And now, some cosmology …

Nov 15, 2009 Posted Under: cosmology

In the pool last night, one of my friends made a comment about reversing entropy.  Which led me to tell him about the article I had just read about Stephen Hawking’s recent efforts.

Hawking made a bet with Kip Thorne, if you recall, against John Preskill of CalTech that information could not leak out of a black hole.  This notion is a direct contradiction of one of the fundamental tenets of quantum mechanics, that information cannot be destroyed.

Well, after reconsidering the matter for some years from the viewpoint of Heisenberg’s Uncertainty Principle, Hawking finally conceded in 2004 that, indeed, information could leak out of a black hole via the uncertainties surrounding the creation of Hawking radiation.  It seems the black hole’s “event horizon” is not sharply delineated, but fuzzy.

Anyway, the focus of Hawking’s attention lately has been the probability aspects of quantum mechanics leading to the notions of multiple histories of the universe now popular in string theories.  And, surprisingly, there may be a testable concept in here, in that some of the alternate probability waves may have been captured in the microwave background radiation, generated when the universe was about 380,000 years old.

All of which leads me back to some of my own conjecturing that a singularity is prohibited by the Uncertainty Principle, and that simple situation would lead to the supposed singularity spitting out at least one particle (stringlet? — must be at least one-dimensional to avoid itself being a singularity).  But there can’t be only one, so there would then have to be another, and then another, and so on.

My thinking has been so far stopped there, because I have not yet imagined how to assign enough attributes to this string-icle to let it vibrate.  The vibration would presuppose time and space in which it would vibrate.  So I am letting my imagination stew in the very simplistic view of an  infinity of single dimensional stringlets of one attribute — direction, or polarity.

Anyone have any suggestions about a mapping of these into multiple dimensions?

Be Sociable, Share!

4 Responses to “And now, some cosmology …”

  1. Ray says:

    Since Heisenberg would prohibit all the string-icles being identical (then you would know everything about any given one of them), I postulate a random polarity reversal — entropy.

    The difference between any two adjacent random arrangements would constitute a time delta.

    Did we also postulate a second spatial dimension with that language?

  2. Ray says:

    Can spin occur for a single dimensional object? Or would that be equivalent to polarity?

    I had imagined only one bit (attribute) per string-icle to start things off, but I suppose that’s just as arbitrary as two, if they could be different.

  3. Ray says:

    Then again, doesn’t the context of Heisenberg presuppose spacetime?

    I was hoping to notice how they/it would come into being, not as a precondition.

  4. admin says:

    What if the entire uni-demensional infinity of stringlets were generated before Heisenberg was “turned on”?

    Then, for another simplifying assumption, what if time were turned on next, in the form of a probability function choosing which stringlets’ attribute gets flipped on the next adjacent time interval propagation of the stringlets.

    The probability function could be chosen so as to encapsulate a “rule set” enforcing foldings of the stringlets to emulate forces. Then perhaps other dimensions could be generated by operation of the forces.

Leave a Reply