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?
No. But I think some data may be interpreted as a cycle in the universe expansion/temperature - cycling about 2.718 K. Some 5 B years ago the temperature may have been increasing. Now it may be decreasing from CMB temperature (2,725 K) to theaverage.
Dear Jerry Decker
Roger Penrose was just follower of last century scientists that they did not know anything about our this most complete, well organized, more detail, most accurate universe that it holding several hundred billons of galaxies, with out any Black Hole.
shame that he got the Nobel Prize for a fake science.
Article How the Quantum Universe Works
regards
Respected Sir,
Much to my own study in the field of conformal cyclic cosmology(CCC) and of philosophical texts such as the Bhagavad Gita and the Upanishad I can say that Mr. Penrose’s theory is quite right. Conformal cyclic cosmology tell us that there were infinite cycles of universes before the creation of our universe and there will be infinite cycles after the death of our universe. This means that there existed a universe before ours which ended into a singularity and that singularity, when it exploded, led to the birth of our universe. The only problem with the theory is that because of the second law of thermodynamics it is prohibited that a system of high entropy can evolve into a system of lower entropy and thus it is not possible for our universe to be generated from an earlier universe.
Now for a moment I would like to turn your attention to the religious scriptures. While I was going through the Upanishads I found a upanishad dealing with the birth of our universe. It was titled as the Atharvashir Upanishad and it said that upon the generation of a wave of breath from God Rudra 4 elements were born and the merging of these four elements led to the creation of the universe in which we live in. Also in the Bhagavd Gita sections 12-13 we can easily notice the theory of multiverse and also of something much bigger than that is sustaining our universe.
Again coming back to modern physics and cosmology, there exists a quantum mechanical picture of Conformal Cyclic Cosmology called as the Big Bounce theory which says that the universe existing earlier than our universe contracted and contracted until it neared a singularity and then it started to expand to form the universe in which we live in today. But for CCC its problem with the 2nd law of thermodynamics could be resolved by either the existence of a multiverse or a theory of the quantum nature of aeons. To my belief both of these theories are good and since CCC was first proposed it showed that a infinite cyclic history of the universe must have been present. And if somehow entropy travelled from the earlier universe to ours then they must possess a quantum nature which could explain their tunneling from one universe to another. At last, I would say that CCC can explain the origin of our universe and also the things which existed before our universe if it could shift a little from its foundations laid according to General Relativity.
Yours Sincerely,
Rishi Raj
Consider a closed universe with two phases. A long phase some tenth of billons of years of star burning, black hole feeding and transferring energy into gravitational waves. Followed by a short phase of transferring gravitational energy to black holes. The black holes finally explode to clouds of neutrons providing new star fuel for the next first phase.
- Badges
- Science topic
- Similar topics
- Solid State Physics
- Devices