In a "Rainbow" Universe Time May Have No Beginning

What if the universe had no beginning, and time stretched back infinitely without a big bang to start things off? That's one possible consequence of an idea called "rainbow gravity," so-named because it posits that gravity's effects on spacetime are felt differently by different wavelengths of light, aka different colors in the rainbow.

Rainbow gravity was first proposed 10 years ago as a possible step toward repairing the rifts between the theories of general relativity (covering the very big) and quantum mechanics (concerning the realm of the very small). The idea is not a complete theory for describing quantum effects on gravity, and is not widely accepted. Nevertheless, physicists have now applied the concept to the question of how the universe began, and found that if rainbow gravity is correct, spacetime may have a drastically different origin story than the widely accepted picture of the big bang.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=rainbow-gravity-universe-beginning


Scientific America

Hi Puriel, now we have an interesting topic to discuss, but I can only repeat what I’ve said before in other discussions. But before I start commenting here is a poem I wrote many years ago when I was betwixt and between religion and evolution. Simply called

 ‘The Journey.’
 I forced my snorting charger down the paths between the stars, through empty, infinite space. Forward, forward, slacken not your mighty speed. Onward, onward, seek and find another race.
Hot, flaming belly, push harder, force your breath to straining flanks. Step lively faithful steed ere we sup yon supernova’s burning death.
 A thousand eternities did we traverse, aye, and the same amount of universe. Past myriads of galaxies we’ve hurled, down past weird nebula and maternity of suns, dead and born again a million times. Down…down again, deep…so…deep. Infinity! Where is your timeless bend? What your confines? Where the end? How near, how far Eternity? Ageless yet so young, binding yet so boundless. Wondrously prolific yet so lifeless, you create to destroy, destroy to create, innocently conquering, insatiate!
 Up, up and down, forward and backward you flow and yet, though all is movement how still you seem to be to trusty steed and I as through the unbounded universe we pass in awe.
On…on, into hypnotic void of deep space…….
Spirit of life, I have seen your face.
-------------------------------------------------------------
It was some years later before I realised and understood my own poem. And now, in this discussion, I can explain it. Two lines in the poem explain it all in a nutshell: ‘You create to destroy, destroy to create.’ And that is how my philosophy interprets life, the universe, and everything. Lol, no, not 42!
When we look at nature with a critical eye we see that nothing goes to waste, just about everything that is born feeds another life form, even after its death when microbes, viruses and other life feeds of the rotting carcass, whether animal or vegetation. It is that process which I believe is at the root of all life including the planets, solar systems, and the Universe.
I have a lot more to say on this matter but will let you read and digest the above first. OK?

stardesk wrote:Hi Puriel, now we have an interesting topic to discuss, but I can only repeat what I’ve said before in other discussions. But before I start commenting here is a poem I wrote many years ago when I was betwixt and between religion and evolution. Simply called

 ‘The Journey.’
 I forced my snorting charger down the paths between the stars, through empty, infinite space. Forward, forward, slacken not your mighty speed. Onward, onward, seek and find another race.
Hot, flaming belly, push harder, force your breath to straining flanks. Step lively faithful steed ere we sup yon supernova’s burning death.
 A thousand eternities did we traverse, aye, and the same amount of universe. Past myriads of galaxies we’ve hurled, down past weird nebula and maternity of suns, dead and born again a million times. Down…down again, deep…so…deep. Infinity! Where is your timeless bend? What your confines? Where the end? How near, how far Eternity? Ageless yet so young, binding yet so boundless. Wondrously prolific yet so lifeless, you create to destroy, destroy to create, innocently conquering, insatiate!
 Up, up and down, forward and backward you flow and yet, though all is movement how still you seem to be to trusty steed and I as through the unbounded universe we pass in awe.
On…on, into hypnotic void of deep space…….
Spirit of life, I have seen your face.
-------------------------------------------------------------
It was some years later before I realised and understood my own poem. And now, in this discussion, I can explain it. Two lines in the poem explain it all in a nutshell: ‘You create to destroy, destroy to create.’ And that is how my philosophy interprets life, the universe, and everything. Lol, no, not 42!
When we look at nature with a critical eye we see that nothing goes to waste, just about everything that is born feeds another life form, even after its death when microbes, viruses and other life feeds of the rotting carcass, whether animal or vegetation. It is that process which I believe is at the root of all life including the planets, solar systems, and the Universe.
I have a lot more to say on this matter but will let you read and digest the above first. OK?

Thanks Stardesk and a very powerful poem I have to say, you have a talent sir.

I very much believe that because we take time for granted or that we need it, why does there have to be any need of time for something that has had no beginning or end but is a continuous cycle of birth and destruction. We are ourselves nothing more than a cycle and in the end we give back in some form to the earth itself through our deaths.
It is a fascinating view of what we clearly have mountains more to learn and understand in this field. I myself have always been fascinated within this field though will admit there is much I still need to learn here being as it is not one of my stronger topics. But to me why is there a need of time for the cycle of the life in the Universe, it really is only important to us and to use with measures of time and space.

So I pretty much agree with most of what you are saying.

Have to go, but would like to learn more from what you understand and know.

Cheers!

Glad you liked the poem, Puriel. To be factual it is 'free verse,' whereas poetry has rhyming line ends.

I'll get back on track tomorrow concerning the issue you've mentioned of 'time.' A fascinating subject and again one that I can only answer from my philosophical reasoning. See you tomorrow.

I will look forward to your ideas and hope I can propose some myself.

This might also interest you Stardesk, but makes it even more complex to even start to unravel.



Simulations back up theory that Universe is a hologram
A ten-dimensional theory of gravity makes the same predictions as standard quantum physics in fewer dimensions.


In 1997, theoretical physicist Juan Maldacena proposed1 that an audacious model of the Universe in which gravity arises from infinitesimally thin, vibrating strings could be reinterpreted in terms of well-established physics. The mathematically intricate world of strings, which exist in nine dimensions of space plus one of time, would be merely a hologram: the real action would play out in a simpler, flatter cosmos where there is no gravity.

Maldacena's idea thrilled physicists because it offered a way to put the popular but still unproven theory of strings on solid footing — and because it solved apparent inconsistencies between quantum physics and Einstein's theory of gravity. It provided physicists with a mathematical Rosetta stone, a 'duality', that allowed them to translate back and forth between the two languages, and solve problems in one model that seemed intractable in the other and vice versa. But although the validity of Maldacena's ideas has pretty much been taken for granted ever since, a rigorous proof has been elusive.

http://www.nature.com/news/simulations-back-up-theory-that-universe-is-a-hologram-1.14328

That's what I said tomorrow.

the provable fact that time is influenced by gravity ( clocks appear to travel slower in space than on the earth, or more accurately the further you are away from a mass, which is further complicated by the fact that the faster you go also affects relative time ) could possibly mean that time as we see it and calculate it is stretched as the universe is condensed into or approaching the singularity.
Science is always coming up with new theories and devising new ways to make what has been observed fit the calculations.
just because the NEW maths fits does not make it true, but just gives people more things to investigate in the future.

Things have a beginning a middle and an end.
It is quite likely the universe will as well.

the observable universe is expanding and that is something that is provable by observation. Unless something stops the expansion eventually the night sky will go dark as galaxies and stars move away from each other.
The bit I find very confusing is that we are all at the centre of the universe no matter where we are in it.
one day though, on a planet somewhere, not earth because that will be long gone, something will look up into a night sky totally devoid of other stars

Flap Gallagher wrote:the provable fact that time is influenced by gravity ( clocks appear to travel slower in space than on the earth, or more accurately the further you are away from a mass, which is further complicated by the fact that the faster you go also affects relative time ) could possibly mean that time as we see it and calculate it is stretched as the universe is condensed into or approaching the singularity.
Science is always coming up with new theories and devising new ways to make what has been observed fit the calculations.
just because the NEW maths fits does not make it true, but just gives people more things to investigate in the future.

Things have a beginning a middle and an end.
It is quite likely the universe will as well.

the observable universe is expanding and that is something that is provable by observation. Unless something stops the expansion eventually the night sky will go dark as  galaxies and stars move away from each other.
The bit I find very confusing is that we are all at the centre of the universe no matter where we are in it.
one day though, on a planet somewhere, not earth because that will be long gone, something will look up into a night sky totally devoid of other stars

Where's the beginning and end of a circle?

Tess wrote:
Where's the beginning and end of a circle?

Brilliant, well played Tess, very impressed at that, great counter.

  

Tess wrote:

Flap Gallagher wrote:the provable fact that time is influenced by gravity ( clocks appear to travel slower in space than on the earth, or more accurately the further you are away from a mass, which is further complicated by the fact that the faster you go also affects relative time ) could possibly mean that time as we see it and calculate it is stretched as the universe is condensed into or approaching the singularity.
Science is always coming up with new theories and devising new ways to make what has been observed fit the calculations.
just because the NEW maths fits does not make it true, but just gives people more things to investigate in the future.

Things have a beginning a middle and an end.
It is quite likely the universe will as well.

the observable universe is expanding and that is something that is provable by observation. Unless something stops the expansion eventually the night sky will go dark as  galaxies and stars move away from each other.
The bit I find very confusing is that we are all at the centre of the universe no matter where we are in it.
one day though, on a planet somewhere, not earth because that will be long gone, something will look up into a night sky totally devoid of other stars

Where's the beginning and end of a circle?

I am not sure the universe is a circle. It may be a sphere.
However the analogy may not be quite right as most of us mere mortals assume balloon, and a balloon has an inside and an outside and I am not sure the universe as such has an outside.
the vacuum of space is thought of as nothing, when in fact there are plenty of atoms and other particles zooming about all over the place. However the outside of the universe, so to speak is actually nothing in all its glory and the universe expands into that nothing and so it becomes something. A concept that is hard to visualise unless you have huge blackboards full of weird formulas that no one but stephen hawkin or that very nice chap brian cox can understand.
the yuman brain is not really set up to understand the concept of UNIVERSE and all that entails.
To use a phrase from an excellent book
“Space is big. You just won't believe how vastly, hugely, mind-bogglingly big it is. I mean, you may think it's a long way down the road to the chemist's, but that's just peanuts to space.”

So in essence I doubt if we will ever work it all out as each piece of the puzzle we find only points out that the puzzle is bigger than we think.

so in conclusion

"Time is an illusion. Lunchtime doubly so."
Ford Prefect

Evening folks. I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about the question of time, a question which has several theories. I can only put forward my own interpretation of what time is, and at some point in this comment I’ll be giving you an exercise to do which may help in putting time into some kind of perspective.

What is time? Does it exist as a force independent of external factors? One of my propositions is no. That may surprise you but consider this: If we humans didn’t exist, and therefore not mindful of time, would it then exist? I know, everything that exists has a beginning, a period of maturity, then a period of demise then death, whether a microbe or a star, this we call time for we can measure that period of existence. But as said, if we humans were not around there would only be periodic events. We need an appraisal of time, we need to quantify it, measure it, for our minds are now beyond that of animal life, beyond that of a tree or a bird. They only respond to the passing of day and night and/or the seasons.

It would appear that we need to put time into some kind of measurable perspective to help us along, from day to day, year to year, and forward projection. Now, consider this, our minds are conditioned to operate 24/7 that’s why we dream, it needs to function without stopping, Thus I mentioned an exercise  for you to do which will demonstrate and go some way towards what I mean.

Sit quiet somewhere, where and when you know you wont be disturbed. Relax and try to empty your mind, literally. Try not to think about anything at all, a blank, unthinking mind. If you can get beyond about 3-4 seconds then you’re superhuman.

This little exercise demonstrates how it is our minds which give quality and quantity to everything around us, including time. It would appear that time is a necessary function in our lives, but it is our minds which give it its existence.

stardesk wrote:Evening folks. I’ve spent a lot of time thinking about the question of time, a question which has several theories. I can only put forward my own interpretation of what time is, and at some point in this comment I’ll be giving you an exercise to do which may help in putting time into some kind of perspective.

What is time? Does it exist as a force independent of external factors? One of my propositions is no. That may surprise you but consider this: If we humans didn’t exist, and therefore not mindful of time, would it then exist? I know, everything that exists has a beginning, a period of maturity, then a period of demise then death, whether a microbe or a star, this we call time for we can measure that period of existence. But as said, if we humans were not around there would only be periodic events. We need an appraisal of time, we need to quantify it, measure it, for our minds are now beyond that of animal life, beyond that of a tree or a bird. They only respond to the passing of day and night and/or the seasons.

It would appear that we need to put time into some kind of measurable perspective to help us along, from day to day, year to year, and forward projection. Now, consider this, our minds are conditioned to operate 24/7 that’s why we dream, it needs to function without stopping, Thus I mentioned an exercise  for you to do which will demonstrate and go some way towards what I mean.

Sit quiet somewhere, where and when you know you wont be disturbed. Relax and try to empty your mind, literally. Try not to think about anything at all, a blank, unthinking mind. If you can get beyond about 3-4 seconds then you’re superhuman.

This little exercise demonstrates how it is our minds which give quality and quantity to everything around us, including time. It would appear that time is a necessary function in our lives, but it is our minds which give it its existence.

a fair example, but even without us time would be measurable as everything at the atomic level vibrates essentially.
It might not be aware, but it still tick tocks away at its own rate.
while we have brought about the concept of hours minutes seconds
plops, dazzles and fzings may be the norm on a planet at the other end of the universe. however there is bound to be some correlation between a fzing and a second.

the only place where time as a concept may totally break down is in a black hole or at absolute zero.
neither place is somewhere I would like to have my summer holiday.

stardesk wrote:
Sit quiet somewhere, where and when you know you wont be disturbed. Relax and try to empty your mind, literally. Try not to think about anything at all, a blank, unthinking mind. If you can get beyond about 3-4 seconds then you’re superhuman.

This little exercise demonstrates how it is our minds which give quality and quantity to everything around us, including time. It would appear that time is a necessary function in our lives, but it is our minds which give it its existence.

Stardesk - you can't empty your mind for more than a few seconds? You must be really wired. Haven't you ever tried meditation? Really necessary to unwind I think. Give it a go.   

Hi Tess. A very good question and yes, I spent a lot of time meditating. But even then there were little thoughts zipping around the mind. The very word 'meditate' means to concentrate on something, therefore it doesn't empty the mind. If you use an item to concentrate on, to enable you to meditate and on which to focus your attention, then again you are using your mind to do the concentrating, being aware of blocking out outside interferences. Even those renowned experts, Buddhist monks, during meditation think of or concentrate on an objective, such as merging with the Universal Spirit. To empty the mind and think of nothing is, as far as I'm aware, virtually impossible.

Thus, is our concept of time just an action carried out by our minds which need to put everything in life in neat little boxes, and tie a label on them with names?

Bugger you Tess, I was going to have a quite afternoon watching the box, or snoozing in my armchair, now you've gone and woken up my mind.