Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Widdekind

"Ballooning" of spacetime from hyper-particles

Recommended Posts

The expansion of spacetime is commonly called "The Big Stretch" (Carroll & Ostlie. Intro. Mod. Astrophys.), and is often likened to the blowing up of a balloon.

 

Musing naively from the analogy, balloons only blow up, when something provides an internal pressure, in excess of the surroundings.

 

 

 

Speculation:

 

The closed "3-Sphere" of spacetime is being "blown out like a balloon", by a radiation of "hyper-particles", emanating from "interior Hyperspace" (the hyper-space topogically inside of the hyper-sphere of spacetime). These "hyper-particles" impinge upon the "inside surface" of spacetime. As they "rain down" on spacetime, they produce a "pitter-patter" of small-scale curvature fluctuations, allot like repeatedly poking fingers into a trampoline. This perpetual "pitter-patter" imparts momentum, which manages to "push" spacetime "(hyper-)radially outward", from the "hyper-center", thereby accounting for the "ballooning up" expansion of spacetime, "out" towards "exterior Hyperspace".

 

 

 

Prediction:

 

This "hyperspace rain" hypothesis would predict that, at (presumably) small scales, fleeting curvature fluctions -- which would be observed as fleetingly ephemeral micro-gravity wells -- would be observed.

 

 

hyperparticlerain1.th.jpg

 

hyperparticlerain2.th.jpg

 

hyperparticlerain3.th.jpg

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One could conceive, of Gravity Waves, on the "membrane" of standard spacetime, creating "sound pressure waves", in the "Hyperspace ether", in "interior Hyperspace". If so, such Gravity Waves would eventually impinge back upon the membrane of spacetime, "on the other side of space", where their "lapping" against spacetime, from (interior) Hyperspace, would appear to create "non-local" Gravitational disturbances:

 

hyperparticlerainnonloc.th.jpg

 

 


Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

 

 

If, from inside of a closed hyper-spherical spacetime, you could "eject" mass-energy from said spacetime, "out" into Hyperspace, then you could conceivably "open up" the closed hyper-spherical spacetime, into an unbounded hyper-cylindrical spacetime:

 

spacetimeopenedouttoete.th.jpg

 

From the Friedmann Equations, with a Cosmological Constant ([math]\Lambda[/math]), one sees that such a static universe contains more Mass-Energy, when it is "bigger" by virtue of having a larger Radius of Curvature (a):

 

spacetimeopenedouttoete.th.jpg

 

Thus, one could conceivably "maximize" the amounts, of Mass-Energy, as well as Spacetime itself, by "opening out" spacetime at the "equator" of the original hyper-sphere:

 

spacetimeopenedouttoete.th.jpg

 

spacetimeopenedouttoete.th.jpg

 

Such a system, while requiring complete control of the whole Cosmos, could conceivably create a Cosmic-caliber "un-Doomsday Device" -- w/o which, the "whole show" would ultimately amount to a ~40 billion year "waste of time", when all information was destroyed, down to the Quantum level, in the (original) "Big Crunch". Such a "super system" would be most economically enacted, at the "equator" of spacetime, since such would minimize the amount of mass requiring the (presumably expensive) "Hyperspace ejection" processing.


Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

Could the Cosmological Constant ([math]\Lambda[/math]) come from this sort of "Hyperspace pressure" ?? To wit, would the fabric of spacetime act as some sort of "Hyperspace sail", which would "catch the wind" of Hyperspace particles, thereby accounting for the constancy of [math]\Lambda[/math] in every given volume ("hyper-area") of spacetime ("sail-surface") ??

 

It is my understanding, that the Cosmological Constant ([math]\Lambda[/math]) is "mathematically equivalent" to a 4D "Hyper-wind", impinging upon the 3D "Hyper-sail" membrane of space, and imparting something akin to a kind of "Force per (3D) volume". To wit, this "Hyper-wind" would not impinge upon any "time-space(-space) plaquettes" (Wheeler. Gravity & Spacetime.), but only "space-space(-space) plaquettes". If so, then the Cosmological Constant ([math]\Lambda[/math]) represents some sort of "space opacity" to the "Hyper-wind" — a little like the Neutrino Capture Cross-section for flows of neutrinos thru matter — w/o which, only matter embedded within space would "interact opaquely with Hyperspace" to produce curvatures which didn't cancel completely internally w/in space itself.

 

hyperwind.th.jpg

One could "hyper-speculate" upon the existence of a "
Hyper
-star" dwelling at the "center" of (interior)
Hyperspace
, whose
World-Line
would over-lie the central
Time Axis
, and which was the source of the "
Hyper
(-stellar) wind" flux.

Edited by Widdekind
Consecutive posts merged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If, from inside of a closed hyper-spherical spacetime, you could "eject" mass-energy from said spacetime, "out" into Hyperspace, then you could conceivably "open up" the closed hyper-spherical spacetime, into an unbounded hyper-cylindrical spacetime:

 

spacetimeopenedouttoete.th.jpg

 

From the Friedmann Equations, with a Cosmological Constant ([math]\Lambda[/math]), one sees that such a static universe contains more ass-Energy, when it is "bigger" by virtue of having a larger Radius of Curvature (a):

 

spacetimeopenedouttoete.th.jpg

 

Thus, one could conceivably "maximize" the amounts, of Mass-Energy, as well as Spacetime itself, by "opening out" spacetime at the "equator" of the original hyper-sphere:

 

spacetimeopenedouttoete.th.jpg

 

spacetimeopenedouttoete.th.jpg

 

Such a system, while requiring complete control of the whole Cosmos, could conceivably create a Cosmic-caliber "un-Doomsday Device" -- w/o which, the "whole show" would ultimately amount to a ~40 billion year "waste of time", when all information was destroyed, down to the Quantum level, in the (original) "Big Crunch". Such a "super system" would be most economically enacted, at the "equator" of spacetime, since such would minimize the amount of mass requiring the (presumably expensive) "Hyperspace ejection" processing.

 

The current Cosmic Curvature Radius (R) is roughly 100 Gpc. If so, then the "Cosmic Circumference" (2 π R) would be about 2 trillion light-years. So, to construct such a cross-Cosmic-scale Super System, and put it in place "in time", within the next few billion years (say), would apparently presume the ability to move matter around the Universe, at speeds of order 1000 c ("Mach 1000").

 

Inside of standard Spacetime, signals seem likely to be limited to 1 c ("Mach 1"). But, it could (conceivably) be the case, that the "hyper-velocity" of Spacetime, "outwards" through Hyperspace, might be about 25 c ("Mach 25") (see prior link). From such a pseudo-science-fiction stance, then, it could be the case, that Spacetime's "speed-limit" might compel one to "drive elsewhere" (thru Hyperspace — the early Universe expanded "outward" even faster !), were they want to fly faster ("if you cannot go through it, go around it" as it were).

 

Note that the fabric of Spacetime, has "expanded outwards through Hyperspace", by ~100 Gpc, in ~13 Gyr — an average "hyper-velocity" of ~25 c, completely consistent, and of the same order of magnitude, as mentioned previously. Now, if the Cosmic expansion rate was slowing down, wouldn't Spacetime's average "hyper-velocity" (25 c) be greater than its current "hyper-velocity" (25 c)?? So, since the converse is the case, could that be construed, as evidence supporting the suggestion, that the expansion of Spacetime is actually accelerating ??


Merged post follows:

Consecutive posts merged

If the "circumference" of Spacetime, is roughly 2 trillion light-years "around"...

 

And, if Mankind can currently observe a Hubble Volume about 20 billion light-years across...

 

Then, Mankind can currently detect about 1% of the complete Cosmos, along each spatial dimension...

 

or about 10-6 of the 3D volume of the complete Cosmos (??). To wit, this might mean, that there are roughly 1 million Hubble Volumes1 million "Level 1 Parallel Universes" (HC Universe — Parallel Universes (TV)) — which, taken together, comprise this Cosmos.

 

(Mankind's "intelligence" on the Universe, is "yesterday's news" about 1% of 1% of 1% of the complete Cosmos. "Creatively conjecturing" an "intelligence estimate", by "embellishing" known information, to craft a consistent conception of unknown information, one could be compelled to conclude, that the Cosmos' million Hubble Volumes house a million sentient species [maybe more, were we possessing "today's paper" on our own stretch of the sandbox].)

Edited by Widdekind
Consecutive posts merged.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If, from inside of a closed hyper-spherical spacetime, you could "eject" mass-energy from said spacetime, "out" into Hyperspace, then you could conceivably "open up" the closed hyper-spherical spacetime, into an unbounded hyper-cylindrical spacetime:

 

spacetimeopenedouttoete.th.jpg

 

(Mis?)reading Rudy Rucker's 4th Dimension seemingly suggests, that photons possess no net spacetime curvature. If so, then converting mass to energy, would reduce the curvature-causing matter content of the Cosmos. And, if the current Cosmic density parameter is within a few percent of one; and if nuclear fusion tends to convert ~1% of mass to energy, in stars; then, after a few generations of stars, the Cosmos might "open up on its own" (?!?!).

 

Once could quasi-conceivably create a Matter-Antimatter "stamp" ("hyperspatial hydraulic press") system:

 

mattertoantimatter.th.jpg

Edited by Widdekind

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.