Cosmos may be 'inherently unstable'

[DavidDvorkin]

Source: BBC

Scientists say they may be able to determine the eventual fate of the cosmos as they probe the properties of the Higgs boson.

A concept known as vacuum instability could result, billions of years from now, in a new universe opening up in the present one and replacing it

Read more: http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-21499765

---

Cue all the jokes about not bothering to clean out the garage.

[snooper2]

1. So what happens to jesus when this new universe begins?

[DavidDvorkin]

2. Oh, my God! The article didn't even cover that!

It's enough to make one suspect that some cosmologists might actually not be Christians -- or even theists!

[snooper2]

3. Well it SHOULD!

people want answers!

[cer7711]

6. Here's What Happens:

A new Jesus opens up in the old one and replaces him.

Since the universe is really a multi-verse and there are literally an infinite number of possible realities this means, of course, that an infinite number of Jesuses open up in an infinite number of Jesuses: grumpy Jesus, gladiator Jesus, lazy lay-about wine-wasted Jesus, ad infinitum . . .

I loves me the new field of theological physics; it's such an exact, hard science. Once you take away the theological part . . .

[DavidDvorkin]

7. Ah! A New New Testament.

[localroger]

36. It's testaments all the way down. /nt

[Hugabear]

10. Maybe there's just one Jesus, and he controls all of the multi-verse

With help from his special ring

[cpwm17]

19. And with an infinite number of universes

we will be reincarnated an infinite number of times – guaranteed, since there will be an infinite number of conscious critters with brain processes sufficiently similar to our own to create identical consciousnesses.

Some claim that we have souls that die when our bodies die, thus preventing reincarnation. I don't believe in that woo, so I believe reincarnation must be possible.

[randome]

22. If there is an infinite number of universes, then there is one with a god-like being who...

...has collected all the universes and placed them on a chain about his/her neck. So I don't believe in the infinite universe theory.

[cpwm17]

25. With an infinite number of universes

all things possible will happen an infinite number of times. Since gods are likely impossible, that can never happen.

I don't necessarily believe there are infinite universes at any given time, but I'm sure there are huge number, with an infinite number through infinite time.

Here’s astronomer Martin Reese’s reasoning for the existence of the Multiverse at 11:10 to 26:40 in video – ignore the rest:

I find it more than an impossible coincidence that I exist right now in the infinite time that has ever existed. I must be reincarnated.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

70. Infinity Jesus?

That's one mother of a big Jesus!

[Ian David]

20. Our entire Universe is instantly destroyed without warning. n/t

[joshcryer]

39. Minor correction, our entire universe is destroyed at the speed of light.

Which is equivalent to instantly destroyed since no one would no it was being destroyed.

[Ian David]

41. No, it's destroyed instantaneously, without regard for the speed of light, everywhere,.

At least, according to one documentary I'd seen on The Science Channel.

[joshcryer]

43. This is the paper for the basis of the theory:

It has been known for about twenty years that for a low Higgs mass relative to the top quark mass, the quartic Higgs self-coupling runs at high energy towards lower values. At some point it would turn negative indicating that the vacuum is unstable. In other words the universe could in theory spontaneously explode at some point releasing huge amounts of energy as it fell into a more stable lower energy vacuum state. This catastrophe would spread across the universe at the speed of light in an unstoppable wave of heat that would destroy everything in its path.

http://blog.vixra.org/2011/12/04/what-would-a-higgs-at-125-gev-tell-us/

You wouldn't see it coming though. You wouldn't even know it happened. So basically, the idea of "instantaneous destruction" still is logical, but it'd still take 14+ billion years for the process to complete itself.

[Ian David]

44. Okay, you've convinced me. n/t

[JimDandy]

49. So it may have started already? n/t

[joshcryer]

50. Yeah, or a billion years ago.

:O

[Warpy]

51. Well, we can only see in one direction along the time/space

continuum, backwards. The universe could be coalescing for another Big Bang and we'd still see a huge universe still flying apart because we can't see even milliseconds into the future.

[JimDandy]

66. The whole idea is very trippy.

Physics made simple enough for the average joe like me is exciting. Thanks!

JD

[Dash87]

31. He and Raptor Jesus, his arch-enemy and evil twin brother, have an epic battle?

Buddy Christ will be cheering from the sidelines.

[derby378]

32. Will Cthulhu be the referee? (n/t)

[Dash87]

35. Why yes, and his noodly highness can only be the chef.

[NoodleyAppendage]

42. Yep. I'll be there.

At the end of 10 iterations of universe recycling, I've decided that it will stop with a huge plate of pasta and planets only populated by pirates. Ramen.

[longship]

4. Hopefully the new one won't have any Republicans.

[99th_Monkey]

15. and deadly weaponry is universally regarded as quaint and totally useless. ~nt

[Remmah2]

5. The universe is unstable?

What an understatement.

[DavidDvorkin]

8. Also: There is no gravity. The Earth sucks.

[Remmah2]

9. I don't feel grounded anymore.............. nt

nt

[Wolf Frankula]

11. And Therefore

Talking Snake!

Wolf

[99th_Monkey]

12. People are predicting apocalypses like there's no tomorrow. ~nt

[DavidDvorkin]

16. Ha!

[Lint Head]

13. Wonder if each persons energy will come back a a different life form.

They say energy does not die it just changes form. I want to be a super hero.

[randome]

21. Or, if the Universe begins at the same point and with the same density as before...

...maybe it simply repeats itself in every aspect. In which case it would really suck to have lived a bad life.

[Lint Head]

23. That's interesting. Maybe it becomes an opposite universe.

[99th_Monkey]

14. All The Universe is, is pure consciousness

light & energy, which is all quite fungible & fluid, except for the
part that isn't.

I think this is what Buddha taught, and probably Jesus did too in
his own way.

[DavidDvorkin]

17. What does that mean?

And how do you know that?

[The2ndWheel]

18. Gunga galunga

[DavidDvorkin]

30. Ook.

[The2ndWheel]

56. Not a Carl Spackler fan?

[link:

|

[99th_Monkey]

47. Oh come on. whole books are written about what it "means"

.. and you want me to tell you what it "means", here in this post.

[cpwm17]

53. Whole books have been written on scientific subjects

I suggest you read some.

[Scootaloo]

52. It means "I want to look deep and spiritually-ish on the internet"

[zipplewrath]

24. All screwed up

I think the thought keeps getting all screwed up. Karma was probably closer than the Golden Rule.

That which you do to the least of US, you do to all of us, including yourself.

Or to correct Spock. There is no difference between the needs of the many, and the needs of the few, or the one. What happens to one, happens to all. What one needs, we all need.

[99th_Monkey]

48. How about Quantum Physics?

It's all the same stuff, Carl Jung, Buddha, and Quantum Physics are all in the
same ballpark.

[zipplewrath]

58. Good point

At some point I suspect Quantum Mechanics will demonstrate that everything is ultimately connected.

[99th_Monkey]

59. +10

Is interesting how some scoff at the very mention of such things,
I suppose out of a knee-jerk reaction, that it's too "spiritual" or
"not real science" .. even when real science discovers that, you
know what? Buddha was actually correct about some important
stuff. Einstein was certainly onto it big-time.

The bogus pitting of scientific truth v. spiritual truth against
one another, has put our collective psyche into a choke-hold for
nearly a century now.

[cpwm17]

60. This is a liberal discussion forum

You laid on the non-scientific woo pretty thick, and then you attacked the poster who asked you to explain yourself. Obviously you can't.

[99th_Monkey]

62. Forgive me if I choose not to presume

to explain Quantum Physics, Buddhism, and the life works of Carl Jung,
and how all three of these modes of awareness dovetail with one another,
providing scouts' reports and a roadmap for better understanding the
intimate interconnectedness of the Universe, and how human evolutionary
consciousness can become more self-directed, as in democratic, with
small d.

I must be a little "off" today, not to be able to do that in a single DU post.

My most insincere apologies to you and any other DUers who were expecting
me to deliver on that, and are so disappointed that they send me snide
comments.

My bad.

[zipplewrath]

63. Relax

He's right, you're wrong. You understand something that isn't easily explained and you brought it up in a discussion forum. When queried about it, you best response was probably that it was far too broad of a topic for the forum. You're right, there's no way you could have covered the topic in this context, especially within this thread. But ya can't blame someone for askin'.

[99th_Monkey]

64. Assuming it was really a real question

and not a snark, that would be true.

I'm not convinced the question was sincere in the first place. If
I thought it was sincere, I probably would have gone to a little more
effort to provide some useful links or whatever.

If indeed I did get that "wrong", then I'd admit to being "wrong" a
bit more easily.

i mean, if someone is seriously interested in knowing about such
subjects, there is a thing called google, that people use for that.

[zipplewrath]

65. Always a problem

That is a constant problem in these mediums. Do you presume that questions are genuinely asked? There is the "troll question". There is the "leading" question. There are questions that appear rhetorical. And of course my favorite, the question that is grounded in assumptions that are wrong or unestablished. Spend a week in the Gungeon (heck, spend an hour) and you'll get 'em all.

But I do tend to give a huge benefit of the doubt, especially when I know I'm being fairly obtuse or have unique/special/uncommon/detailed knowledge. And have "paid for it" more than once.

[Son of Gob]

67. Don't forget Scott Bakula.

[99th_Monkey]

68. I haven't

Actually, I AM Dr. Sam Beckett, but please don't tell anyone, ok?

I'm supposed to be undercover in this dimension, for now.

[ThoughtCriminal]

26. Vacuum State Instability

The ultimate doomsday machine would tear us a new one.

[Squinch]

27. If you just keep the glass chilled and use a good cranberry juice, they stay fine.

[They_Live]

28. what can I do to protect

my record collection?

[grantcart]

29. don't tell Cliffordu

After 40 years he is just getting comfortable with the Big Bang.

[derby378]

33. Remember that song lyric from Ozzy Osbourne?

"Swallowing the colors of the sound I hear?" In the new universe, you won't need drugs or synesthesia to pull that trick off!

[slackmaster]

34. It's certainly important to consume them before entropy takes its toll

[DavidDvorkin]

37. That's the spirit.

[DaveJ]

38. Republicans will figure out how to destroy the universe before that happens.

Someone will propose free warp travel, then most likely they'll hold the universe hostage and blow it all up in a grande ideological statement.

[joshcryer]

40. Energy availablity is topped off at around 200 trillion years.

By then all visible galaxies will be long gone and all that will be left are black holes in a super galactic formation. In other words, the end, as we know it, is going to happen eventually. This is good news in some ways because it points to the possibility that the universe refreshes itself.

[Dyedinthewoolliberal]

45. Great!

One more thing to worry about............

[DavidDvorkin]

46. You can put that off for a while

[sakabatou]

54. So we may enter another universe when this one begins to die off.

[struggle4progress]

55. "Yeah, I'm flakey and unstable -- but so is the rest of the cosmos! So gimme a break!"

[dipsydoodle]

57. He never did look all that

[Rosa Luxemburg]

61. it's always been unstable

[bemildred]

69. +1 nt

[XRubicon]

71. When i plug a negative number into my equation it works

That means it is true in reality.