05-06-2024, 12:49 PM
This post was last modified 05-06-2024, 12:58 PM by Maxmars.
Edit Reason: spelling
Bless you for starting this conversation... I had found an article, but hesitated to bring it here because I wasn't sure that it wasn't only me who was interested.
I offer this: A Mathematical Proof That The Universe Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing
It seems the epitome of paradoxical... How everything we can see, and sense was a logical extension of nothing.
One of the great theories of modern cosmology is that the universe began in a Big Bang. This is not just an idea but a scientific theory backed up by numerous lines of evidence.
For a start, there is the cosmic microwave background, which is a kind of echo of the big bang; then there is the ongoing expansion of the cosmos, which when imagined backwards, hints at a Big Bang-type origin; and the abundance of the primordial elements, such as helium-4, helium-3, deuterium and so on, can all be calculated using the theory.
But that still leaves a huge puzzle. What caused the Big Bang itself? For many years, cosmologists have relied on the idea that the universe formed spontaneously, that the Big Bang was the result of quantum fluctuations in which the Universe came into existence from nothing.
Being relatively simple-minded, it chafes me to think that in a universe of "quantum fluctuations" the learned would decide that they were a "component" of "nothing."
But I suppose the math must be at least reasonably sound to have been published.
The new proof is based on a special set of solutions to a mathematical entity known as the Wheeler-DeWitt equation. In the first half of the 20th century, cosmologists struggled to combine the two pillars of modern physics— quantum mechanics and general relativity—in a way that reasonably described the universe. As far as they could tell, these theories were entirely at odds with each other.
The breakthrough came in the 1960s when the physicists John Wheeler and Bryce DeWitt combined these previously incompatible ideas in a mathematical framework now known as the Wheeler-DeWitt equation. The new work of Dongshan and co explores some new solutions to this equation.
At the heart of their thinking is Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. This allows a small empty space to come into existence probabilistically due to fluctuations in what physicists call the metastable false vacuum.
I have some reservations about the elements... 'metastable vacuum,' spontaneous and random Heisenberg phenomena, the Wheeler-DeWitt equation, etc.
Insofar as "ever-flowing time" I find it an amusing perception. I imagine a parable of old: a man views a river, its' source out of view... far off and away beyond sight, and its final destination similarly out of view, far off, and unseen... he declares it "infinite"... and who would argue otherwise?
I think we should get comfortable with the reality that scientists and philosopher don't know everything... they never have... yet they always proclaim their 'knowledge' as if it were 'all encompassing' and 'unquestionable.'
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Almost synchronously, another article regarding your musings has surfaced... and once again it relies on the Wheeler-DeWitt equation for some support...
Quantum Experiment Shows How Time ‘Emerges’ from Entanglement
Subtitled: Time is an emergent phenomenon that is a side effect of quantum entanglement, say physicists. And they have the first experimental results to prove it
But it didn’t take physicists long to realise that while the Wheeler-DeWitt equation solved one significant problem, it introduced another. The new problem was that time played no role in this equation. In effect, it says that nothing ever happens in the universe, a prediction that is clearly at odds with the observational evidence.
This conundrum, which physicists call ‘the problem of time’, has proved to be a thorn in flesh of modern physicists, who have tried to ignore it but with little success.
Then in 1983, the theorists Don Page and William Wootters came up with a novel solution based on the quantum phenomenon of entanglement. This is the exotic property in which two quantum particles share the same existence, even though they are physically separated.
Perhaps time is all about perception from the framework of an observer... and not something inherently woven into the machinery of the universe... but then that's a relativistic point of view, and might now be insufficient to explain anything....
I offer this: A Mathematical Proof That The Universe Could Have Formed Spontaneously From Nothing
It seems the epitome of paradoxical... How everything we can see, and sense was a logical extension of nothing.
One of the great theories of modern cosmology is that the universe began in a Big Bang. This is not just an idea but a scientific theory backed up by numerous lines of evidence.
For a start, there is the cosmic microwave background, which is a kind of echo of the big bang; then there is the ongoing expansion of the cosmos, which when imagined backwards, hints at a Big Bang-type origin; and the abundance of the primordial elements, such as helium-4, helium-3, deuterium and so on, can all be calculated using the theory.
But that still leaves a huge puzzle. What caused the Big Bang itself? For many years, cosmologists have relied on the idea that the universe formed spontaneously, that the Big Bang was the result of quantum fluctuations in which the Universe came into existence from nothing.
Being relatively simple-minded, it chafes me to think that in a universe of "quantum fluctuations" the learned would decide that they were a "component" of "nothing."
But I suppose the math must be at least reasonably sound to have been published.
The new proof is based on a special set of solutions to a mathematical entity known as the Wheeler-DeWitt equation. In the first half of the 20th century, cosmologists struggled to combine the two pillars of modern physics— quantum mechanics and general relativity—in a way that reasonably described the universe. As far as they could tell, these theories were entirely at odds with each other.
The breakthrough came in the 1960s when the physicists John Wheeler and Bryce DeWitt combined these previously incompatible ideas in a mathematical framework now known as the Wheeler-DeWitt equation. The new work of Dongshan and co explores some new solutions to this equation.
At the heart of their thinking is Heisenberg’s uncertainty principle. This allows a small empty space to come into existence probabilistically due to fluctuations in what physicists call the metastable false vacuum.
I have some reservations about the elements... 'metastable vacuum,' spontaneous and random Heisenberg phenomena, the Wheeler-DeWitt equation, etc.
Insofar as "ever-flowing time" I find it an amusing perception. I imagine a parable of old: a man views a river, its' source out of view... far off and away beyond sight, and its final destination similarly out of view, far off, and unseen... he declares it "infinite"... and who would argue otherwise?
I think we should get comfortable with the reality that scientists and philosopher don't know everything... they never have... yet they always proclaim their 'knowledge' as if it were 'all encompassing' and 'unquestionable.'
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Almost synchronously, another article regarding your musings has surfaced... and once again it relies on the Wheeler-DeWitt equation for some support...
Quantum Experiment Shows How Time ‘Emerges’ from Entanglement
Subtitled: Time is an emergent phenomenon that is a side effect of quantum entanglement, say physicists. And they have the first experimental results to prove it
But it didn’t take physicists long to realise that while the Wheeler-DeWitt equation solved one significant problem, it introduced another. The new problem was that time played no role in this equation. In effect, it says that nothing ever happens in the universe, a prediction that is clearly at odds with the observational evidence.
This conundrum, which physicists call ‘the problem of time’, has proved to be a thorn in flesh of modern physicists, who have tried to ignore it but with little success.
Then in 1983, the theorists Don Page and William Wootters came up with a novel solution based on the quantum phenomenon of entanglement. This is the exotic property in which two quantum particles share the same existence, even though they are physically separated.
Perhaps time is all about perception from the framework of an observer... and not something inherently woven into the machinery of the universe... but then that's a relativistic point of view, and might now be insufficient to explain anything....
