Roger Penrose has promoted his book Cycles Of Time as an alternative view of Universe early beginnings. Along with other researchers he finds faint circles of temperature variations in the CMB that are said to represent exploding black holes in support of his theories.

Competing theories claim the net energy in our universe is zero sum of positive and negative energies, and it all happened in a single lucky chance that had no cause. Presumably if it starts spontaneously with a poof it can end spontaneously with a poof.

Erwin Schrödinger gives a negative entropy argument in his Book The Meaning Of Life, where entropy can decrease in a non random system. One such system is a magnifying lense where low temperature diffused light is focused to a hot spot with no work being done and no quantity of energy being discharged to a lower temperature reservoir. Second law of thermodynamics does not describe this, but third law of thermodynamics does. Some systems of this type occur naturally in the large scale universe, example gravitational lensing, but the extent of it is small over the life of the universe. We don't use these things for power sources, because a small energy boost comes from a large device.

Over the life of many universes the observed energy and mass can be accumulated. How many universes? It takes as many universes as the number of dust specks in the deserts and the number of sand grains in the oceans, something approaching infinity. An energy boost approaching zero is multiplied by a number approaching infinity. This is one way that something can apparently come from nothing.

For the present question, opinions are invited about whether or not the Penrose view of sequential universes is consistent with established science, and a possible explanation of beginnings.

Does The Ending Of An Old Universe Cause The Beginning Of A New Universe?

More Jerry Decker's questions See All
Similar questions and discussions