Hubble Space Telescope Discovers Multiple Universes! (videos, format, error, system)

[gy2020]

Pardon the title, I just found this letter that I wrote to several science and astronomy magazines back around 1995. I find it kind of amusing now but it shows that I was at the forefront of paparallel universes back in the mid 90's. Of course, the idea wasn't original, I read a lot of science fiction. I did get a lot of rejection notices from the letter to the editors of these publications. No one back then took multiple or parallel universes seriously. They mostly don't now but science is changing.

Here goes, this is my own work:

Dear Sir:

I have been reading with interest the controversy created by the discrepancy in age and time between the new "Big Bang" dates and the age of Cepheid Variables since the Hubble Space Telescope has received renewed vision.

The Hubble dates the "Big Bang" at 8 to 12 billion years and the Hubble Constant has dated the Cepheid Variables at 14 to 20 billion years. Perhaps it is time for a new paradigm.

Originally man saw the Earth as the center of his Universe and he was at the top. The Sun, Moon, planets and stars circled the Earth. Copernicus showed that the Earth was spinning around the Sun. Gallileo's telescopes showed the immenisity of the Milkway Galaxy. later, other scientists showed that the Universe was bigger than the Galaxy and that there were billions of galaxies in the Universe. And it has continued to expand in concept.

Consider that the Hubble Space Telescope may be looking beyond our own Universe and seeing stars and galaxies that are part of a neighboring universe separated by billions of years or more. Perhaps in time we will discover some that are 50 to 100 billions years old. This leads us to the concept of multiple universes. Some may be closed universes, starting with a "Big Bang", expanding and then slowing down, contracting and collapsing on themselves. Others might be opened and always expanding and yet others may be in a steady state. What happens when a universe expands into a neighboring universe?

I like this concept because it releases Man from the constraints of time. Now we are part of an infinite cosmos--no beginning and no end-- only universes within that are born, just like galaxies or stars or even man, himself.

Sincerely,

G.Y.
San Antonio

[NightBazaar]

I don't think the editors of various publications necessarily rejected your letter because science was so greatly different in 1995, but perhaps because of errors in the content of the letter. However, you're quite right that our knowledge and perspectives of the universe have changed since then. New discoveries are happening so fast, that it's hard to set any specific markers, which is unlike the views of earlier discoveries which were held for long periods of time. That's because of the rapid pace of advancement in today's technology and communication.

Consider that the Hubble Space Telescope may be looking beyond our own Universe and seeing stars and galaxies that are part of a neighboring universe separated by billions of years or more. Perhaps in time we will discover some that are 50 to 100 billions years old. This leads us to the concept of multiple universes. Some may be closed universes, starting with a "Big Bang", expanding and then slowing down, contracting and collapsing on themselves. Others might be opened and always expanding and yet others may be in a steady state. What happens when a universe expands into a neighboring universe?

Is the Hubble Space Telescope looking beyond our universe and seeing stars and galaxies in a neighboring universe? Probably not. The reason is because the farther objects are, the faster they appear to be moving away. This is because space itself is expanding at increasing rates. The "horizon" of the observable universe is changing because of the continuing expansion of space. There are probably objects that are past the horizon, but we'll never see them and never know they were there.

Part of the reason for it has to do with what took place in the early universe before there were any stars or galaxies, during the Inflation Period. This period of inflation expanded faster than the speed of light. This gave the size of the universe a head start. It also means there were no stars or galaxies as the space was expanding during the Inflation Period. At a certain point in the distance, there would be nothing to see.

What we can see though, is the Cosmic Microwave Background. That pretty well indicates that whatever distant objects we can see are objects contained within the horizon of the observable universe.

In a multiverse scenario, if another universe were expanding into our own universe (assuming the other universe has stars and galaxies) we would see galaxies receding away from us because of the expansion of our universe, but we would also be able to see galaxies coming toward us from the expansion of the other universe. That doesn't seem to be happening with such distant objects.

Also, in a multiverse scenario, it's possible that a collision between two expanding universes might not be able to penetrate each other. Both would simply continue to expand. After all, what's to prevent them from expanding in a quantum foam of hyperspace? If one universe is older than the other, the older one would eventually fade out of existance making more room for the other to expand into or perhaps any new universes that may crop up.

If you haven't looked at it recently, I posted a couple of videos that might help visualize the origin of the universe. The first one looks at branes which would exist as a quantum foam much like a different kind of "universe" beyond our own universe. The video isn't two universes in collision, but is a visualization of two branes colliding within a field of 11 dimensions. The second vid called "Universe" tries to describe the quantum foam and the formation of the universe. In effect, what's beyond the universe is where the universe came from in the first place, and why we can never see beyond the horizon of the observable universe.
http://www.city-data.com/forum/8735990-post13.html

On the other side of the coin, the universe might be a tiny island within a much larger universe which in turn is part of an even larger universe, etc. This could almost (but not quite) fit with Fred Hoyle's Steady State theory, although Hoyle was not describing anything other than our own universe which seems clear is not a Steady State universe. If the universe were a closed universe, it would be infinite with no expansion. Rather Big Bangs can still occur, but sort of like an infinte progression of a turtle on the back of a turtle on the back of a turtle, etc.

The bottom line is that we have no real idea what kind of system our universe is a part of. We may develop various models that seem likely, but I doubt we'll ever really know.

[gy2020]

Thanks NightBazaar, that was a good critique. All I was trying to say is that I put out this idea 15 years ago and there wasn't that much info on the subject at the time. I remember the consternation of scientists and NASA people when the time lines didn't jibe and I was just trying to fill a gap. It was fun getting those rejections, "Like you idiot, don't you know that there is only one universe." "The definition of a universe is one." etc.

[NightBazaar]

Strange that they'd send reply letters like that in 1995. I see what you mean though. While admittedly the concept of multiverses has gained in popularity in recent years, I certainly considered the idea in the latter half of the 1960s. The "many-worlds" interpretation goes back to 1957, and the term "multiverse" was coined by Andy Nimmo of the British Interplanetary Society in 1960. You'd think publications on science, and especially astronomy, would have had a least a little awareness on the subject.

Actually the definition of "universe" does refers to a single (uni) entirety. If there are more than one out there, then the word universe, in reference the one we live in, is inaccurate. Of course to be fair, there's no way to know if there are any other "universes" or not.

Online Encyclopedia and Dictionary - Multiverse

[PITTSTON2SARASOTA]

Here's another pertinent mini movie about Parallel Universes..... http://www.city-data.com/forum/showt...php?p=11357915 Interesting physics and that 11th dimension.