Cosmological Evolution (Part 5)

OK in the last post I said that…

Energy In is the matter and energy used to create our Parent Black Hole. And Energy Out is the net matter and energy that makes up our universe (matter – antimatter).

…and that our universe must balance the energy equation

Energy In = Energy Out

…such that it consumes an amount of energy equal to the amount of energy being fed into it. This is merely conservation of energy at the inter-universe scale.

So the question is…

Why does the emergent universe, our universe, evolve the way it does – with, matter, stars and us?

Well, let’s consider the range of possible universes by varying or “tuning” the universal physics constants such as the speed of light, vacuum permittivity, Planck’s constant, or the gravitational constant.

It turns out that most possible universes are uneventful, with settings that don’t involve matter that clumps and stars that shine. Thus, they don’t end up balancing the energy equation and therefore, won’t end up emerging. In fact we know of only one setting for the universal physics constants that results in a universe that does involve energy consumption – and it’s the one that we inhabit!

So it’s not an accident that the speed of light is 299,792,458 meters per second, or that Planck’s constant is 6.626176 x 10 joule-seconds. This combination of settings results in an “energy eventful” universe that can balance the energy equation.

So – let’s pause and let this idea sink in. Balancing the energy equation drives a very important result:

It tunes the universal physics constants such that matter clumps and stars shine – which gives us an “energy eventful” universe.

Our “energy eventful” universe is not just a random accident. Our universe emerged from an infinite number of possible universes because it’s the one that balances the energy equation. As I said..

There’s a set amount of energy available to our universe from beyond our event horizon, and our universe is the one that requires this exact amount of energy such that the overall system is balanced.

This is a profound idea – but let’s not stop there. What if this requirement to balance the energy equation is also the reason we exist? In the next posts I’d like to explore this concept…

Why did life emerge?

I mean, it’s possible to have an “energy eventful” universe that doesn’t involve abiogenesis – where life doesn’t emerge. But maybe there’s a mathematical explanation for the emergence of animate, self replicating objects!

OK – so let’s explore this question in my next post.

Cosmological Evolution (Part 3)

As I pointed out in the previous post, in scale theory, all possible alternate histories and futures only exist as information at sub Planck scales. And from all of these possible histories and futures, one single actual universe ends up emerging – the one you are in right now. This post series asks the question…

which “single actual universe” has the highest probability of emerging?

Well, I will make the case that the answer to this question has to do with the energy equation – which I promised to discuss.

But before I do, why am I even asking this question? Why do we care about what caused our “verse” to emerge? I mean according to the many worlds interpretation, all possible “verses” exist. Our’s – with matter and stars and life is just as likely to emerge as one with no matter and no stars and no life. Lykken and Spiropulu put it this way in their article titled Supersymmetry and the Crisis in Physics:

In the multiverse scenario, the big bang produced not just the universe that we see but also a very large number of variations on our universe that we do not see. In this case, the answer to questions such as “Why does the electron have the mass that it does?” takes an answer in the form of: “That’s just the random luck of the draw—other parts of the multiverse have different electrons with different masses.

If many worlds is correct then our existence is random – there is no scientific reason for things to be as we experience them. Put bluntly…

The many worlds interpretation of quantum physics says our existence is meaningless – our universe is just one possibility emerging from an infinite number of other possible universes – all equally likely to exist – and all that actually do exist.

But this isn’t what the math we experience tells us. We see a wave function that describes a probability space. Some things are more likely to happen than others. So what determines this probability?

You see, this is an important question because – the answer would reveal a great truth…

why are we here?

Why is our universe set up this way? Why are the physics constants finely tuned to values that allow matter to form and clump into stars that light up and provide elements and energy that ultimately power life?

Scale Theory says that one single “verse” emerges from the quantum foam that contains information about all possible “verses”. And as I said, this post series provides a logical, mathematical explanation to the question…

which “single actual universe” has the highest probability of emerging?

And unlike the many worlds interpretation, Scale Theory makes room for a logical, mathematical, explanation for our existence. That is, there is a mathematically explainable driving force that sets the probabilities described by the wave function.

I’m proposing that…

of the many universes that could exist, there is a mathematical explanation for why our universe, with matter and stars and life is the one, and only one, that in the end, actually does exist.

As I said, this selection process is evolutionary in nature and is driven by the survival of the fittest law. I will show that with “verses”, fitness is defined by the energy equation. Our universe must consume an amount of energy equal to the amount of energy being fed into it..

Energy In = Energy Out

So what is Energy In and Energy Out? Well that’s the topic of the next post…

Cosmological Evolution (Part 2)

As discussed in a previous post, in the many-worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics EVERY event is a branch point for a different universe. However, in scale theory, all possible alternate histories and futures only exist as information at sub Planck scales. And it is the quantum classic border pressure that resolves the wave function into a single actual happening. So this post series asks the question…

which “single actual universe” has the highest probability of emerging?

My argument begins with Darwin’s “survival of the fittest.” In biology “fitness” is defined as the ability to win the right to procreate. In the kingdom of life, the ones who reproduce and pass on their genes are the fittest. But what defines cosmological fitness? I propose that “fitness” as it relates to “verses” is define by energy.

The universe that emerges from the wave function probability space is the one that balances the energy equation.

So what exactly is the energy equation and how is it balanced?

Well that’s the subject of this next post…

Cosmological Evolution (Part 1)

In a multiverse paradigm, if you were forced to only create one universe, which ‘verse’ would you create?

In his 1952 lecture, Erwin Schrödinger said that when his equations seemed to describe several different histories, these were “not (merely) alternatives, but all really happening simultaneously.“

In Scale Theory, these “historic alternatives” can be thought of as descriptions of “future possibilities” or potential universes. This post series is an exploration of why the universe we experience is the one that ended up emerging.

I will propose that our universe is the one that balances the energy equation (shown below). Simply speaking, our universe is selected based on its energy level. There’s a set amount of energy feeding into our universe from beyond our event horizon, and our universe is the one that consumes energy at a rate that balances the overall system.

Energy In = Energy Out

So if Schrödinger’s equations predict multiple alternative universes, the one that balances the above energy equation is the one that will emerge. Now I realize that if my theory proves to be right, this would be a big let down. It’s more exciting to believe that our existence is born from some deep cosmic revelation as opposed to the mundane balancing of an algebraic equation. But I’m afraid that after much consideration, this is where I’ve landed. The verse that ends up emerging is the one that balances energy in and energy out.

In the next post I will go into more detail about this idea – but I first wanted to lay out the general idea.

Let’s continue the discussion in this next post…

Schrödinger’s Cat – Explained

Here is the Schrödinger’s cat thought experiment explained in terms of my idea which I call Scale Theory. You don’t have to fully ‘get’ the theory to understand the explanation as it applies to Schrödinger’s cat. But in short – Scale Theory proposes that scale is a dimension, just as “up and down” is a dimension. Furthermore, Scale Theory says that at scale extremes (very very large and very very small scales), the fabric of the universe is warped or bent. Now don’t flip out – Einstein takes the blame for proposing that our universe is bendable – not me.

So, where the “information” about Schrödinger’s cat resides (at sub Planck length scales) – time and space are warped or bent – just as if you were near a black hole. (Side note: we are on the inside of this particular black hole so instead of ‘stuff’ being sucked in – it’s being spit out). In this ‘bent’ place, time doesn’t exist as we know it – in a before, now and after fashion. In this place, there’s room for all “befores”, all “nows”, and all “afters”. Yes, there’s even room for information about both a “living cat” and a “dead cat”.

OK – So here’s what’s happening with Schrödinger’s cat:

Space-time is fundamentally different at very very small scales where the information about all of the cat’s fates reside. At this place, information about the living and dead cat happily coexist, superimposed on top of each other. (BTW this is different from the Hilbert Space of String Theory)

Then, due to the properties of the border between this bent small-scale place and the unbent place were we experience the world, some of the information is left behind. That is, as the information transitions across this quantum classical border, only some of the information is allowed safe passage.

Think of it this way. Let’s say that The Rolling Stones hold a concert where tickets are awarded by lottery. This means that only the fans that (by chance) win the lottery get into the show. The rest of the fans are denied access. Note however that this doesn’t mean that the losing fans don’t exist. All of the fans exist. Just as with the quantum classical border, due to the limitations of the venue, only the winners get to experience the concert. By the way – the odds of winning the living or dead cat lottery are described by the wave function.

So back to the cat. At the start, the information about both the living cat and the dead cat exist in the realm of the very very small. Then, the information that successfully makes its way into the larger scale, unbent realm, becomes the experienced or measured reality.

In his book Now: The Physics of Time, Muller writes, “What does it take to make the wave function collapse? We don’t know.”

Well, Scale Theory provides some answers. (1) It explains why the wave function appears to collapse and (2) it allows us to speculate about what a measurement might be.

The wave function appears to collapse because unbent scale-time is not able to accommodate the superimposed information that exists at very very small scales – where scale-time is bent. This mandates that only one of the cats can be observed in the unbent scale-time realm we occupy. This means that if the information about the living cat wins the Schrödinger lottery – we will observe (measure) only the living cat. We cannot experience both cats – our unbent realm doesn’t have room for both of them.

OK, so this explains why we perceive that the wave function is collapsing. So now let’s talk about the definition of measurement.

As I said, scale theory allows us to (at least) speculate about what a measurement might in fact be. Here is one possibility:

Let’s say we divide scale-time into these three parts: (1) the place where all the information exists at the very very small scale, (2) the place where we live out our lives and (3) the divide between the two. I propose that there might be a type of pressure between the very very small (1) and where we exist (2). This ‘pressure’ pushes information across the divide (3) which acts like an information filter – converting all of the potential realities described by the wave function into a single measured reality. This idea posits that what we perceive as measurements are the result of this flow. If this is the case, then an observer is not required to get the wave function to collapse.

Side note: Even if this pressure idea isn’t spot on – it’s still a win for Scale Theory in that it allows us to speculate on the definition of measurement.

And there you have it, the Scale Theory explanation of Schrödinger’s cat.

This explanation is an alternative to the prevailing theory called the many worlds interpretation of quantum mechanics. So how does scale theory compare to many worlds? Well in this next post I compare the two – so read it and let me know which theory you believe makes more sense – mathematically speaking.

😃

Scale Theory

Abstract: Scale Theory proposes that there is a fourth spatial dimension in the direction we perceive as scale. Scale Theory also proposes that the warping of space time in this fourth spatial dimension gives rise to phenomena such as dark matter, dark energy, quantum effects, quantum entanglement, the Big Bang and the expansion of the universe.

Is Scale a Dimension?

When you move in the three spatial dimensions, such as when traveling from Phoenix to Hawaii or from Earth to a Black Hole, you are able to experience different things. In Phoenix you can golf in the desert, and in Hawaii you can surf in the ocean. And on Earth you experience one G of gravity, while at a Black Hole you experience massive gravity. Why? Because you are in a different place – dimensionally. The same seems to be true when you shift between scales from the very large to the very small. At large scales you experience Einstein’s Relativity. At very small scales you experience Quantum Mechanics. The equations of General Relativity are incompatibility with the equations of Quantum Mechanics. This is what is meant when physicists say we have not yet discovered the theory of everything. I believe the solution might be found if we consider scale itself as a fourth spatial dimension.

My theory is that there is a fourth spatial dimension in the direction we associate with scale.

And if there is a “scale dimension”, this could explain some of the observed physical phenomena we are currently unable to understand such as Dark Energy and Dark Matter. Just as three dimensional space separates Phoenix from Hawaii and Earth from a Black Hole, the very small may be separated from the very large. These may be completely different places – dimensionally.

What is Scale?

With model trains, scale is the ratio of the model to the real-life train. For example, O Scale is 1:48 Scale where 1 inch on the model equals 48 inches in real life. Thus, a 48′ freight car would be 12″ on your model railroad.

The scale my theory refers to is similar to this idea, but instead of train scales, we are talking about the different scales or levels at which physical events take place. For example, chemical reactions take place at the molecular level, while the level at which we encounter planetary orbits is at ‘solar system’ scales. Each of these levels or scales requires a different type of analysis for modeling physical phenomena. And although you can measure scales in terms of the three familiar spatial dimensions, length, width and height, my proposal is that scale itself is a dimension. And because scale is a dimension, you are able to experience different phenomena at different scales. And although we know that certain phenomena dominate at different masses and speeds, I’m proposing that…

There is a fourth spatial dimension in the direction we perceive as scale.

Warped Scale-Time

So if scale is a dimension, what is different at the scale extremes? I am proposing that…

The properties of space are fundamentally different at the scale extremes because space time is warped there.

I propose that the warping of space time in the scale dimension accounts for the strangeness of quantum effects at submicroscopic levels and observations of a singularity (microwave cosmic background) at the outer edge of our universe.

As I said, at the scale extremes space time is curved. Therefore at the scale extremes, we should perceive something equivalent to a gravitational force. Why? Well, space time is warped by the earth and on the earth we experience a pull we call gravity. So it stands to reason that if space time is warped at the edges of the scale dimension, we should observe a pull there too. And while we might attribute this “pull” to something called Dark Matter, or at the edge of our universe, something called Dark Energy, I propose that…

Dark Matter and Dark Energy are a result of the warping of space time in the scale dimension at the scale extremes.

It would follow that at the two scale extremes, space time is curved so severely that they present a border or boundary, much like the event horizon of a black hole.

And, given this theory proposes quantum effects of the very small are a result of warped space time in the scale dimension, this may be why, according to Stephen Hawking, the event horizon of a black hole has quantum-like characteristics.

How to Visualize this?

Here is a way to visualize this. Before Columbus sailed the ocean blue the earth was thought to be flat. In essence, the known universe was imagined to be roughly two-dimensional. Then of course we discovered that in fact the earth was spherical and our imagination expanded to the notion that the known universe was three-dimensional. This shift can be visualized as someone looking down on the earth and concluding it is a flat disc. Then when we rotate our view around, the extra (previously hidden) dimension is revealed. Next it took Einstein to explain how the fourth dimension of time fits into the picture and now we imagine space time as a fabric. And since it is a dimension, we can rotate around and see its true shape. Space time is bendable.

So now all you have to do is take this idea one step further and imagine that scale is a dimension and rotate yourself around so that you can see this dimension. Look to the left where we experience the very very small and now look the right where we view the very very large. And now imagine that to the left space time is curved or warped giving rise to quantum effects, and in the middle space time flattens out, allowing for classical/relativistic effects. Then, to the right near the edge of our universe, where we observe the echo of the Big Bang, space time is again curved or warped. By the way, the thing that is attractive to me about this theory is that it is elegant and symmetrical. This single idea seems to explain both Dark Energy and Dark Matter.

Space time is bent at both extremes of the scale dimension. At the one end we primarily perceive quantum effects and at the other we see the Big Bang.

This post describes the theory inasmuch as I understand it to date. The posts below are explorations of how the theory might explain physics concepts and observed properties of the universe.

Index

• The Big Bang
• Dimension Tunnel Vision
• Universe Expansion Rate
• Schrodinger’s Cat
• Many Worlds
• Scale Theory Ruminations
• Cosmological Evolution