Scientists May Have Found Evidence of Previous Universes

a reply to: Gothmog

Crikey!!! I'm in for some reading tonight. Will look at that also.

Gotta check out the plumbing physicist first.

Cheers, thanks for the tags.

bally

According to some theories all the universes in the multiverse exist simultaneously

a reply to: Gothmog

Hmmm, hearing you. Have enough homework for one night including the recipe from FlyingClayDisc to which I have to add cinnamon to get access to the old front hole.

But, I may had read that theory you have mentioned where it asserts that those alternative universes may be the cause of a process of Karma in the meaning that experiences you think have happened before may actually come from your existence in a parallel universe. I think I got that right. Read it a while back. Interesting but of course supposition and not proven.

Kind regards,

bally

originally posted by: bally001
a reply to: hombero

Its just how you accumulate stars from admirers. I starred and flagged this simply because I enjoyed the title and the opening premise. Attention seeking if you will. So at the expense of getting another 'smack' I will go back to the topic at hand.

"Hawking points". I don't understand how a 'black hole' can release radiation. I consider this because I have always been taught that a black hole is so dense that nothing escapes.

May have touched on some thing there, I dunno.

My kind regards as always,

bally

There's the theory that pairs of sub-atomic particles can appear and disappear due to quantum fluctuations. One particle gets sucked down the black hole, while the other gets left behind. If that particle is an anti-particle, it annihilates a bit of the black hole. Over time, the black hole would evaporate back into something visible.

Black holes do give off jets of matter. Those are from the accretion disks before the atoms have crossed the event horizon. Unless they are from stuff coming from another universe.

a reply to: stormcell

Well, there you go.

Regarding the jets of matter given off, what do they consist of?

Asking because I have no flaming idea myself.

bally

originally posted by: bally001
a reply to: stormcell

Well, there you go.

Regarding the jets of matter given off, what do they consist of?

Asking because I have no flaming idea myself.

bally

en.wikipedia.org...


The pulsar IGR J11014-6103 with supernova remnant origin, nebula and jet.
Jets may also be observed from spinning neutron stars. An example is pulsar IGR J11014-6103, which has the largest jet so far observed in the Milky Way Galaxy whose velocity is estimated at 80% the speed of light. Initially, this pulsar was presumed to be rapidly spinning but later measurements indicate the spin rate is only 15.9 Hz.[19][20] Such a slow spin rate and lack of accretion material suggest the jet is neither rotation nor accretion powered, though it appears aligned with the pulsar rotation axis and perpendicular to the pulsar's true motion.

a reply to: stormcell

First black holes do evaporate but never back into something that becomes visible. And you're close as to how they evaporate but its not because of antimatter. What happens is virtual particles form in pairs to separate the two involves energy. The particle gets that energy from the black hole itself. So as we know from Einstien energy is mass. So the energy stolen decreases the mass of the black hole.

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: bally001
a reply to: Gothmog

Well, now you'll have me researching. Thanks for the info.

Kind regards,

bally

And a mathematician that produced the math that black holes CANNOT exist.

Really? I'm pretty sure they were able to directly observe the black hole at the center of the Milky Way this past year. I don't think their existence is theoretical anymore.

originally posted by: watchitburn

originally posted by: Gothmog

originally posted by: bally001
a reply to: Gothmog

Well, now you'll have me researching. Thanks for the info.

Kind regards,

bally

And a mathematician that produced the math that black holes CANNOT exist.

Really? I'm pretty sure they were able to directly observe the black hole at the center of the Milky Way this past year. I don't think their existence is theoretical anymore.

Yet , some scientist's are still not sure they actually observed a black hole there . In fact , sometimes Hawking stated reasonable evidence Black Holes may not exist.
That is Prof . Stephen Hawking in case you were not sure

a reply to: Groot

So- Hans Reinhardt was correct?

(The captain of the Cygnus in The Black Hole)

a reply to: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk

Hi potato. These scientists read too many comic books.

originally posted by: bally001
a reply to: Gothmog

Hmmm, hearing you. Have enough homework for one night including the recipe from FlyingClayDisc to which I have to add cinnamon to get access to the old front hole.

But, I may had read that theory you have mentioned where it asserts that those alternative universes may be the cause of a process of Karma in the meaning that experiences you think have happened before may actually come from your existence in a parallel universe.

What if I told you that billions of versions of yourself actually reside right here in our very own Milky Way, and nowhere else?

I propose that galaxies and atoms are the same thing at different scales. So are stars and electrons. When we look up at the night sky and see billions of stars, what we're actually seeing are billions of instances of just a few stars.

When I say instances, I don't mean that there are copies of our sun all over our galaxy. What I mean is that our sun actually exists in multiple places within our galaxy... and so do we.

originally posted by: toms54
a reply to: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk

Hi potato. These scientists read too many comic books.

Hi! Sometimes I think they do too, but some of the theories they come up with actually do turn out to be true. Or they don't. I'm still waiting for that "missing link" to prove Darwin's theory beyond a shadow of a doubt, but that's just me.

originally posted by: stormcell

originally posted by: bally001
a reply to: hombero

Its just how you accumulate stars from admirers. I starred and flagged this simply because I enjoyed the title and the opening premise. Attention seeking if you will. So at the expense of getting another 'smack' I will go back to the topic at hand.

"Hawking points". I don't understand how a 'black hole' can release radiation. I consider this because I have always been taught that a black hole is so dense that nothing escapes.

May have touched on some thing there, I dunno.

My kind regards as always,

bally

There's the theory that pairs of sub-atomic particles can appear and disappear due to quantum fluctuations. One particle gets sucked down the black hole, while the other gets left behind. If that particle is an anti-particle, it annihilates a bit of the black hole. Over time, the black hole would evaporate back into something visible.

Black holes do give off jets of matter. Those are from the accretion disks before the atoms have crossed the event horizon. Unless they are from stuff coming from another universe.

Correct. And to be clear (for those who are just now learning about (1) The "Hawking Radiation" given off by a black hole when an anti particle is caught in the even horizon, and (2) The jets of energy that are emitted from the spinning accretion disk of a black hole), those are two different things.

The jets that are emitted form a black hole's accretion disk is NOT within the black hole's even horizon. That is to say, it isn't being emitted from "the point of no return" for matter and energy falling into a black hole; it is emitted from a place safely outside of the event horizon.

Hawking Radiation, on the other hand, does invovle paritcles that have fallen into the event horizon.

a reply to: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk

I have always wondered about this everyone always seems so focused how how old this universe is, this is the first time I've heard anyone wondering how many universe's there've been. Kudos!

originally posted by: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk
Interesting theory!

Researchers claim to have discovered proof for past universes may exist in the night sky – specifically the leftovers of black holes from another universe. As stated by New Scientist, the notion is grounded around something called conformal cyclic cosmology (CCC). Conformal Cyclic Cosmology is the theory that our universe goes through continuous cycles of Big Bangs and compressions, negating the possibility of having initiated from a single Big Bang.

Cool, but their "proof" is technically just theoretical:

The proof originates in the form of “Hawking points”, titled after the late Stephen Hawking. He speculated that black holes would release radiation called Hawking radiation, and it’s this that Penrose and his associates propose may pass from one universe to the next ultimately.

Linky to article:
PHYSICS-astronomy.com

Glad to see that mainstream publications are still lagging behind.

If one advanced civiization makes it to the end, they will have the chance to shape the new universe in their own preference.

To perform the computer tasks necessary to solve for entropy and gravitational unification, you will probably need a quantum computer(s) with an actual quantum instruction set.

It is amazing what a simple letter can mean.
big bang
big bangs
One simple letter and a whole theory can be changed or even discounted.
Quite powerful.
I do wonder what this means in terms of reincarnation. That is only a question for those who find similarities in the universe and human body.

Oh yeah good op but someone took a dump on it on the first page. Perhaps people should use the private message feature.

a reply to: GeauxHomeYoureDrunk

Theoretical is the operative word, good luck testing the hypothesis because any sort of meaningful measurement or observation is going to be an issue.

Still interesting all the same.