bornagainathiest Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 Hi! From time to time I check on the latest cosmological research. This caught my eye yesterday. The emphasized portion is mine, with an explanation below. Laura Mersini From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia Laura Mersini-Houghton Born Tirana Nationality Albanian Institutions UNC Chapel Hill Alma mater Tirana University, UMD, UWM Doctoral advisor Leonard Parker Dr. Laura Mersini-Houghton (née Laura Mersini) is a theoretical physicist-cosmologist and professor at the University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill since January 2004.[1] In 2009 she is on a sabbatical at DAMTP, University of Cambridge. Laura Mersini-Houghton received her undergraduate degree from the University of Tirana, Albania, her M.Sc. from the University of Maryland and was awarded a PhD in 2000 by the University of Wisconsin–Milwaukee. [edit]Research interests She has worked on a variety of topics on the particle physics-cosmology interface. She was particularly interested in the possibility of generating dark energy from transplanckian physics in string theory, gravity and quantum field theory in curved space, and higher-dimension braneworlds. One of her major contributions is her theory that explains the selection of the Initial Conditions of our Universe from the multiverse,[2] (see also [3]). This theory explains that the only way the universe can survive the Big Bang is if it bangs at high energies. As such, high energy initial states for the universe are more probable than their low energy initial patches, since the latter are terminal. This theory addresses one of the big mysteries of nature, the birth of the low entropy universe in compliance with the arrow of time. It also offers observational signatures of all the surviving universes that comprise the multiverse. She says that when it comes to what we know about the universe, current physics theory is lagging a little behind. For example, the Big Bang theory might not be enough to explain the origin of all the matter in the universe (everything from the universe's large-scale structure — galaxies and the like — to cosmic microwave background radiation, dark matter, and the rest). A Copernican extension of our physical theories to a multiverse framework may be required for probing the most fundamental questions and best kept secrets of nature. In 2006, Mersini-Houghton with collaborators predicted a series of observational imprints of her theory [4] for the birth of our high energy universe from the multiverse, by using the unitarity principle of quantum mechanics(no information loss). They predicted the existence of a giant void far away of size about 12 degrees in the southern hemisphere of the sky; the 'tilting' of the gravitational potential in the universe, which gives rise to a Dark Flow of structure, caused by superhorizon entanglement of our universe with all else in the multiverse; the suppression of the overall amplitude of inflationary fluctuations due to the same interaction of our Hubble volume with others in the multiverse, etc. A second void was predicted for the northern hemisphere of the sky as reported in the New Scientist.[5] In 2007, Mersini-Houghton claimed that the observed CMB cold spot was "the unmistakable imprint of another universe beyond the edge of our own",[6] just as she and her collaborator had predicted in her theory 8 months earlier.[7] In Nov. 2008, a NASA team led by Alexander Kashlinsky[8] observed the Dark Flow of clusters in the universe at exactly the velocity and alignment predicted by her [9] earlier in the 'Cosmological Avatars of the Landscape I, II' papers in 2006.[4] In the same year (2006) WMAP reached agreement with SDSS experiment, that the overall amplitude of fluctuation is less than 1. If these observational findings, predicted in the 2006 papers by Mersini-Houghton et al. are confirmed over the next few years, then they may offer the first evidence of a world beyond our own. Such confirmation would tie the standard model of cosmology into a more coherent picture where our universe is not at the center of the world, but part of it. After the observational confirmation of the three predictions (the Void, Dark Flow and Sigma8) her work continues to attract international media attention, GCHEP/UNC, and Discover magazine, October 2009. Two astrophysicists reported recently that they have found evidence of the northern hemisphere void in analysis of WMAP data,.[10] On October 11, 2010, Laura Mersini-Houghton appeared in a BBC programme What Happened Before the Big Bang (along with Michio Kaku, Neil Turok, Andrei Linde, Roger Penrose, Lee Smolin and other notable cosmologists and physicists) where she propounded her theory of the universe as a wave function on the landscape multiverse,.[11] The programme referred to three observational tests of her theory's predictions, which makes it the only theory on the origins of our universe ever to offer predictions and have them successfully tested. Mersini-Houghton's work on multiverse theory is discussed in the epilogue of a recently published biography of Hugh Everett III.[12] [edit]References ^ Laura Mersini-Houghton ^ arxiv:hep-th/0511102 ^ arxiv:hep-th/0410213, arxiv:hep-th/0504026 ^ a b Cosmological Avatars of the Landscape I, II; Phys. Rev. D, 77,063510, 063511; arxiv:hep-th/0611223, arxiv:hep-th/0612142 ^ The void: Imprint of another universe?, New Scientist, 2007-11-24 ^ Marcus Chown, The void: Imprint of another universe?, New Scientist, 2007-11-24 ^ arxiv:hep-th/0612142 ^ A. Kashlinsky, F. Atrio-Barandela, D. Kocevski, and H. Ebeling, A measurement of large-scale peculiar velocities of clusters of galaxies: results and cosmological implications, ApJ 686 L49, doi:10.1086/592947, arxiv:0809.3734,(same paper at nasa.gov) ^ arxiv:0810.5388 ^ arxiv:0811.2732v3/astro-ph ^ "Two Programmes - Horizon, 2010-2011, What Happened Before the Big Bang?". BBC. Retrieved 2011-01-02. ^ "The Many Worlds of Hugh Everett III",ISBN13:9780199552276 [edit]External links Mark Trodden's Cosmology @ S.U. Page ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Ok, I'm not saying that Dr. Mersini's absolutely right, but in any branch of science a confirmed prediction is a very strong indicator that the proposing scientist has a good understanding of the natural processes involved. Also of relevance are these pages... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_flow http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMB_cold_spot http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation (So where do you live? Vandalia? El Norte? Durango? The Northern or Southern Confederacy?) Personally, I find the theological implications of this (if more conformations and proofs come in) to be staggering! Thanks, BAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzy Posted January 29, 2011 Share Posted January 29, 2011 I love all multiverse theories. To me they are mind-boggling and exciting. I hope they are true! My favourite type of Multiverse is Type 3, or the so called Everett Interpretation, which was born as an explanation of the strange phenomenons of quantum mechanics. As far as I know it is very successful in explaining these phenomenons! Here is more about it in-depth: http://www.hedweb.com/manworld.htm Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted January 31, 2011 Author Share Posted January 31, 2011 Hi Suzy! Nice link, tho' a bit over my head. I never made it to college, so my understanding of this stuff is on a conceptual, non-math level. Talking of levels, I think that Dr. Mersini's work relates to Level 1 or Level 2 Multiverses, as described here... http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse Regions that are spatially connected with our universe but which are currently unobservable - Level 1. Or disconnected regions that were in quantum entanglement with our universe only in the earliest stages of the Big Bang event - Level 2. Either way, if these findings are borne out, it'll blow all those Fine-Tuned/Intelligent Designer arguments out of the water. Thanks, BAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzy Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Yes. It's also a lot more exciting and cooler than the concept of a sky daddy (especially if he is so bad tempered as the Biblegod). And if it's the truth, all the better! (For now, there are a lot more facts supporting these multiverse theories than the existence of a sky daddy). Here is a good PDF by Max Tegmark explaining all 4 types: http://cosmos.phy.tufts.edu/~zirbel/ast21/sciam/ParalellUniverse.pdf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Legion Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 I don't do cosmology. I look at all of it with great suspicion. About the only things I am willing to accept are the observations alone. I highly distrust the inferences we are drawing from them. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted January 31, 2011 Author Share Posted January 31, 2011 I don't do cosmology. I look at all of it with great suspicion. About the only things I am willing to accept are the observations alone. I highly distrust the inferences we are drawing from them. Hi Legion! Hmmmm... sorry that you're so suspicious of cosmology. So, what about other branches of science? Is your suspicion just confined to cosmology? I'm not being flippant here. This mindset is something I've encountered before. Somehow, because these things seem so distant and removed from everyday life, some folks think that the principles and methodolgies of science don't apply to them, as they would to (for example) biology, here on Earth. Well, science is science, no matter where it's done. Dr. Mersini was not just making an inference - she was making hard and fast predictions, three of which have been confirmed by other scientists. Confirmed predictions are the ultimate acid test of a theory. This holds true for science here on Earth, on the Moon, on Mars and everywhere. Legion, a confirmed prediction is the hallmark of a correct and valid explanation of nature by a given theory. You just can't get something right, three times in a row by sheer fluke! So, this is good-quality science - just as much as physics or geology. I hope this reassures you. Thanks, BAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted January 31, 2011 Author Share Posted January 31, 2011 Yes. It's also a lot more exciting and cooler than the concept of a sky daddy (especially if he is so bad tempered as the Biblegod). And if it's the truth, all the better! (For now, there are a lot more facts supporting these multiverse theories than the existence of a sky daddy). Here is a good PDF by Max Tegmark explaining all 4 types: http://cosmos.phy.tufts.edu/~zirbel/ast21/sciam/ParalellUniverse.pdf Ah... thanks Suzy! I bought this issue of SciAm, read that article over and over, filed the magazine somewhere in the 'parallel' universe I call my study and then lost the damn thing! Having it to hand again (electronically speaking) is great! Exciting and cooler is right. I can't think of any other time in history I'd rather have been born, than now. It's only now, in the early part of the 21st century that we'll get our first, real answers about Earth-like planets orbiting other stars and about other universes besides ours. The possibilities are astronomical... pun intended! Btw, did you see the 'Head's Up!' message about the Kepler news conference this Wednesday? 10 am PST here will be 8 or 9 in the evening where you are? Eastern Europe, somewhere...? Anyway, thanks again. BAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzy Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Yes. It's also a lot more exciting and cooler than the concept of a sky daddy (especially if he is so bad tempered as the Biblegod). And if it's the truth, all the better! (For now, there are a lot more facts supporting these multiverse theories than the existence of a sky daddy). Here is a good PDF by Max Tegmark explaining all 4 types: http://cosmos.phy.tu...ellUniverse.pdf Ah... thanks Suzy! I bought this issue of SciAm, read that article over and over, filed the magazine somewhere in the 'parallel' universe I call my study and then lost the damn thing! Having it to hand again (electronically speaking) is great! Exciting and cooler is right. I can't think of any other time in history I'd rather have been born, than now. It's only now, in the early part of the 21st century that we'll get our first, real answers about Earth-like planets orbiting other stars and about other universes besides ours. The possibilities are astronomical... pun intended! Btw, did you see the 'Head's Up!' message about the Kepler news conference this Wednesday? 10 am PST here will be 8 or 9 in the evening where you are? Eastern Europe, somewhere...? Anyway, thanks again. BAA. You are welcome! I haven't heard of the Kepler news conference. What it will be about? As for the trust in cosmology. When I started to open up to science again at the end of my 20 years in Xtianity, first I started to read cosmology books (more precisely The Whole Shebang by Timothy Ferris), because astronomy, cosmology have always been my great interest - although I sidelined them as a Xtian. At first I used to think of it with a bit of suscpicion as well. Remember at the time when I picked up these books I was still a Xtian, so I read them very critically and if there was a claim that contradicted the Bible I tended to ignore it or decided in myself that scientists are definitely mistaken there. But the more I read the more convinced I got. I think the breakthrough to me was the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation and how it was discovered. When I read about it that's when I accepted the Big Bang theory. The impressive thing to me was that first there was the Big Bang theory (based on Hubble's observations about the expanding Universe). And this theory predicted a radiation. Physicists even calculated what its main parameters have to be if the BB theory is right. For example that its temperature has to be about 3 Kelvins. But at the time it was just a prediction of the BB theory, there was no proof such a radiation really existed. Then, some decades later, two physicists discovered the CMB Radiation - while they were doing a totally different experiment with their antenna. Basically they discovered it totally accidentally. As scientists examined this radiation, they found it has the parameters those were predicted by the BB theory (for example its temperature is 2.725 K)! Of course, there are many other facts of cosmology those are well proven (and contradict the Bible), but to me personally it was the CMB Radiation and the story of its discovery that was the big "wow!" moment and I started to be more open-minded to the fact maybe the Bible is wrong and maybe scientists really know what they are doing.... BTW, the CMB radiation is all around us. When you switch on your TV and it's untuned, a big part of those small "ants running around" on your screen is caused by it, or when you are listening to an untuned radio. That is the echo of the Big Bang! So, to me cosmology was the field of science that first made me start to doubt the Bible, not darwinism, like for so many. I'm just starting to learn more about darwinism. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
par4dcourse Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Ran across this "parallel universe with-a-twist" theory. Incorporates gravity with the three forces. Interesting. http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2010/04/does-our-universe-live-inside-a-.html?ref=hp Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzy Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Ran across this "parallel universe with-a-twist" theory. Incorporates gravity with the three forces. Interesting. http://news.sciencem...-a-.html?ref=hp The link doesn't work. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
par4dcourse Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Ran across this "parallel universe with-a-twist" theory. Incorporates gravity with the three forces. Interesting. http://news.sciencem...-a-.html?ref=hp The link doesn't work. Hmmm. Did for me. Browser problem? Anyone else have trouble? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzy Posted January 31, 2011 Share Posted January 31, 2011 Ran across this "parallel universe with-a-twist" theory. Incorporates gravity with the three forces. Interesting. http://news.sciencem...-a-.html?ref=hp The link doesn't work. Hmmm. Did for me. Browser problem? Anyone else have trouble? It works now. Thanks. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted February 1, 2011 Author Share Posted February 1, 2011 You are welcome! I haven't heard of the Kepler news conference. What it will be about? This Suzy... http://www.nasa.gov/centers/ames/news/releases/2011/M11-06.html Here's some more info... http://kepler.nasa.gov/Mission/Quickguide/ Thanks, BAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
bornagainathiest Posted February 1, 2011 Author Share Posted February 1, 2011 Ran across this "parallel universe with-a-twist" theory. Incorporates gravity with the three forces. Interesting. http://news.sciencemag.org/sciencenow/2010/04/does-our-universe-live-inside-a-.html?ref=hp Thanks Par4! Unification of the 4 forces, eh? Well, why not? I'm for anything that furthers our understanding of what's 'out there'. BAA. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Suzy Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 You are welcome! I haven't heard of the Kepler news conference. What it will be about? This Suzy... http://www.nasa.gov/...011/M11-06.html Here's some more info... http://kepler.nasa.g...ion/Quickguide/ Thanks, BAA. Thank you. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigVaden Posted February 1, 2011 Share Posted February 1, 2011 I wonder if it's like they portrayed it in Futurama where you just pulled up to the edge of this universe and you can see cowboy versions if yourself in the other universe waving back at you. I contributed absolutely nothing to this thread with this reply. I just laughed when I thought about that Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts