Are there 10^272,000 Universes?

[John Clark]

Are there 10^272,000 Universes? - Numberphile

John K Clark    See what's on my new list at  Extropolis

rtu

[Lawrence Crowell]

This is F-theory I presume.

LC

[spudb...@aol.com]

Weepers. I am behind the times. Last I remember it was 10^500 universes as informed by Guth, Linde, Vilenkin, and the rest. 

F theory must me when ya hear 10^272K universes, ya yell out F#@CK!!!. Anyone willing to wager if some of have better shows than Netflix?

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-li...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/07cc79c3-0195-4741-9fc7-930dc9bdb497n%40googlegroups.com

.

[Lawrence Crowell]

I think it is best to think of these as calculational gadgets. To be honest I am not sure about the ontological status of these 10^{272,000} spacetimes or cosmogonies.

LC

[spudb...@aol.com]

Well said, but I do love the multiverse (at times) for its entertainment values. I also wonder as a few astronomers and physicists have postulated an infinite or much larger cosmos? In other words, what might lie for hundreds of billions or trillions of light years, beyond the Hubble Volume? Axions, virtual photons, a vast oceans of neutrinos, old deposed black holes, dimensions? One of the answers the Multiverse provides is simply what maps provided ancient cartographers, "Here be dragons."

Spud, Cartographically speaking...

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/2ccbc278-4296-4cb5-acb5-cfc92135f2f0n%40googlegroups.com

.

[Lawrence Crowell]

One of the things about inflationary cosmology we should keep in mind is that it implies there is a fundamental limit to what we can know. This period from 10^{-35} seconds to 10^{-30} seconds had space expand by 60-efolds or e^{60} ~ 10^{26}. Hence, information at that time corresponding to any curvature or other spacetime data was enormously stretched out. Thus Planck scale data at 10^{-35}, was stretched to 10^{-9}m, which might correspond to coherent state gravitons. This was in a region about .1 to 1 m in scale. Thus such data if we can read it is imprinted on the CMB. It might be here! The quantum sources for this are now over 2 trillion light years away. Sort of for the same reason we can observe galaxies with z > 1. The CMB is with z = 1100, which means it is being frame dragged out at 1100 times the speed of light. The source for gravitons we might indirectly observe in the CMB data have z ~ 10^{60}! 

The multiverse, a term I really do not like very well, just means the vacuum state of the entire universe has a degeneracy or multivalued structure and what we observe in this universe is one of them. These other cosmogonies for all we know may just be radiative corrections to the universe we observe. They would be off-shell conditions, similar to interior graphs in a Feynman diagram. I think this is mostly likely the case with high energy vacuum conditions on these other cosmogonies. The problem is that we will have a very difficult time knowing which of these alternatives is the case. Inflation implies our cosmos emerged in or from a de Sitter vacuum with a huge cosmological constant. It is "eternally inflating," which means any data concerning something outside the observable universe may be extremely difficult or impossible to measure. 

LC

[spudb...@aol.com]

Thanks Doc! You said it and gave the reasons for it. Which for me means, that Freeman Dyson's suggestion that the best thing scientists can do to better understand things is to improve the equipment they use to observe. Telescope improvement means observations improvement. How can we get to an outside region of spacetime would appeal only to a sci-fi head as myself, strictly for the non-professional. Eternal Inflation seems quasi religious as in transcendental, and we mammals seem not built for this neurologically.  Perhaps (again science fiction) when we someday link to AI, we, as a new species may be grooving on the Inflationary Eternity, in the  Everett/DeWitt/Wheeler wonderfulness of it all? 

My guess is that if this is not an existential disaster for us, it'd be akin to us forming another brain section. The Machinery would like the emotionalism of being us, we'd like the braininess of being it. Like peanut butter and chocolate or chocolate plus peanut butter. 

Much thank,

Spud, the gourmand. 

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/73b9229b-8662-4423-95da-5c2701391d1dn%40googlegroups.com

.

[Lawrence Crowell]

If you think about it the limitations imposed by inflation prevent any observer from observing an infinite amount of information. The de Sitter manifold of eternal inflation may be infinite in extent, but eternal inflation may limit any observer from observing an infinite amount of information. It is sort of like the event horizon of a black hole, where the horizon prevents certain violations of thermodynamics or the direct observation of the singularity. Quantum mechanics also has a similar feature. The uncertainty principle of QM cuts nature off at a certain scale of of action, so there are not an infinite number of degrees of freedom with action limit --> 0. In fact the QM uncertainty limitation and the limitations with spacetime physics are I think a part of a general principle.

LC

[spudb...@aol.com]

Getting all Schrodinger + Wigner on this topic, what about a an infinite, (exponentiating-asymptotic) propagation of  "observers?" It's just a matter of catching up always and since its multiples of observers, but non-indexical Leibniz kind of observers. 

You may have just solved the purpose of this universe JC. Observers galore! 

Yeah Verily!

Spud-member of The Church of the Poison Mind

https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/36b11bbb-dc53-45ae-9bfa-ebc38daa2213n%40googlegroups.com

.