Fwd: NEW Tegmark - How did it all begin?
- Begin forwarded message:
> From: Jack Sarfatti <sarfatti@...>
> Date: October 1, 2005 10:35:09 AM PDT
> To: Gary S Bekkum / SSR <garysbekkum@...>
> Subject: Re: NEW Tegmark - How did it all begin?
> Yes, I already had this idea in 1973 as Saul-Paul Sirag can attest.
> I think it's even on the 1973 tape with me and Puthoff & Targ. I
> will put that tape on the WEB when I get a chance. This is a major
> theme in all 3 of my books now on http://amazon.com Robert
> Dickson Crane related this idea to Islamic "Tauhid" BTW.
> On Oct 1, 2005, at 10:15 AM, Gary S Bekkum / SSR wrote:
>> Here is the paper by Gott & Li:
>> http://www.arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/9712344Can the Universe Create
>> Itself?Authors: J. Richard Gott, III, Li-Xin Li
>> Categories: astro-ph gr-qc
>> Comments: 48 pages, 8 figures
>> Journal-ref: Phys.Rev. D58 (1998) 023501
>> The question of first-cause has troubled philosophers and
>> cosmologists alike. Now that it is apparent that our universe
>> began in a Big Bang explosion, the question of what happened
>> before the Big Bang arises. Inflation seems like a very promising
>> answer, but as Borde and Vilenkin have shown, the inflationary
>> state preceding the Big Bang must have had a beginning also.
>> Ultimately, the difficult question seems to be how to make
>> something out of nothing. This paper explores the idea that this
>> is the wrong question --- that that is not how the Universe got
>> here. Instead, we explore the idea of whether there is anything in
>> the laws of physics that would prevent the Universe from creating
>> itself. Because spacetimes can be curved and multiply connected,
>> general relativity allows for the possibility of closed timelike
>> curves (CTCs). Thus, tracing backwards in time through the
>> original inflationary state we may eventually encounter a region
>> of CTCs giving no first-cause. This region of CTCs, may well be
>> over by now (being bounded toward the future by a Cauchy horizon).
>> We illustrate that such models --- with CTCs --- are not
>> necessarily inconsistent by demonstrating self-consistent vacuums
>> for Misner space and a multiply connected de Sitter space in which
>> the renormalized energy-momentum tensor does not diverge as one
>> approaches the Cauchy horizon and solves Einstein's equations. We
>> show such a Universe can be classically stable and self-consistent
>> if and only if the potentials are retarded, giving a natural
>> explanation of the arrow of time. Some specific scenarios (out of
>> many possible ones) for this type of model are described. For
>> example: an inflationary universe gives rise to baby universes,
>> one of which turns out to be itself. Interestingly, the laws of
>> physics may allow the Universe to be its own mother.
>> Gary S Bekkum
>> Starstream Research
>> P.O. Box 1144
>> Maple Grove, MN 55311-6144
>> (763) 439-0719
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: Jack Sarfatti
>> To: caryn anscomb
>> Cc: Gary S Bekkum / SSR ; Dan Smith ; Katia ; S-P Sirag ; Colin
>> Bennett ; Cynthia Tsai
>> Sent: Saturday, October 01, 2005 10:52 AM
>> Subject: Re: NEW Tegmark - How did it all begin?
>> Thanks for reference.
>> Intelligent Design FROM the Future does not contradict Darwinian
>> Evolution. They work together.
>> This is all completely explained in my 3 books - it's a self
>> consistent loop in time. I already talked about this in 1973. Saul-
>> Paul Sirag wrote an opera about it in 1974. This is old stuff. No
>> mystery here. Dan Smith tries to mystify all this with Telos,
>> Eschaton. Gott has a book on this from Princeton Time Travel. I
>> already had Gott's idea decades before him.
>> On Oct 1, 2005, at 7:24 AM, caryn anscomb wrote:
>>> Tegmark: How Did It All Begin?
>>> P6 of 6
>>> ‘Q: Where does the observed matter come from?
>>> A: Inflation can produce it all from almost nothing.’
>>> At the risk of getting my knuckles rapped, I think the
>>> fundamental question in relation to intelligent design, posed to
>>> the physicist, might be: What is the ‘almost nothing’ and what
>>> gave the ‘almost nothing’ it’s marching orders in the very first
>>> (I say very first instance in consideration of the ‘self-
>>> replicating inflationary universe theory’). It appears that all
>>> theories can be reduced to what must be viewed as a first event,
>>> even when we consider something like ‘backward causation’ plausible?
>>> Gary S Bekkum / SSR <garysbekkum@...> wrote:
>>> FYI 6 page summary paper for your list members, they really need
>>> to get up to speed :-)rom: Max Tegmark [view email] Date: Sat, 20
>>> Aug 2005 15:57:30 GMT (576kb) How did it all begin?
>>> Authors: Max Tegmark
>>> Categories: astro-ph
>>> Comments: 6 pages, 6 figs, essay for 2005 Young Scholars
>>> Competition in honor of Charles Townes; received Dishonorable
>>> How did it all begin? Although this question has undoubtedly
>>> lingered for as long as humans have walked the Earth, the answer
>>> still eludes us. Yet since my grandparents were born, scientists
>>> have been able to refine this question to a degree I find truly
>>> remarkable. In this brief essay, I describe some of my own past
>>> and ongoing work on this topic, centering on cosmological
>>> inflation. I focus on
>>> (1) observationally testing whether this picture is correct and
>>> (2) working out implications for the nature of physical reality
>>> (e.g., the global structure of spacetime, dark energy and our
>>> cosmic future, parallel universes and fundamental versus
>>> environmental physical laws).
>>> (2) clearly requires (1) to determine whether to believe the
>>> conclusions. I argue that (1) also requires (2), since it affects
>>> the probability calculations for inflation's observational
>>> predictions.Full-text: PostScript, PDF, or Other formats
>>> Gary S Bekkum
>>> Starstream Research
>>> P.O. Box 1144
>>> Maple Grove, MN 55311-6144
>>> (763) 439-0719