Bang/Crunch Revisited

[Moontanman]

Some aspects of brane theory suggests the universe is a much bigger than we know and is made of a multidimensional "bulk" space. The 3d space we live in is a 3d brane floating in this "bulk" space. It has at least one other 3d counter part that it is attracted to by gravity which is the only force that can leave the 3d brane. These to branes are like sheets on a clothes line. They attract and collide in an endless time scale many orders of magnitude longer the age of the universe now. The collision results in an apparent big bang that occurs everywhere not just a point. the energy of the collision causes all matter in each brane to turn into energy much like what we think the big bang was like. the resulting energy drives the branes apart and each 3d brane cools back into hydrogen much like the big bang we think of now. with each collision the 3d branes expand to infinity from the view point of a 3d observer but they stay finite from the view point of an observer of the "bulk" space.

[Pluto]

G'day Moontanman

Your talking about magnetic reconnection.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by Pluto

G'day Moontanman

Your talking about magnetic reconnection.

I've never heard it called that pluto, do you have a link?

[Pluto]

G'day Moontanman

Search under

arXiv or NASA/ADS

Magnetic reconnection

and

solar flares

If the links are too big in number than do a search by year starting from 2009 down.

Rather than me giving you links that I have chosen. Read through and get the gist of it.

Right now I'm off to play with the kids and smell the roses.

When I come back, I can post the links that I Have read.

[Moontanman]

Pluto, none of those things have anything to do with multi dimensional bulk space, brane theory, colliding branes, gravity crossing into other dimensions or anything even remotely similar.

[Michael Mooney]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

Some aspects of brane theory suggests the universe is a much bigger than we know and is made of a multidimensional "bulk" space. The 3d space we live in is a 3d brane floating in this "bulk" space. It has at least one other 3d counter part that it is attracted to by gravity which is the only force that can leave the 3d brane. These to branes are like sheets on a clothes line. They attract and collide in an endless time scale many orders of magnitude longer the age of the universe now. The collision results in an apparent big bang that occurs everywhere not just a point. the energy of the collision causes all matter in each brane to turn into energy much like what we think the big bang was like. the resulting energy drives the branes apart and each 3d brane cools back into hydrogen much like the big bang we think of now. with each collision the 3d branes expand to infinity from the view point of a 3d observer but they stay finite from the view point of an observer of the "bulk" space.

This does not even address my most recent questions. Oh well.

How do you see string/M-/Brane theory with its imaginary membranes clashing as more reasonable than the model I presented in the opening post... with further commentary later, as follows?:

Our cosmic event horizon is just a small bubble of visibility *within* the thickness of the "rubber" of the good old cosmic expanding balloon. This mini-cosmos within the maxi-cosmos, the Whole Balloon, is cycling through bangs and crunches even as the whole balloon keeps expanding.... *Yes*... out into the infinity of space.
...
Anyway, we can't even "see out of the rubber" (the visible cosmos) let alone see the *yes* empty space within or beyond the bubble.

And, again as I asked you in posts 7 and 10, as an advocate M-theory:

Please explain and document... how seven of the eleven "dimensions" in String/M-theory (after 3-D space and "elapsed time for all movement"... 4-d) are derived and what there referents in the observable cosmos are....

In your own words explain even one of those 11 dimensions after the familiar four I mentioned above...
and if you can explain all seven extras you will win the prize as the only one through several forums of my asking, to explain them.

So, counting the questions in my last post, that's a lot of unanswered questions.
Michael

[Moontanman]

I am not trying to debate your model, you asked for an alternative. i gave you one, if you don't like it ignore it. You seem to more than willing to ignore everyone else who doesn't follow your drummer. My puny IQ doesn't compare to yours.

[Michael Mooney]

Originally Posted by Moontanman

I am not trying to debate your model, you asked for an alternative. i gave you one, if you don't like it ignore it. You seem to more than willing to ignore everyone else who doesn't follow your drummer. My puny IQ doesn't compare to yours.

It was not my intention to beat you over the head with my IQ but to stimulate dialogue on the subject of this thread. Dialogue is about exchange of ideas in a respectful manner. If I ask a question, then you either answer or explain why you can or will not, and vice-versa.

So there was a long string of them and you dodged them all.
I had hoped for a real conversation with you on the subject,
I'll get over it.
Michael

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzz

Moontanman said

Pluto, none of those things have anything to do with multi dimensional bulk space, brane theory, colliding branes, gravity crossing into other dimensions or anything even remotely similar.

I did not say that.

I agree with you.

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzz

Just sharing the reading on this.

Beyond Inflation: A Cyclic Universe Scenario
Neil Turok et al 2005 Phys. Scr. T117 76-85 * doi: 10.1238/Physica.Topical.117a00076*


Neil Turok1,3 and Paul J Steinhardt2
1 Centre for Mathematical Sciences, Wilberforce Road, Cambridge, CB3 0WA, UK
2 Department of Physics, Princeton University, Princeton, NJ 08544, USA
3 Talk given at the Nobel Symposium `String Theory and Cosmology', Sigtuna, 14-19 August 2003


=========================

Could cyclic universe explain mystery? - Space.com- msnbc.com
Could cyclic universe explain mystery?
Theorists suggest Big Bangs and Crunches lead to cosmic balance

One of the biggest mysteries in cosmology could be explained by a controversial theory in which the universe explodes into existence not just once, but repeatedly in endless cycles of death and rebirth.
Called the cyclic universe theory, it could potentially explain why a mysterious repulsive form of energy known as the "cosmological constant," which is accelerating the expansion of the universe, is several orders of magnitude smaller than predicted by the standard Big Bang model.

=========================

'Cyclic universe' can explain cosmological constant - space - 04 May 2006 - New Scientist
'Cyclic universe' can explain cosmological constant

A cyclic universe, which bounces through a series of big bangs and "big crunches", could solve the puzzle of our cosmological constant, physicists suggest.
The cosmological constant represents the energy of empty space, and is thought to be the most likely explanation for the observed speeding up of the expansion of the universe. But its measured value is a googol (1 followed by 100 zeroes) times smaller than that predicted by particle physics theories. It is a discrepancy that gives cosmologists a real headache.
In the 1980s, physicists considered the possibility that an initially large cosmological constant could decay down to the value measured today. But this theory was abandoned when calculations showed that it would take far longer than 14 billion years - the time since the big bang - for the constant to reach the level seen today.
Now physicists Paul Steinhardt at Princeton University, in New Jersey, US, and Neil Turok at Cambridge University in the UK, are resurrecting the idea. They point out that if time stretches back beyond the big bang, the problem could be solved. At that is just what is predicted by their cyclic model of the universe - an alternative to the Standard Big Bang theory - which the pair first developed in 2002 (see "Cycles of creation").

=============================

Please I'm just sharing the reading.

There are some important issues at hand and one form of a cyclic universe not as a total but as individual parts that can be explained by physics may have something to offer.

=============================

and this paper is interesting

[0801.2965v1] Cosmology and Cosmogony in a Cyclic Universe
Cosmology and Cosmogony in a Cyclic Universe

Authors: Jayant V. Narlikar, Geoffrey Burbidge, R.G. Vishwakarma
(Submitted on 18 Jan 2008)