Universe <> Anti-Universe

[7DSUSYstrings]

This amounts to what I think I mentioned in the past about a 19 dimensional theory that is 11 + 1 + 7. It also involves the supersymmetry in the classic sense of particle-antiparticle, so if we seperate the 2 opposing sub-universes away from the 3 compacted, expanded and restorative vector dimensions, opposed to the 1, or scalar, dimensions. I also depicted, if I recall, that the above dimensions collapse into the first of the 7 dimensions of existential taxonomy.

 

1. Mass

2. State

3. Motion

4. Time

5. Relativity

6. Collectivity

7. Autonomy

 

are the current descriptors. You should be able to see this not as against the mainstream. It is wading in it always observing.

What I have always found interesting is that from this emerges a model very much like strings, yet different because, like the Casimir effect, it points to the superparticles developing around infinite forces. Different even further is the evolution of not only a single particle, but a stream of expanding then collapsing particles produced by infinite forces and returned by the same infinite forces. If such a frame, or pulse, of existence is to satisfy the accepted cosmologic constant, it would define the smallest increment of time, or the cosmological second, to be 10 ^-43 of our seconds. We can factor Planck Time into this with some degree of adjustment to the period of that so-dubbed cosmological second.

 

An antiuniverse would be everything a finite universe would not be. It would be infinite for one. It would seem natural that a neutral universe would be needed to interface to opposing universes. So A universe, likely Big Bang, a Biverse, likely time driven, or Triverse, likely autonomy driven. In my opinion, the triverse satisfies Occam's Rasor and the others don't completely.

[belovelife]

the difficulty in the multi-verse concept is that all we can imagine is relative to something we experience,

while what we experience is true to us, what another universe could be wouldn't even be able to enter our imagination

 

like what is there was no infinate time,

 

nothing would move, but if time wasn't the driving force of a universe, then what would be

[7DSUSYstrings]

the difficulty in the multi-verse concept is that all we can imagine is relative to something we experience,

while what we experience is true to us, what another universe could be wouldn't even be able to enter our imagination

 

like what is there was no infinate time,

 

nothing would move, but if time wasn't the driving force of a universe, then what would be

 

That is part of the point. Time is a dimension of itself, but what is time without something to push around? Mass.

 

 

I just noticed I put this thread in the wrong section.... Group W again...

[7DSUSYstrings]

I really intended for this thread to be in Astronomy or physics. Is it possible to get a Mod to move it there?

[7DSUSYstrings]

Thank you :)

[7DSUSYstrings]

To those who view or respond to this:

 

This is Research In Progress, but I'm at a point where it can be discussed. I haven't been that active here till recently for quite a few reasons, so I just noticed another thread that might be similar. "Universe from Nothing." I'll check that out. As this year progresses I'll be able to elaborate on some simple experiments I performed that suggest chaotic fields can be manipulated, and rather easily at that using minimal energy, with auxiliary magnetic fields. For the time being I'll ask that those interested in this entertain that I'm reporting honestly my results. By summer I'll have a camcorder set up to log what is intriguing IMO. In the meantime, I'll answer what questions I can. If it's an unknown as of the moment, I'll say so, but the theoretical aspects can be explained. Science is getting weirder than scifi nowadays. :)

[7DSUSYstrings]

 

I may have posted this somewhere else. It is DG Tau B.

Let's call this the Raw Image.

 

 

The above represents the Spacial Boundaries of the magnetic and gravitational fields. You math wizes may wish to notice the inflective region. It is from the plane being normal to the axis, the disk of gravity is established in that region because the effective strength of the areas of the opposing fields, where y is low will constrain y of the disk.

 

I'll add more lines as I have some extra time. What I'm pointing out in this is that to achieve a field around a star to create an influx of what likely began as intergalactic hydrogen, only accreting along its journey toward this node of magnetism and gravitation, some primordial fractal must be present and we can't leave time out of the scenario.

Edited March 31, 2012 by 7DSUSYstrings

[Cyberia]

7DSUSYstrings. It seems to me that if you are relying on the anti-particles of supersymetry to produce an anti universe, then you only have the same amount of material as the (normal) universe, so the anti-universe will be the same size.

 

If you allow that there are increments of time (Planck time), then at that level, you have things ceasing to exist between such intervals and reappearing again.

[7DSUSYstrings]

7DSUSYstrings. It seems to me that if you are relying on the anti-particles of supersymetry to produce an anti universe, then you only have the same amount of material as the (normal) universe, so the anti-universe will be the same size.

 

If you allow that there are increments of time (Planck time), then at that level, you have things ceasing to exist between such intervals and reappearing again.

 

 

Not that. At this point, I'm asking opinions concerning whether it is possible for an anti-universe, for lack of a better term, may be the solution to the concept expounded on as meaning "everything the universe was made from was always there." Matter-anti-matter, as we denote them, are both present, possibly as superpartners, in this existential universe. That's pretty much common knowledge. I tend to favor vacuum energy/vacuum fluctuation as a simple anti-force or negative potential force that spawns particles in the existential universe. Imagine, if you will, a quark inverted so radius aproaches infinity. Imagine insignificant thermal mass approaching infinite potential cryo-mass. Personally I have a vivid imagination and still find it mind boggling.

 

And thus the question about a third, meso-universe.

 

Although it is not possible with current technology to evidence this directly, what do you think about ANY of these variations of what I see as a constantly regenerative universe?