Why is the Universe the way it is?

[sigurdV]

Well, the simple answer is that if the universe was any different, you would have asked exactly the same question!

 

I agree!

 

But I cant help wondering if the question really has exactly the same meaning in the two cases?

 

( Back to them old Philosophy Books... reading,yawning,laughing...still wondering ... hmmm "rigid determinators" ... contrafactual arguments ...HELP!... This IS a Philosophical Question. With roots in, and possible consequenses for, Science.)

[johnferk]

Suggest a read of Hawkins "Grand Design."

 

To very crudely and somewhat presumptuously reduce his argument to a few sentences, the universe we see is as it is because we are here to observe it.

 

Borrowing from quantum mechanics, Hawkins argues that the universe we see is only one of an infinite number of universes that were created during the big bang. Using an analogy from the "two slit" experiment, a particle will travel all possible pathways to the target beyond the slits. Likewise, the big bang, which was a quantum event, will produce all possible universes. Like the particles path, some universes have a greater or lesser probability of existing, however, each has a measurable probability of existing. Hence, our universe must exist as one of those probabilities.

[sigurdV]

Actually there is only one question there. why is everything in an ordered state right from Universe to a single atom to a life.

In small "why is everything in the Universe in an ordered form"?

 

Im not convinced that life (=order) can arise and exist in chaos.

If it can then chaos becomes something else.

 

PS Let there be -Entropy!

PPS +E turns order to unorder...

What is "Chaos"? Will -E order it?

[maddog]

OK here is my Question.

Why is the universe the way it is , why are planets rotating,starts shining,stars forming black holes, who gets what if they don't exist.

You may think of this as all one question, though it not. I will accept to maybe be a linked compound question with

many parts.

 

1. This one has mostly been discussed at length upto now. Yes, I also agree of the value in discussing Chaos as

these principles are more often seen in the universe in action. Another set of driving items are forces: Gravity,

etc. Gravity moves the planets, rotates them, collapses Black Holes, etc.

 

Why it all looks like its an art ?

The universe looking like art is as seen be eye of the beholder doing the observing and interpreting therein.

 

... even life itself is in ordered state, if you cut a alive body into a half why it dies? why life itself is in an ordered form?

This last series of question, I haven't seen much addressed in this thread. Primarily because it is out of the scope of

the hard sciences (Physics/Astrophysics). This does not devalue them as good questions they are. You just won't

get much of a meaningful answer from such a scientist where you are expecting a "scientific answer"!

 

My thoughts on why life behaves the way it does may be considered heretical to hard facts sort of scientific person. I

don't mean to go down that track at the moment other than to say that currently the Standard Model explains most of

the behavior we see in the universe. There are still anomalies that the Standard Model does not fully explain. A

Quantum description of Gravity is one major one. Another few are why are the fundamental constants at the values

they are. Why is the fine constant work out to 1/137 (best number I have) - related to the strength of EM force. These

anomalies have theorists consider what hidden invalid assumptions have been made. Just for a sample.

 

maddog

[G Anthony Kent]

The Universe is as it is because of Black-Holes:

 

The Hyperbolic Hyper-Massive Black-Hole Universe

 

 

The hyperbolic (declines as 1/r) black-hole galactic and universe gravitational field explains Dark Energy and Dark Matter.

 

Stephen Hawking did not buy his own pronouncements regarding the disappearance of information into black holes. Instead, as a retraction, he and some others invented a whole new theory of black-hole thermodynamics. So, in a sense, they concluded, the black-hole event horizon is a real surface. It is sometimes called a "quasi-surface". However, the center of a black-hole is a physically real singularity. It is constrained only by the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle.

 

There is no such thing as a valid quantum gravity (how many papers are published in ArXiv on unicorns? By their standards, there should be dozens!) So, any appeal to QG to put the Kibosh on black-hole singularities is therefore bogus.

 

See The Hyperbolic Hyper-Massive Black-Hole Universe and Galactic Gravitational Field (HHBF), which is a paper written for the blog http://garyakent.wordpress.com that describes the e-Model for inflationary expansion of the universe.

 

The hyperbolic hyper-massive black-hole gravitational field is a phenomenological postulate, that is, it is a tentative premise that should be confirmed by experiment or observation and need not wait for theoretical justification. In the case of galaxies and galactic clusters, there is already enough observational support for the galactic hyperbolic super-massive black-hole gravitational field (HSBF).

 

The point is emphasized that Birkhoff’s Theorem and other interpretive principles derived from general relativity cannot apply to any real black-holes. These rules presume that the massive bodies that are considered are always “unperturbed” and are perfectly “spherically symmetric”. No real black hole meets these criteria. The rules are good only for approximate calculation, not for “precision cosmology”.

 

Besides, GR should not prohibit a gravitational field that declines as 1/r if a metric is found, similar to the Schwarzschild metric, using assumptions and boundary conditions wherein a singular black-hole is presumed at the outset. If such a gravitational field can be confirmed, the e-Model will serve as more evidence for the existence of our universe as part of a multiverse in meta-time.

 

Hugh Everett may one day be seen as a thinker on a par with A. Einstein. And, John Archibald Wheeler’s suggestion concerning the quantum self-interference of probability density waves may be taken more seriously while Everett’s declaration of the “reality of probability” as a sort of substance gains credence.

 

Self-interference can explain the virtual absence of antimatter (AM) in our universe. AM would be confined to our virtual twin, which must exist according to the logical extension of Alan Guth’s inflation hypothesis wherein a virtual particle came into existence from a hyper-excited false vacuum which itself came to exist precisely because of its ultra-high energy level. It would be seen as the deeper mechanism behind apparent “symmetry breaking” and unbalanced annihilation of fundamental sub-nuclear particles and antiparticles to give our universe with matter as the dominant form.

 

The existence of an interference twin could also be helpful in explaining the hyperbolic field as the resultant of a superposition of states. As the real expression of a statistical process within the multiverse, we experience only the total sum, the superposed probability density form from which emerges probability, P ---> 1. There are ways that such a superposition might affect the shape of a gravitational potential well. Gravity itself may be viewed as a probability vortex or wave in the Einstein Aether. There is much that has not been considered.

[sigurdV]

The Universe is as it is because of Black-Holes:

 

There is much that has not been considered.

 

Like?

 

What made black holes as they are

 

if they make the universe as it is? :blink:

[sigurdV]

Because everything is NOT in an ordered state!

 

Order is rare in the universe.

 

Chaos is MUCH more common in the universe.

 

 

So chaos = disorder...

 

Perhaps, what else could it be?

 

The arrow of time should begin in order

and point towards disorder,right?

 

Was maximum of order the beginning?

 

And will maximum of disorder be the end?