Search FQXi


If you are aware of an interesting new academic paper (that has been published in a peer-reviewed journal or has appeared on the arXiv), a conference talk (at an official professional scientific meeting), an external blog post (by a professional scientist) or a news item (in the mainstream news media), which you think might make an interesting topic for an FQXi blog post, then please contact us at forums@fqxi.org with a link to the original source and a sentence about why you think that the work is worthy of discussion. Please note that we receive many such suggestions and while we endeavour to respond to them, we may not be able to reply to all suggestions.

Please also note that we do not accept unsolicited posts and we cannot review, or open new threads for, unsolicited articles or papers. Requests to review or post such materials will not be answered. If you have your own novel physics theory or model, which you would like to post for further discussion among then FQXi community, then please add them directly to the "Alternative Models of Reality" thread, or to the "Alternative Models of Cosmology" thread. Thank you.

Forum Home
Introduction
Terms of Use

Order posts by:
 chronological order
 most recent first

Posts by the author are highlighted in orange; posts by FQXi Members are highlighted in blue.

By using the FQXi Forum, you acknowledge reading and agree to abide by the Terms of Use

 RSS feed | RSS help
RECENT POSTS IN THIS TOPIC

Georgina Parry: on 3/19/09 at 7:54am UTC, wrote Steve , thank you for your very kind comment. I'm really not sure what...

Steve Dufourny: on 3/3/09 at 15:54pm UTC, wrote Hello dear friends , What a beautiful methodological and relevant...

Georgina Parry: on 2/27/09 at 10:20am UTC, wrote Not to be left out here is how I speculate that the universe ends. It...

amrit: on 12/18/08 at 14:39pm UTC, wrote Hi Paul According to ma research universe is without an end, a noncreated...

Fred Kohn: on 7/9/08 at 0:24am UTC, wrote "How did the universe begin and how will it end?" is a question analagous...

paul valletta: on 6/23/08 at 10:41am UTC, wrote Repulsive energy in the far off future, will accelerate and create a vacuum...



FQXi FORUM
May 1, 2017

ARTICLE: Predicting The End [back to article]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

paul valletta wrote on Jun. 23, 2008 @ 10:41 GMT
Repulsive energy in the far off future, will accelerate and create a vacuum void, out of this void particles will emerge, ripped into existence. Out of this darkness will emerge attractive energy, things will tend to collide rather than have distance between them?

There cannot be any "infinity" of emptiness, infinity will need there to be no activity, at any instance, for a infinity future amount of time.

It is my guess before infinity can get a hold on things, there will be a fluctuation and another Universe will pop into existence.

There is no end?.. because there can never be an "infinity" of anything really.

report post as inappropriate


Fred Kohn wrote on Jul. 9, 2008 @ 00:24 GMT
"How did the universe begin and how will it end?" is a question analagous to "What does the earth stand on?" The latter misunderstands gravity and the former misunderstands time.

I have posted this theory elsewhere, but I'm excited enough to post it again.

Gravitons are the remnants of a negative universe- they have negative space/time and negative mass/energy. At the time of the big bang, there was "room" for a huge number of gravitons (although "room" is inaccurate: since gravitons have negative spacial dimensions, they aren't really "in" our universe.) Gravitons create gravity locally because their negative space is contracting rather than expanding, "pulling" massive objects towards each other. As there is less space between objects, there is "room" for more gravitons, creating stronger gravity fields. Gravity fields also distort time, because of the negative time component of gravitons.

As our space expands, there is "room" for fewer and fewer gravitons. Eventually a point will be reached where there is "room" for only one "in" our universe. At this point our universe will blow apart into multiple universes (the big rip). Then the remnants of our "old" universe will become the gravitons of the "new," negative universe.

report post as inappropriate


amrit wrote on Dec. 18, 2008 @ 14:39 GMT
Hi Paul

According to ma research universe is without an end, a noncreated ethernal phenomena.

yours amrit

attachments: THE_THEORY_OF_ATEMOPORALITY.pdf

report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Feb. 27, 2009 @ 10:20 GMT
Not to be left out here is how I speculate that the universe ends.



It can be speculated that a 4D mega universal entity reached a critical mass at some point in its development and released that energy, previously stored as mass energy, that it had accumulated during its development. This released all of the sub atomic constituents of the entity forming a cloud of high energy particles in 4D space. The movement of the sub atomic particles through 4D space producing disturbances that cause the sub atomic particles to come together to form larger and larger structures.... (until critical mass is reached again repeating the cycle)

Alternatively, if 4D mathematics permits, there may be continuous recycling of matter and energy. When matter reaches the centre of the hypersphere there is nowhere else to go other than back to the outer region of the hypersphere through the centre. This causes the matter to be torn apart and the energy released back into the outer region of the hypersphere.

The centre of the hypersphere is the end of the universe and is the end of subjective time for that universe. All of the matter that has accumulated to form that universe is disintegrated as it is returned to the exterior of the hypersphere either through 3D vector space, as a big bang or along the 4th dimension as continuous recycling.

Both mechanisms can give a continuous cycling and reinvention process. The contraction of the universe being along the 4th dimension, not direct contraction in 3D vector space which is why it is not obvious.

from the Prime Quaternion model.

The hypersphere itself is eternal because it exists in 4 spatial dimensions without time.Only motion along the 4th dimension within the hypersphere gives rise to the subjective experience of time. Relativity only relates to subjective reality not unobservable, material,objective reality, so this structure can be postulated without contradicting Einstein's mathematics.

report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Mar. 3, 2009 @ 15:54 GMT
Hello dear friends ,

What a beautiful methodological and relevant explanation.Thanks dear Georgina.

Could you continue ,please ,I am interested .

Cordially

Steve

report post as inappropriate


Georgina Parry wrote on Mar. 19, 2009 @ 07:54 GMT
Steve ,

thank you for your very kind comment.

I'm really not sure what more you would like me to say.

I would just like to add that continuous recycling of the universe via the centre of the hypersphere, if this is mathematically possible, rather than a big bang in which the whole of the universe is disintegrated seems a more satisfactory and natural solution.

The centre of the hypersphere is then akin to the singularity in the currently most widely accepted model of the origin of the universe. The arrival of the energy from the disintegrated universe back at the outer region of the hypersphere could account for the elusive rapid inflation of the universe.I did mention this in reply to another article but I can't find it now .

report post as inappropriate


Login or create account to post reply or comment.

Please enter your e-mail address:
Note: Joining the FQXi mailing list does not give you a login account or constitute membership in the organization.