Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

fullawe t1_iu3jbdj wrote

Reply to comment by Chadmartigan in Spacetime is not fundamental | Donald Hoffman by whoamisri

I think in the same way that the mathematical existence of the Amplituhedron implies the existence of a deeper layer, so does the big bang.

An event happened that caused the big bang and all that comes after. Therefor there was something beforehand.

If one event can happen, another may as well. I hope we find structures within the CMB. I think it would show that our universe was born inside another.

Perhaps others could be born inside ours, with their initial inflation showing as late inflation to us.

2

Chadmartigan t1_iu4t5iy wrote

IMO, if we find total randomness in the CMB, that's just as interesting.

The deep structure is what makes theories like Conformal Cyclical Cosmology more compelling for me. The idea there is that the conditions of the late-stage universe (post-mass-decay and black hole evaporation) conform to those of the earliest moments of the big bang in all regards except the scale of the space. In other words, if you take the late stage universe and squeeze down the scale of spacetime, you get the something that looks a lot like the early big bang. And if Penrose is right, that might not be such a difficult hurdle to overcome, since scale and space kind of fall out of the picture in the late-stage universe anyway, and there's no particular reason it should be strictly preserved from one aeon to the next. (Some information within spacetime could be preserved, however - notably gravitational waves should survive from one aeon to the next, and perhaps some radiation as well.)

If all this is right, even just kind of conceptually right, that would point to a structure underlying the "reality" of spacetime that is preserved from one universe to the next.

2

fullawe t1_iu5w2c3 wrote

It was cyclical cosmology that lead me into my idea. The change of scale at absolute entropy is a cool idea.

I think we should be trying to find solutions that aren't cyclical though. Although that doesn't mean that spacetime isn't preserved.

Another thought I had was to split space/time. In that, time started at the moment of the big bang, and is tied to space in a direct correlation of 1:1.

Space would be preserved throughout universes, but not time. I believe that the implication is that time can be tied to the speed of light across a unit of spac. That all non baryonic particles can be unified into a single field, that excludes gravity.

Gravity becomes an artifact of the deeper level of emergent space, and the expansion of our universe becomes the potential energy of each subsequent big bang being realised.

2