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 blogger 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

alena lis: on 8/2/16 at 9:08am UTC, wrote U have so interesting discussions!

Pentcho Valev: on 2/9/16 at 20:57pm UTC, wrote LIGO, Einstein's Relativity and Possible Fraud (2) Luboš Motl: "It's much...

Pentcho Valev: on 2/9/16 at 16:36pm UTC, wrote LIGO, Einstein's Relativity and Possible Fraud "Physicists have for months...

Pentcho Valev: on 2/8/16 at 20:34pm UTC, wrote Will LIGO Announce Discovery of Gravitational Waves? (4) Comment by...

Pentcho Valev: on 2/7/16 at 12:40pm UTC, wrote Will LIGO Announce Discovery of Gravitational Waves? (3) Comments by...

Pentcho Valev: on 2/6/16 at 20:14pm UTC, wrote Will LIGO Announce Discovery of Gravitational Waves? (2) "According to...

Pentcho Valev: on 2/6/16 at 10:46am UTC, wrote Will LIGO Announce Discovery of Gravitational Waves? Of course LIGO will...

Eckard Blumschein: on 1/31/16 at 6:32am UTC, wrote In my post on Jan. 28, 2016 @ 04:41 GMT "hides is" should read "hides". ...


RECENT FORUM POSTS

Lorraine Ford: "Re Blogger Ian Durham replied on Aug. 25, 2019 @ 15:31 GMT..."Free will..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...

Lorraine Ford: "So, define “free will” Ian. It’s obvious that you are not talking..." in Measuring Free Will: Ian...

Georgina Woodward: "Hi Anthony, you have briefly explained the fictitious (centrifugal) force...." in Bonus Koan: Distant...

Vipul Agarwal: "All about this post is very informative and unique. I am thankful to you..." in FQXi'ers Debate the Deep...

Georgina Woodward: "What is happening in material reality provides the connection to inertia...." in Bonus Koan: Distant...

andrea gonzalez: "Interesting stuff to read. Keep it up. If want to collect free gift card..." in Memory, Causality and...

Joe Fisher: "Dear Dr. Kuhn, Today’s Closer To Truth Facebook page contained this..." in First Things First: The...

Poker Online: "https://www.jakartapoker.net/" in Downward causation:...


RECENT ARTICLES
click titles to read articles

First Things First: The Physics of Causality
Why do we remember the past and not the future? Untangling the connections between cause and effect, choice, and entropy.

Can Time Be Saved From Physics?
Philosophers, physicists and neuroscientists discuss how our sense of time’s flow might arise through our interactions with external stimuli—despite suggestions from Einstein's relativity that our perception of the passage of time is an illusion.

Thermo-Demonics
A devilish new framework of thermodynamics that focuses on how we observe information could help illuminate our understanding of probability and rewrite quantum theory.

Gravity's Residue
An unusual approach to unifying the laws of physics could solve Hawking's black-hole information paradox—and its predicted gravitational "memory effect" could be picked up by LIGO.

Could Mind Forge the Universe?
Objective reality, and the laws of physics themselves, emerge from our observations, according to a new framework that turns what we think of as fundamental on its head.


FQXi BLOGS
August 26, 2019

CATEGORY: Blog [back]
TOPIC: Detecting Parallel Universes Hidden Inside Back Holes — The First Proof of the Multiverse? [refresh]
Bookmark and Share
Login or create account to post reply or comment.

FQXi Administrator Zeeya Merali wrote on Dec. 10, 2015 @ 18:33 GMT
Garriga et al, arXiv:1512.01819v2
It’s hard to say what’s the most exciting element of this new paper on parallel universes, the inflationary multiverse, and black holes, by Tufts cosmologist (and FQXi member) Alex Vilenkin and colleagues. Is it the idea that black holes hide baby universes inside them — inflating their own spacetimes — connected to our universe by wormholes? Could it be that, according to the authors, astronomers may soon be able to find evidence to confirm this crazy notion? Perhaps it’s the fact that this paper could be presenting the first way to find definitive evidence that an inflationary multiverse of parallel worlds exists. Oh yes, and the authors also say that such black holes could have seeded supermassive black holes — the origin of which remains a mystery — *and*, in some of the scenarios they’ve looked at, they could comprise dark matter, the invisible stuff that makes up most of the matter in the universe.

Phew! No wonder the paper by Vilenkin along with Jaume Garriga, at the University of Barcelona, and Jun Zhang also at Tufts, is almost 50 pages long! (”Black Holes and the Multiverse” arXiv:1512.01819v2.)

Let’s take this piece by piece. Vilenkin sent me the paper, which he has just posted to the physics preprint server, arXiv, because, for him, what’s exciting is that it provides a "new way to test multiverse models observationally." Their analysis is based on inflation theory — the idea that our universe underwent a phase of rapid expansion, or inflation, in its early history. This is now a pretty mainstream notion, which serves to solve a number of mysteries about the state of our universe today. It has also had good observational backing since various satellites have now measured the slight temperature differences in the afterglow of the big bang — the cosmic microwave background radiation — and found patterns that match those predicted by inflationary models. (There are still alternative proposals out there to explain these features, however. See Sophie Hebden's "Faster than Light" for an example.)

Slightly more controversial is the idea that inflation forces us to accept that we live in a multiverse of neighbouring universes with potentially very different physical parameters than our cosmos. This stems from the realisation, by Vilenkin and others, that inflation is unlikely to have been a one-off event. Just as the patch of space that we now call home once inflated to create an entire cosmos for us to wonder at, other neighbouring patches are probably inflating all around us, creating parallel bubble universes nearby.

The multiverse idea has been criticised because it’s tough to test. Almost by definition, parallel bubbles are spacetimes that are divorced from ours, and so we can't interact with them directly. That hasn't stopped cosmologists like Vilenkin, and our own Anthony Aguirre, from coming up with inventive ways we might be able to detect them. For instance, two neighbouring bubbles might collide and leave a scar on our universe, which we could pick out of the cosmic microwave background data. (See "When Worlds Collide" by Kate Becker.)

In their new paper, Garriga, Vilenkin, and Zhang have investigated another possible consequence of inflationary cosmology — providing a new mechanism for the formation of black holes in our universe. We often talk about stellar mass black holes that were formed from the collapse of stars. There are also supermassive black holes that can be found at the centre of galaxies, which can have masses up to a billion times that of the Sun. Astrophysicists aren’t quite sure how those latter behemoths are formed.

According to Garriga, Vilenkin and Zhang, black holes could also have been formed by little bubbles of vacuum in our early universe. These would have expanded during our universe's inflationary phase (as the cosmos they were embedded in was also growing around them). When inflation ended in our cosmos, these bubbles would — depending on their mass — have either collapsed down to a singularity (an infinitely dense point that we think lies at the core of a black hole) — or, if they were heavier than some critical mass, the bubble interior would continue to inflate into an entirely new baby universe. This universe would look to us, from the outside, like a black hole, and would be connected to our universe by a wormhole. (See the image, taken from the paper, at the top of this post.)

The team has also examined another mechanism in which black holes are formed inside spherical "domain walls" that are thought to be created during inflation. A domain wall is like a fracture or defect in space, created as the universe cools. You can think of it like a defect created in a cube of ice, where the crystal structure in the solid has misaligned as the water froze.

The paper takes a detailed look at some of the possible properties of such black holes formed by these novel processes, including the masses they might have, and the sort of observable signs they might give out that astronomers could pick up. They caution that they would need to carry out comprehensive computer simulations to work out all possible signatures and the possible effects of, for instance, energy being siphoned off from our universe through the wormhole. But a preliminary analysis suggests that these novel black holes could provide noticeable signatures, in the form of gamma rays given out by the black holes, or distortions induced on the cosmic microwave background spectrum created by radiation that was emitted as gas accreted onto large black holes in the early universe.

By looking at observational evidence that is already out there, the team can rule out inflationary black holes with certain parameters, but others are still allowed. Those that remain viable could have seeded today's supermassive black holes, the team says. And for certain model parameters they have investigated, the number and mass of black holes they expect to see suggests that these black holes could make up the missing dark matter in the universe.

The authors also calculated that the baby universe could contain very different physical parameters from each other. Thus the network of baby universes within black holes, linked by wormholes, would create an inflationary multiverse.

"We note that the mass distributions of black holes resulting from domain walls and from vacuum bubbles are expected to be different and can in principle be distinguished observationally," the teams writes in their paper. "If a black hole population produced by vacuum bubbles or domain walls is discovered, it could be regarded as evidence for the existence of a multiverse."

It's worth noting here that this isn't the first time that physicists have suggested that black holes lead to parallel universes. For example, FQXi members Lee Smolin and Jorge Pullin have independently had similar ideas in the past. On the podcast, on the June 2013 edition, you can hear Pullin talking about how loop quantum gravity predicts that black holes are tunnels to parallel worlds. (Smolin is also on that edition, talking about his book.) But this is the first analysis carried out using inflationary theory.

You can also read about Nobel Laureate Frank Wilczek’s ideas for detecting quantum parallel worlds by looking for energy leaking between worlds. Plus, you can listen to Howard Wiseman on the podcast talking about tests for interacting parallel worlds.

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the forum administrator

report post as inappropriate


FQXi Administrator Anthony Aguirre wrote on Dec. 10, 2015 @ 18:47 GMT
Vey nice writeup Zeeya!

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Dec. 11, 2015 @ 19:26 GMT
Hello Mr Aguirre,

Indeed.I am asking me if we return always towards the sphere and its uniqueness afer all .We have always a kind of limit implying the number 1 , the sphere here.In what turn these multispheres....Inside a sphere after all.And the central sphere ? The central BH.The spherical volumes semms relevant....

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Dec. 11, 2015 @ 19:39 GMT
We arrive so at an important analyse,the spiritual point of vue of our universe and its uniqueness.The entropy ,absolute if I can say is relative .If the multispheres are analysed like an anti thesis of this unique universal sphere.So entopy is totally different in its fractalisation if we consider these multispheres.That said we return always towards this maximum infinite entropy above our walls implying an uniqueness. If we consider the physicality and the increasing mass and entropy on the Arrow of evolutive timme ,irreversible,we can see this uniqueness for entropy.God does not play at dices after all.

Regards

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Pentcho Valev wrote on Dec. 10, 2015 @ 20:13 GMT
"Despite the dominant presence of ST-related people, and the supportive opinions on ST by some philosophers, the unanimous conclusion of the participants today was that multiverse is nonsense."

Pentcho Valev

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Dec. 11, 2015 @ 00:15 GMT
Maybe at energies like that of the inflationary epoch of the big bang, you can get access to parallel universes, or the speed of light increases.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Dec. 11, 2015 @ 16:44 GMT
Hello ,

beautiful articles.Say to Mr Tegmark that he can make the multispheres if he wants.Me ofcourse you know my point of vue about the principle of uniqueness, that said, this kind of anti thesis is relevant.Congratulations for his article dear Ms Merali.

Best Regards

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Akinbo Ojo wrote on Dec. 21, 2015 @ 11:31 GMT
When exotic fantasies are further elaborated upon as in the above paper it is good to recall that what led to this was the theoretical and astronomically supported observation that the universe NOW is flat, and from the great work of Dicke and Peebles in what is called 'the flatness problem', that this flatness must have been there AT VERY EARLY TIMES in the universe's history. This is what...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Dec. 21, 2015 @ 13:24 GMT
Hello Mr Ojo,

It is a beautiful course about inflation and the flat universe.Of course it is a general analyse.You like probably the work of Lemaître.It was a good work indeed.But how can we sure about this universal reality since the electromagnetic and photonic BB.You have well resume in fact the work of Lemaître.How can we sure about what is this photonic BB?How can we analyse the...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Dec. 21, 2015 @ 13:46 GMT
In fact, our actual analyses have difficulties to interpret this BB.What is this center ?How can we interpret rationally this point of beginning.What is this limit sepating the physicality and the unkwown infinite entropy.How enter the codes,gravitational and bosonic? This center, a central sphere for me, the biggest volume of the universal sphere ,is so far of us.It is intriguing spiritually speaking.The main codes are from this point of departure purely linked with the universal gravitation.This gravitation is a natural equilibrium, a natural force, balanced since the beginning of the physicality after all.The points of natural equilibriums are foundamentals,and the sphere is the perfect equilibriumof forces, so the perfect equilibrium of gravitation.The rotations are correlated probably.The spherical volumes seem an universal other key probably linked with this universal gravitation.Particules exist for this gravitation, it is essential, if they exist so they are produced by something, perhaps that the main gravitational codes are from this central sphere, with a kind of gravitational expansion,spherical.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Samuel Douglas wrote on Dec. 23, 2015 @ 00:29 GMT
I presume that we can rule out being in a baby universe ourselves?

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Dec. 27, 2015 @ 10:56 GMT
Hello Mr Douglas,

We are Young still respecting a general analyse on the Arrow of entropic time and evolution.13,7 billions of years, it is Young when we analyse the accelerated expansion and the future contraction due to a mass in increasing.Our universe is a baby sphere in fact indeed.....We evolve.....

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Steve Dufourny wrote on Dec. 24, 2015 @ 21:24 GMT
MERRY CHRISTMASS TO ALL DEAR FQXI FRIENDS,be the force with you and a lot of universal love for all.

Entropically yours :)

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Jason Mark Wolfe wrote on Jan. 6, 2016 @ 00:17 GMT
If universes could exist inside a black hole then an observer from inside of the black hole should be able to observe a white hole somewhere. To my knowledge, the scientific community has not detected any white holes in our universe.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Steve Dufourny replied on Jan. 6, 2016 @ 08:10 GMT
Hi Jason and happy newe year, happy to see you again on FQXi.I agree also about whosmholes;It is just a symmetry of BH implyied by geometrical algebras.Regards

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Jason Mark Wolfe replied on Jan. 6, 2016 @ 16:36 GMT
Hi Steve! Happy New Year to you too! :)

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Pentcho Valev wrote on Jan. 10, 2016 @ 15:00 GMT
Dishonest Cosmologists, Honest Einsteinians?

http://theconversation.com/cosmology-is-in-cris
is-but-not-for-the-reason-you-may-think-52349

"Cosmology is in crisis - but not for the reason you may think"

The whole paper is a euphemism for "Cosmologists lie blatantly". How about Einsteinans (if they are different from cosmologists)? Are today's Einsteinians still as honest...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Flemming Sorensen wrote on Jan. 11, 2016 @ 00:35 GMT
Consider this: Gravity is entangled throughout all parallel universes, and this entanglement not only explains the weakness of gravity, but also cancels out the paradox with locality vis á vis entangled particles.

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Pentcho Valev wrote on Jan. 25, 2016 @ 15:39 GMT
The End of Physics

https://www.ted.com/talks/harry_cliff_have_we_reached_the_en
d_of_physics/transcript?language=en

Harry Cliff: "Have we reached the end of physics?"

http://blogs.scientificamerican.com/cross-check/how-physics-
lost-its-fizz/

John Horgan: "Physicists' fantasies about parallel and virtual realms are not just stale. Increasingly, they strike...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Pentcho Valev replied on Jan. 27, 2016 @ 22:45 GMT
Symptoms of dead science:

http://blog.physicsworld.com/2015/06/22/why-converge
/

"Turok explains that the "large bandwagon" of the last 30 years has not found experimental support. The bandwagon in question is the Standard Model of particle physics established in the 1970s, which, he says, people have been elaborating ever since. "Grand unified theories, supersymmetry, string...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Eckard Blumschein replied on Jan. 28, 2016 @ 04:41 GMT
"what happens simultaneously for one observer might seem sequential to another".

Already the expression "simultaneity for one observer" hides is a mistake. It does not mean the ubiquitous genuine simultaneity but it refers to observers.

True simultaneity belongs to real processes.

Reality is the most fundamental and indispensable conjecture, and therefore it is always essentially different from any observation, no matter how large the delay is between the cause (reality) and its effect (observation).

Any cause precedes its effect.

If a theory is based on "simultaneity for one observer" then it cannot be correct.

++++

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Pentcho Valev replied on Jan. 28, 2016 @ 18:26 GMT
Einstein's 1905 false constant-speed-of-light postulate, the tool by which Einstein killed physics, is worshiped by Einsteinians as "a cosmic conspiracy of the highest order":

http://www.amazon.com/Death-Black-Hole-Cosmic-Quandar
ies/dp/039335038X

Neil deGrasse Tyson, pp. 123-124: "If everyone, everywhere and at all times, is to measure the same speed for the beam from your...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Joe Fisher wrote on Jan. 30, 2016 @ 13:49 GMT
This is utter codswallop. There can only be one real Universe occurring in an infinite here.

Joe Fisher, Realist

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Nicholas I Hosein wrote on Jan. 30, 2016 @ 22:25 GMT
Evil is unaware, unintelligent and blind, therefore it does not know itself. It has no clue of what it means to be real.

And he said to the human race, "The fear of the Lord--that is wisdom, and to shun evil is understanding."

Job 28:28

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate


Nicholas I Hosein wrote on Jan. 30, 2016 @ 22:26 GMT
"what happens simultaneously for one observer might seem sequential to another".

God is real. God designs the universe with respect to logic. Recall what I wrote in David Wolpert's article. Reality being defined according to God.

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate


Nicholas I Hosein wrote on Jan. 30, 2016 @ 22:42 GMT
"If the mass is smaller than a certain critical value, the bubble collapses to a singularity."

That's assuming that mass is physical. Recall in this essay by Marc Seguin that reality is pure mathematics (and/or Physics). That it is abstract. This would be why the bubble universe expands/ inflates eternally I think.

Bookmark and Share
this post has been edited by the author since its original submission

report post as inappropriate


Pentcho Valev wrote on Feb. 6, 2016 @ 10:46 GMT
Will LIGO Announce Discovery of Gravitational Waves?

Of course LIGO will "discover" gravitational waves sooner or later. Einstein's relativity cannot survive unless experimental fraud regularly boosts it. Eddington's 1919 fraud, Eddington and Adams' 1925 fraud, Pound and Rebka's 1960 fraud, Alväger's 1964 fraud, Hafele and Keating's 1971 fraud... the list is long. Just an example:...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Pentcho Valev replied on Feb. 6, 2016 @ 20:14 GMT
Will LIGO Announce Discovery of Gravitational Waves? (2)

"According to Burgess's email, which found its way onto Twitter as an image attached to a tweet from one of his colleagues, LIGO researchers have seen two black holes, of 29 and 36 solar masses, swirling together and merging. The statistical significance of the signal is supposedly very high, exceeding the "five-sigma" standard that...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Pentcho Valev replied on Feb. 7, 2016 @ 12:40 GMT
Will LIGO Announce Discovery of Gravitational Waves? (3)

Comments by "secondthought": "Now the good question is what it is meant by "gravitational waves" here. If it is a general-relativistic "ripple of spacetime" (whatever the author meant by that) then it doesn't make much physical sense because every textbook on general relativity says that the gravitational "field" described by a metric...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Pentcho Valev replied on Feb. 8, 2016 @ 20:34 GMT
Will LIGO Announce Discovery of Gravitational Waves? (4)

Comment by secondthought: "I hope that folks in this business are not starting to juggle with definitions and call everything they were able to detect "the gravitational wave"."

Why not? This cannot be a problem in Einstein's world. Similarly, Pound and Rebka called "gravitational time dilation" the gravitational redshift caused by the Newtonian acceleration of photons:

Albert Einstein Institute: "One of the three classical tests for general relativity is the gravitational redshift of light or other forms of electromagnetic radiation. However, in contrast to the other two tests - the gravitational deflection of light and the relativistic perihelion shift -, you do not need general relativity to derive the correct prediction for the gravitational redshift. A combination of Newtonian gravity, a particle theory of light, and the weak equivalence principle (gravitating mass equals inertial mass) suffices. (...) The gravitational redshift was first measured on earth in 1960-65 by Pound, Rebka, and Snider at Harvard University..."

Pentcho Valev

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


Pentcho Valev wrote on Feb. 9, 2016 @ 16:36 GMT
LIGO, Einstein's Relativity and Possible Fraud

"Physicists have for months been buzzing about the possible detection of gravitational waves -- a finding that would confirm one of the key predictions of Albert Einstein's general theory of relativity. (...) But the rumoured signal could also be the result of a deliberate drill. Three members of the LIGO team have access to systems that can...

view entire post


Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate

Pentcho Valev replied on Feb. 9, 2016 @ 20:57 GMT
LIGO, Einstein's Relativity and Possible Fraud (2)

Luboš Motl: "It's much more likely that it's a fake injection that someone pumped into the LIGO computers and forgot it, or masked it. ;-)

Both Washington and Louisiana are said to have seen several cycles of the orbiting chirp, plus even the ringdown afterwards. This is lots of features, and if the 2 detectors saw it with a reasonable delay after each other, comparable to 0.01 second (the wave arrived to one detector before the other one), it's virtually impossible for these signals not to have the cosmic origin."

Motl's first paragraph seems to be a joke but it should be taken more seriously than the second one. It is highly improbable for the so far totally elusive gravitational waves to suddenly become such a powerful source of information. And note that this information is about the behavior of black holes - equally elusive objects. In my view, it is virtually impossible for these signals not to have human ("fake injection") origin. Again, the money-spinner (Einstein's relativity) will be saved in a fraudulent way.

Pentcho Valev

Bookmark and Share
report post as inappropriate


alena lis wrote on Aug. 2, 2016 @ 09:08 GMT
U have so interesting discussions!

Bookmark and Share
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.