Beyond the Void: The Evidence of Multiverse is Mounting

Earlier this year astronomers from the University of Minnesota discovered a massive void of space that measured nearly a billion light years across. It was an intriguing discovery, in a universe that is filled with seemingly infinite objects.



Cosmic gaps aren’t uncommon though, but the fact that this one was nearly 1,000 times larger than the average expected gap, suggested something different.

The team was working with sensor data retrieved by the NASA’s WMAP (Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe) satellite. The hole measured roughly 10,000 times as large as our galaxy or 400 times the distance to Andromeda.

What was even more fascinating was the fact that a hole this size was essentially impossible to explain under the constraints of current scientific theory.

Enter University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill physics Professor Laura Mersini-Houghton.

Mersini-Houghton has put forward a theory that has stunned the wider community. “Standard cosmology cannot explain such a giant cosmic hole.” The real kick of it though, comes next, in what is being termed a groundbreaking hypothesis; she describes the hole as “… the unmistakable imprint of another universe beyond the edge of our own“.

www.dailygalaxy.com...

As a person who studies physics and enjoys the often flightful fancies of the physics community i am extremely excited by this discovery. Finaly after all the debate and hedgeing of bets that the graviton or higgs-boson would be the proof of the multiverse, it may turn out that the evidence has been there all time staring us in the face. We may not have to wait on the fellows at cern to crack this enigma.

I cannot express the joy that discoveries like this bring me. It is time for a paradigm shift in the way humanity conducts itself and science is ready to follow suit.

Big bang was the result of a parallel universes crashing with another one. Could this be the location of where it originated? Very interesting....

Originally posted by Lecter
Big bang was the result of a parallel universes crashing with another one. Could this be the location of where it originated? Very interesting....

Lisa randall's book warped passages describes this subject in great detail.
"A MUST READ" for any1 interested in learing more on multiverse's and the connection between shifting universes. Great post S&F

Or perhaps it IS a part of our universe... except that it's folded in on itself and the opening must be found to see inside it.

I guess it's all the same though... it just depends on how you define 'universe'.

“The quantum theory of parallel universes is not the problem, it is the solution. It is not some troublesome, optional interpretation emerging from arcane theoretical considerations. It is the explanation, the only one that is tenable, of a remarkable and counter-intuitive reality.”

"Everything in our universe -- including you and me, every atom and every galaxy -- has counterparts in these other universes."

David Deutsch -Legendary Oxford Physicist

Legendary Oxford physicist David Deutsch is best known for his contributions to quantum physics, quantum computing, and a leading proponent of the multiverse (or "many worlds") interpretation of quantum theory -- the astounding idea that our universe is constantly spawning countless numbers of parallel worlds.

In his book The Fabric of Reality, Deutsch laid the groundwork for an all-encompassing Theory of Everything by tying together four mutually supporting strands of reality: First: Hugh Everett's many-worlds interpretation of quantum physics, "the first and most important of the four strands"; second: Karl Popper's epistemology, especially its requiring a realist interpretation of scientific theories, and its emphasis on being falsifiable; third: Alan Turing's theory of computation, replaced by Deutsch's universal quantum computer; and fourth: Richard Dawkins' neo-Darwinian evolutionary theory and the modern evolutionary synthesis.

www.dailygalaxy.com...

and the evidence just keeps coming

reply to post by constantwonder

We may stand face to face with the most significant contribution to the unspoken truth that science is best described as having been an open-minded religion. Something is ripping this universe apart and it is to be expected that the cosmologic monotheism would try to preserve the one God/one universe doctrine. The way the defense would proceed will tell us something about the degree of influence of mammalian neural structures of the human brain on those most recent evolutionary additives.

there's a theory that the universe - when it formed - stabilized at a higher vacuum energy than a certain "baseline". it's now known what that baseline would be. however the theory says that somewhere a cavitation can potentially form which would restore the energy of the vacuum to a lower state. this new state would expand like a bubble with the speed of light and we'd never know what hit us because we'd stop existing. the laws of physics would be completely different inside the bubble which would expand forever. maybe the bubble IS visible and we have about 6 billion years to prepare for the end...

Billions of light years.

Can I ask a question? It might seem like a dumb one, but I'm going to ask it anyway.

How do we...actually, better put... WHAT method do scientists use to make such discoveries? Every time I read stories and news articles like this one I ask my self, How the hell do they know that!?

ConstantWonder

Good find thank you,

S+F

Missed that,

Reading for the weekend, Branes eh oh Brans that maybe are made in our Brains/mind

Thanks again, this is a long one line post

Elf.

[edit on 14-11-2008 by MischeviousElf]

reply to post by Andre Neves


They take a guess. Though it's a really good guess.
Then others run with it to try to prove or disprove it based on evidence.
I always find it funny that most things are still theory in the realm of science. You would think they would figure out most theories by now.

Remember Theory = Guess.
Take your theory with a grain of salt.

Originally posted by grey580
reply to post by Andre Neves

 

Remember Theory = Guess.
Take your theory with a grain of salt.

I had to read your words a few times to make sure I was reading them properly. Do you realize how incredibly off your definition of scientific theory is? In the words of the American Association for the Advancement of Science, "In detective novels, a 'theory' is little more than an educated guess, often based on a few circumstantial facts. In science, the word 'theory' means much more. A scientific theory is a well-substantiated explanation of some aspect of the natural world, based on a body of facts that have been repeatedly confirmed through observation and experiment. Such fact-supported theories are not 'guesses' but reliable accounts of the real world." www.aaas.org...

Another definition by the National Academy of Sciences: "Some scientific explanations are so well established that no new evidence is likely to alter them. The explanation becomes a scientific theory. In everyday language a theory means a hunch or speculation. Not so in science. In science, the word theory refers to a comprehensive explanation of an important feature of nature supported by facts gathered over time. Theories also allow scientists to make predictions about as yet unobserved phenomena."

Really, by now everyone should understand the distinction between the colloquial use of the word and the scientific use of it. Don't be so ignorant--but if you're going to be, at least refrain from spreading it around.

[edit on 15/11/08 by paperplanes]

Mmmmmm.... Universal donut....

An extra line for *drool*

Originally posted by constantwonder
We may not have to wait on the fellows at cern to crack this enigma.

Haha. And I bet that pisses them off.

Has anyone thought of Grand Unified Field theory?





The basis is all about a singularity and when you cut out the mumbo jumbo, it means there is a black hole in the center of everything. Thus the polarity of a double torus that a black hole creates, is what our Current cosmolgy suggest is a Donut universe, the collapsing into itself. Most recent discoveries find that the center of out entire galaxy has a coined name "Super Massive Black holes!" Come on now... Listen to Nassim Heremein, and Richard Hoagland about the double star tetrahedral, 19.47 and how it all relates to one common geometry of reality in space time. Then these "Super Giant Open Spaces" will fit.

[edit on 15-11-2008 by UnitedSatesofFreemasons]

Originally posted by TravelerintheDark
Mmmmmm.... Universal donut....

Very Close. My theory is that the universe is an expanding spherical shell instead of an expanding solid sphere. This void is merely the center of this spherical shell.

Originally posted by Lecter
Big bang was the result of a parallel universes crashing with another one. Could this be the location of where it originated? Very interesting....

parallel universes?

reply to post by Andre Neves



The Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) — also known as the Microwave Anisotropy Probe (MAP), and Explorer 80 — measures the temperature of the Big Bang's remnant radiant heat. Headed by Professor Charles L. Bennett, Johns Hopkins University, the mission is a joint project between the NASA Goddard Space Flight Center and Princeton University. [4] The WMAP satellite was launched on 30 June 2001, at 19:46:46 GDT, from Florida. The WMAP succeeds the COBE and medium-class (MIDEX) satellites of the Explorer program. The WMAP honours Dr. David Wilkinson, who died in September of 2002.[4]

The WMAP's measurements are more accurate than previous measurements; per the Lambda-CDM model of the universe, the data indicate the age of the universe is 13.73 ± 0.12 billion years old, with a Hubble constant of 70.1 ± 1.3 km·s-1·Mpc-1, and is composed of 4.6% ordinary baryonic matter; 23% unknown dark matter that neither emits nor absorbs light; 72% dark energy that accelerates expansion; and less than 1% neutrinos — all consistent with a flat geometry, and the ratio of energy density to the critical density Ω = 1.02 ± 0.02. These results support the Lambda-CDM model and the cosmologic scenarios of cosmic inflation, and evidence of cosmic neutrino background radiation. [5]

Source: Wiki

reply to post by constantwonder
So, as a physicist would you say this gap might possibly be "ground zero" of the Big Bang

Originally posted by reject
reply to post by constantwonder

 

So, as a physicist would you say this gap might possibly be "ground zero" of the Big Bang

No it wouldn't.

Because I know where Ground Zero was.

"Ground Zero of the Big bang, was in my Bedroom last night"..!!!

reply to post by paperplanes


I am starting to see this a lot on here as it seems that the proponents of Evolutionary Theory wish to try and show that it is Evolutionary Law, when its not. Even you yourself are using a site on the Theory of Evolution in your post. The fact is that a Theory is exactly that, it’s a theory, though some have more evidence and support behind them then others:

The term theory is regularly stretched to refer to speculation that is currently unverifiable. Examples are string theory and various theories of everything. In the strict sense, the term theory should only be used when describing a model derived from experimental evidence and is provable (or disprovable). It is considered sufficient for the model to be in principle testable at some undetermined point in the future.

Basically the idea that we should accept anything that has "Theory" attached to it as though it is a fact is completely incorrect, many theories are yet to have any proof or testing to back them up in the slightest.