EDGE OF THE UNIVERSE: Physics and Metaphysics of Gravity

This is a tandem presentation of two separate published articles about gravity in unusual roles, the orphan that refuses to belong to the family of the other three natural forces.

Part 1 -- Physics*

The current consensus Big Bang theory requires "boundary conditions" for the assumed beginning (singularity), which is essentially unknown. The "multiverse" variation to be discussed is that these other supposed universes are discounted, rather our territory is posed as a finite portion of a single continuous homogeneous universe that is eternal in time and infinite in extent. How our finite-in-time-and-space portion might have come about is the subject of this article, in order to suggest formal boundary conditions required for refinement of the Big Bang theory. A computer modeling experiment is suggested to test and supplement the thesis, and assist theoretical calculations elsewhere.

A sign of desperation: The current multiverse concept purports to explain the apparent fine tuning of our universe for the existence of life as we know it. The familiar natural constants and particles seem just right for this purpose. If there was more than one universe with different natural constants and particles in each, we might be here by chance according to adherents. While this brute force concept is not elegant, who says nature has to be elegant. A common term for this approach is the "anthropic principle." But questions actually multiply. How did these supposed countless other universes come to be? What is the physical mechanism for developing different sets of natural constants? What are these countless other natural constant sets and derived particle sets? What are the boundary conditions for these other countless universes? How can they be engaged for physical confirmation? And so on. It is difficult enough to explain one set of natural constants and particles and to fully engage our own universe. Being completely out of reach of physical confirmation, the concept is much too broad and speculative to many for serious scientific study, indicating a sign of desperation here. Also, the conventional multiverse concept and metaphysical motivation, in concert with Darwin, needlessly clashes with certain social sensibilities.

A more focused, mathematical/physical motivation for the multiverse concept would be the necessity of determining boundary conditions for the current consensus Big Bang theory, where the initial singularity of this theory requires mathematical/physical boundary conditions for greater precision. A singularity here is an impassable boundary between our universe and that which preceded our universe. If absolutely nothing came before (not even spacetime or the quantum vacuum, which are quite complex), there would be no discernable boundary conditions -- no conditions available to stage let alone result in our universe. No stage, no quantum vacuum, no quantum fluctuation. Or, no stage, no spacetime, no singularity.

A possible "something physical" (physical stage) for the assumed singularity: Instead of postulating an indefinite number of other universes (separated by singularities or impassable boundaries) outside of our own in order to bracket the Big Bang singularity, let us begin by posing only one universe -- a continuous extension our own familiar one.

The most direct approach would be to postulate an infinite space(time) beyond our visible portion. This is because one thing is more direct than two things (Occam's Razor). These two things would be "space" and "that which is not space." This complication implies a boundary, or singularity, between the two, requiring boundary conditions -- which are completely unknown, making any calculation about the singularity incomplete. The present situation. Another term for space in general relativity is "the pure gravitational field." So space is not nothing.

What remains, then, is space infinite in extent and eternal in time. Very simply, boundless space. One thing. Then how could our finite portion (i.e. visible stars and galaxies) of this infinite background have begun? This question is also asked by specialists, and just about any curious layman already, even given the Big Bang theory. But at least now there might be something physical to begin with -- the pure unbounded gravitational field -- a field not pinched off, so speak, beginning or "end."

Cancelling and reinforcing gravitational waves (or quantum vacuum fluctuations): Consider an ocean of water on Earth. The surface of this water can be thought of as a field, in that a field is something sensitive to itself. A disturbance anywhere is felt throughout in principle by wave transmission. Disturbance can begin anywhere in the field, and can cancel or reinforce. A reinforced wave is often termed a rogue wave. Such waves overwhelm ships at sea and seaside communities from time to time, even when the surrounding seas are relatively calm. The more extensive the field the greater the frequency and amplitude of rogue waves by and large. Such waves could be maximized in an eternal infinite gravitational field. In the language of quantum theory, this would be instead of a field fluctuation, a vacuum fluctuation. In that the scale of the system has not been set (no non-zero rest mass particles are yet apparent), a quantum fluctuation is equally posed. A possible physical cause of our sub-universe, by concentrating sufficient energy in a given locale by reinforced gravitational waves, or nascent particle, or nascent singularity (on the verge of qualification).

Boundary conditions: Given such a gravitational field there could be uncountable rogue waves -- with only one set of natural constants and particle types in each, in that only one type of continuous space was postulated. Thus only one universe with potential for "sub-universes," with no distinct boundaries and at least one rogue gravitational wave of sufficient energy to produce our sub-universe. The rogue wave energy quantity condition might be inferred by noting the mass/energy of our own sub-universe, provided the quantity beyond our visible sub-universe can be estimated with sufficient accuracy; this would be considered the principal boundary condition, in that it could fix the scale of the model. However, sub-universes, and their possible distributions, might be formed with other amplitudes -- something open to computer modeling. Additional parameters are mentioned below.

Suggested computer modeling experiment series: The usual multiverse concept is distasteful also because it seems out of the realm of physical examination. But narrowing the concept to our known single sub-universe in an infinite and eternal spacetime, but with "pimples" beyond observation (or comparable sub-universes, depending on rogue wave amplitude) smoothly merging into one another with a single set of natural constants and particles, the use of computer modeling becomes focused (minimal parameters) and calculable by computer simulation, at least in a proportional model sense. The initial state of the model infinite gravitational field -- of certain and varied "stiffness" and "damping" -- could be a random generation of small disturbances, to mimic a field that should be inherently unstable (modeling eternal and infinite conditions), causing the generation of cancelled and reinforced gravitational waves, approaching one another from random directions resulting possibly in a reinforced clash of particularly high amplitude. Then note could be taken of the distribution of such unusual disturbances. Perhaps only certain "stiffness" and "damping" field value pairs will produce the desired effects, which might reinforce theoretical calculations. Also, the frequency and locations of input disturbances might be varied; these parameters are prominent in rogue ocean waves. This might close on formal mathematical/physical boundary conditions suitable for the Big Bang singularity, and a refinement of this theory, to facilitate the union of relativity and quantum theories -- given the fields of spacetime and/or the quantum vacuum.

Part 2 -- Metaphysics**

It was thought the galaxy was the universe not too long ago.

According to general relativity space (understood as spacetime) is something "tangible" in that it can be "curved," shaped with proper coaxing; another term for space is "the pure gravitational field." The "hand" for shaping space is mass/energy (mathematically equivalent). Curve space enough and particles emerge.

A compact (Occam's Razor) way to look at things, before "sufficient energy" to produce stable particles, is to assume space existed before such energy was concentrated. Infinite space is more direct than finite space (or no space), because with finite space two items are necessary -- "space" and "that which is not space," implying a boundary of sorts, and unknown boundary conditions, i.e., a singularity. One thing then, just boundless space.

Einstein has already asked, "Did the Old One have a choice in creating the universe?" Choice implies self-awareness. Can infinite space containing sufficient and varied curves be aware of itself? ("Pre-universe") space that has slight curves is conceivable, as the surface of an ocean of water is forever waving, with portions above and below sea level always apparent with the slightest coaxing by various aspects. Such a surface, isolated, would have a net undulation energy about sea level of zero. The uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics comes to mind as well. Such a scenario implies "rogue waves" able to cause great effect. Such a wave is the joining of various small waves from different directions such that the overall effect is reinforced amplitude, as when an unexpectedly large ocean wave overcomes a seaside community. The more extensive the surface the greater the probability of increased frequency and amplitude of rogue waves. Such would be maximized in an eternal infinite space.

HYPOTHESIS: Let said rogue wave be our "sub-universe." Then, no choice? Not necessarily. In said eternal infinite space there would be infinite rogue waves ("given" our observed one) in infinite time (spacetime) -- infinite familiar particles. Each sub-universe, emerging from a distinct locality, could be subject to quantum entanglement and act as a single cell -- a single cell among an infinite number of such cells (universe of separate rogue waves with only one set of natural constants) individually expanding and contracting and merging and reemerging. Infinite space/particles aware of itself -- physical basis for the choosing mind of the Old One?

PROOF (of sorts): The self-awareness of certain known physical life forms evolving from the same familiar natural constants and particles as in said broadened continuous universe, in that only one continuous type of infinite space was postulated (Occam's Razor again, and no singularities). Infinite similar sub-universes imply infinite life forms with self-awareness -- at least one familiar species. It would seem the Old One plays with loaded dice.

IN CLOSING: This is not the common anthropic approach (of unknown and varied natural constants in varied separate universes -- the often discussed multiverse) since physical bases of self-awareness might evolve similarly in any of said "cells," given the familiar unchanging natural constants and particles among cells. The "multiverse" here is seen as a broader but continuous single universe, consisting of infinite "sub-universes," each driven by a "rogue wave" of the same familiar natural constants and particles -- some waves positive (regions of compressing space or positive curvature) and some negative (regions of expanding space or negative curvature, like ours) -- with a net energy of zero. The only premise is an eternal infinite pure (unstable) gravitational field -- boundless space. It would seem a related age-old question remains. Which came first, mind (i.e., Plato, idealism, religion) or matter (i.e., Aristotle, materialism, science)? But given said eternity, the question becomes moot.

* Formerly, "BEFORE THE BIG BANG: In search of boundary conditions"

** Formerly, "Did the 'Old One' have a choice in creating the universe?"