When Branes Collide

When Branes Collide. - Free Online LibraryLately I've been interested in a lot of this quantum stuff, and I came across this. The branes colliding idea may just overtake the big bang theory in a few decades when we can measure these theories more accurately. This theory is also compatible with the "multiverse" theory. If true, then how do you think that it will effect the way we look at things- or religion? If untrue, why? Please just don't skimp out with a "because God said so." Edited by Teapots&unicorns, : No reason given.

---

I contend that we are both atheists. I just believe in one fewer god than you do. When you understand why you dismiss all the other possible gods, you will understand why I dismiss yours.
- Stephen Roberts

​

I'm a polyatheist - there are many gods I don't believe in
- Dan Foutes

​

"In the beginning, the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has widely been considered as a bad move."
- Douglas Adams

Thread copied here from the When Branes Collide thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.

My guess, as with all scientific advancements, God will merely be pushed back another step.People of a fundamentalist bent will ask, where did the branes come from? And the answer they will accept is: Godidit.

Here you go!The low-temperature team at Lancaster is already devising a test using helium-3 in 2 seperate phases. In my rookieness of cosmology, this seems to be a damn fine step in actually testing String Theory.If you really think about a multiverse, it all kind of comes together. Where does all the matter go in a black hole? It's pretty easy to imagine it coming out of the "other side", "Big Banging" out another Universe. If you really start to think about the size of "our" universe, it's not hard to imagine an almost infinite number of "other universes". Just take a look at the opening scene from the movie Contact. The immensity of our Universe is simply astounding.And lest i forget....rAmen my brother...rAmenEdited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

What makes you think it goes anywhere? We can measure the mass of black holes, and we can see that some are more massive than others. WOUldn't that suggest the matter that falls into the balck hole just gets squeezed to such a desnity that it effectively fits inot an almost zero dimensional point, just as our math seems to indicate?The problem I have with "white holes" is that we don't see any in our universe. We don't see matter being created, so it would have to only work at the very beginning of the universe, however, we see stuff continuously falling into black holes, so either the black hole is continuously making new universes, or the matter is just accumulating there in our own universe.Another issue I have is the amount of mass in our universe. If it had come through a "white hole" that must have been one massive black hole in some other universe. I mean, the entire mass of the universe sucked into one hole at one time? This may be just an argument from incredulity, but it seems improbable to say the least. On the flip side, any universe our comparably teeny black holes are making must be pretty barren places with little to nothing in them. While this is entirely possible, who says a universe has to have a lot of stuff in it, it just doesn't seem to make much sense to me.

Well, I am merely speculating since I have a very finite knowledge of cosomology, me being an unstudied-high school dropout. I find all I know on teh webz because i have found this subject of particular interest in maybe the past year or so. I base that off the BBT. Since BBT says all of our universe was one infintismal point at one time, this makes sense that our universe could also produce black holes which produce other universes in the same fashion. A "white hole" theoretically, is the matter spewing out of the other side. We wouldn't see any because, I would think, we would not have a universe bourn inside of our own. think of it maybe as the Big Bang was a white hole. there is alot we have yet to see, I'm sure. The cosmos is amazing. English words cannot describe the vastness of it. How do we know that our physics do not apply on the opposite end, or some far reaching galaxy? I'll give you that. however, ever larger black holes are being found at an alarming rate. Just recently one was found purported to be the size of the Milky Way. The uncharted areas of space are virtually innumerable.I want to reiterate that this is coming from an untrained, no college, rookie star-gazer. i entertain these ideas every day. The universe surrounding me simply amazes me. The possibilities of what is out there, the wonders of different galaxies, all of it is something to behold.Our planet we call home, is but a micron in comparison to the universe around us.Edited by hooah212002, : No reason given.

I understand the concept, but it still has to overcome two problems. One, if the white hole isn't constantly spewing matter into our galaxy, then the entire mass of our galaxy must have been in the precursor black hole to begin with so either, A) One massive black hole formed at one instant and formed our galaxy, or B) There is a minimum limit of mass that a black hole must reach before ripping the fabric of space to create a new universe, which, we can assume, must be pretty close to the mass of our universe (otherwise the precursor black hole would have Big Banged earlier) in which case, none of our comparatively skimpy black holes would have accreted enough to form a white hole.Two, we don't see black holes losing mass into some undiscovered other universe. We see black holes increasing in mass as they "feed" and we even see some black holes losing mass as they radiate Hawking radiation back into our universe, but if it were acting like a drain, funneling matter from our universe into another, we should see mass disappearing without any trace. You're right, the universe is an amazing thing that words can not even hope to describe adequately. As for the unifrmity of physics, that is one of the things we've been testing with our telescopes as they peer farther and farther away as well as farther and farther back in time, and from what we can tell, physics pretty much works the same everywhere. I don't recall hearing that, but even if it were true, it would perhaps be the "mass" of the Milky Way, but not the "volume" of the Milky Way. Even so, as stated above, the fact that the mass is staying in the black hole shows that it's not leaking into or forming another universe...yet. I'm pretty much a rookie star gazer with an intense interest in space, physics and cosmology, too. I was originally going to major in physics (or astrophysics) in college before calculus kicked my ass, but I'm still highly interested and try to keep up on new discoveries and science being done.The idea of white holes has been around for a while, and while it seems to sound plausible, there just isn't any evidence that they are, in fact, real. That's not to say some new evidence won't turn up, but it seems highly unlikely to me. Don't let me discourage you from trying out seemingly fantastic ideas, though. Some of our best discoveries can be traced back to the wild imaginings of people, whether they are world-renowned scientists, or just every day schmoes with an interest in one particular field. Very true, as the Pale Blue Dot photo so aptly showed us.Edited by Perdition, : No reason given.

Ahh. That makes sense. i have yet to come across that particular aspect of not noticing the black-holes losing mass. Like I said, I am not fully versed yet in astrophysics.Yes you are correct, the black hole would be the mass of the milky way, not volume.