Some speculative theories have proposed that this universe is but one of a set of disconnected universes, collectively denoted as the multiverse, altering the concept that the universe encompasses everything. By definition, there is no possible way for anything in one universe to affect another; if two "universes" could affect one another, they would be part of a single universe. Thus, although some fictional characters travel between parallel fictional "universes", this is, strictly speaking, an incorrect usage of the term universe.

The disconnected universes are conceived as being physical, in the sense that each should have its own space and time, its own matter and energy, and its own physical laws - that also challenges the definition of parallelity as these universes don't exist synchronously (since they have their own time) or in a geometrically parallel way (since there's no interpretable relation between spatial positions of the different universes).

Such physically disconnected universes should be distinguished from the metaphysical conception of alternate planes of consciousness, which are not thought to be physical places and are connected through the flow of information. The concept of a multiverse of disconnected universes is very old; for example, Bishop Étienne Tempier of Paris ruled in 1277 that God could create as many universes as he saw fit, a question that was being hotly debated by the French theologians.

There are two scientific senses in which multiple universes are discussed. First, disconnected spacetime continua may exist; presumably, all forms of matter and energy are confined to one universe and cannot "tunnel" between them. An example of such a theory is the chaotic inflation model of the early universe.

Second, according to the many-worlds hypothesis, a parallel universe is born with every quantum measurement; the universe "forks" into parallel copies, each one corresponding to a different outcome of the quantum measurement. However, both senses of the term "multiverse" are speculative and may be considered unscientific; no experimental test in one universe could reveal the existence or properties of another non-interacting universe.

((This above paragraphs are at the bottom of the page on Wikipedia when you type in "Universe".))

The questions are from me.

Why are there (only) 100 different kinds of elements in this universe?

Could there be 100+ different kinds of elements in a different universe?

I believe we can find more answers about how we originated as of perhaps everything originated if we somehow could leave this universe to explore new dimensions of other universes. My hope would be to find intelligent lifeforms (more intelligent then us hopefully) that could have answers we have seeked for thousands upon thousands of years. What do you believe to be true?

Do you believe in the chaotic inflation?

Do you believe a universe is born every so many billions of years and is the reason why there are so many universes today? If so then how can scientists determine how old universes are?

Smiless, this is one of the problems with Wilkipedia. They publish an opinion of theories which comes out as a theory (it is not, it is a descriptive article) and the actual theory described change so fast that the article gets outdated in no time flat (pun intended).

Explanation of M theory http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xE7xRgfPjAI&feature=related

I have posted over the past six months about M theory which is the state of the art in physics today. M theory took the old string theories that appeared to be going nowhere and simplified them into one coherent explanation that is now embraced by the physics community. Prominent physicists like Lisa Randall who used to be big proponents of the "standard model" of particle physics are now deeply involved in the parallel universe models.

Experiments are being designed at the LHC to test if particles can jump our of our universe, disappear, and pop back into our universe again, which conflicts with the article above. Stephen Hawkin's proof that Black holes evaporate led to the creation of the test and the use of M theory to explain what could not be explained using previous theories.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f7XtqH6ETZc

A really interesting theory is that two universes, perhaps one mostly of matter and the other mostly of antimatter were peacefully floating around in hyperspace or whatever continuum contains them (see eleven dimensional M theory) and they happened to bump into each other (which further conflicts with the article). The "bump" created an incredible explosion that created a bubble in space/time that expands to this day and contains all which is "us".

Here is the five minute explanation by Lisa Randall as to why she made the switch from the "standard model" of particle physics to M theory. Note in her discussion that a "brane" is short for membrane as each separate universe is called in M theory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fSeaC4hGmzY

Thank you Metalwing very much for taking the time to gather up to date information. I will certainly look at all of the links you have provided. This will give me a better idea of what scientists have been working on and to understand what we know so far.

The bigger the atom becomes, the more unstable it becomes past a certain point. Around 100 is the maximum for stability and some of those are unstable. We can make bigger atoms by fusing more and protons and neutrons into a nucleus but they tend to start shedding neutrons and other "chuncks" and trying to slim down to a stable size. Uranium, for example, will eventually turn into lead.

Here is a short "primer".
Begin quote:
Atoms in a radioactive substance decay in a random fashion but at a characteristic rate. The length of time this takes, the number of steps required and the kinds of radiation released at each step are well known. The half-life is the time taken for half of the atoms of a radioactive substance to decay. Half-lives can range from less than a millionth of a second to millions of years depending on the element concerned. After one half-life the level of radioactivity of a substance is halved, after two half-lives it is reduced to one quarter, after three half-lives to one-eighth and so on. All uranium atoms are mildly radioactive. The type of radiation given off at each step and the 'half-life' of each step that U-238 goes through in its change into stable, non-radioactive lead-206. The shorter-lived each kind of atom, the more radioactive it is.



End Quote:

Please note that the number of elements is based on the number of protons in the nucleus but to keep the protons from repelling each other you need an approximately equal number of neutrons to counteract the repulsive force. Therefore the one hundredth atom would have an atomic weight of approximately 200 because of all the neutrons required to make it stable. An atom like uranium 238 would be called an isotope of uranium. The more common form of uranium would be uranium 235 without the three extra neutrons.

I see there are two different uraniums on this table you have shown Metalwing. Is it true that one is used for electricity and the other would be for weapon production such a nuclear bomb? Or do they both have the significant same potential for either or?

Or is this chart just to show the Uraniums life span in general and how it will eventually become lead?

The table by the way is very interesting.

The first video Metalwing offers is only 2:25 minutes long. That was pleasant! I understand that various universes can be far or very near to us, but we can't know for sure. Some cannot form life because it has too much protons or electrons in them to formulate life. So this means to me that we are lucky to have all the correct amount of elements in our universe to provide life as we know it. It seems like such a delicate process. Although this doesn't answer what created everything, it does show an understanding of how universe are constructed off and how important each element is to form them.

A good question they ask also.

Who lives in the eleventh dimension?

As far I understand on what the video is explaining we can only see 3 dimensions ourselves. My question is how do we know there are 11?

Of course my understanding is limited to all this as it is very new to me. So be patient with my limited knowledge on the subject and if you have time and interest to show your views on the topic then please do.

U238 is the highly radioactive isotope used to make power and atomic bombs. U235 is what is mined out of the ground and has a very little U238 mixed with it. The two are separated in large centrifuges because U238 is slightly heavier than U235. These centrifuges are what Iran is using to make "enriched" uranium. It is usually enriched by mixing it with fluoride to make "Hex" and then separating the hex.

That would be cool. But could we even understand where they are coming from?

Just look around at how many humans already don't even understand Einstein's Relativity, or even the mathematics of Quantum Mechanics for that matter.

Most people have no clue that Einstien showed that there is no such thing as absolute time.

Most people still talk about a past (as if it's still back there!)



I wish I knew.

All I have are conjectures. Plus have many different conjectures all based on different primal philosophies. Some of my conjectures consider the idea that physical reality is objective. Other conjectures begin with the idea that life is nothing but a dream of consciousness and life has no real physicality at all.

Any of these thigns could be true.



Only in world economy.

I believe that Inflation Theory has a lot of merit. I'm not sure if I would call it "Chaotic Inflation" though.

One problem with all these theories is that they are all based on our current mathematical model which I'm not even totally convinced is correct. In fact, I'm totally convinced that it's not correct actually.



To the best of my knowledge we have no "evidence" that any universe exists other than the one we live in. It's my current understanding that all conjectures that other universes might exist are entirely based on mathematical models that may or may not have any merit.



Well, we have determined how old our universe is.

To ask how we might determine how any other universe might be cannot be answered until we actually find some evidence that some other universe actually exists.

If that ever happens, then we'd have to see what we can tell from whatever 'evidence' we have.

To the best of my knowledge, we have no such evidence at this time. Other universes may or may not exist. It's anyone's guess at this point.

Well it looks like we the people have a long ways to go before we will find out how to put man on spaceships that can fly to different galaxies to see other life forms.

Perhaps if this planet would somehow stabilize to the point where there is less wars and more money invested in such projects concerning technological advancement for space travel we can accelerate our chances of knowing more. Of course many are pessimistic to this approach.

Just like the rocket scientist Werner von Braun who wanted to make rockets to fly to the moon and not rockets to blow up countries. I mean I understand he had no other choice at the time with Hitler and Himmler threatening him to make V-2 Rockets to try to win the war, but imagine if this war would have never happened. That Hitler never existed. Could it have been possible that the entire German scientist team of hundreds could have advance further in technology as we know it?

I guess we will never know, but as time goes by, I am sure there will be some scientists coming up with new innovative ideas to advance in space exploration. Yes I know some progress has been made that floats occassionally on the news, yet nothing as significant as for example the first man on the moon that had millions watching at the time.

Overall, I find it fascinating but dissappointing that we haven't accomplished more. Just recently on an interview celeberating 50 years since the first man on the moon, one of the astronauts (partner of Neil Armstrong /forgot name) said that we should be already landing on Mars. He also mentions that we need to invest more to make it happen for we could be much further then we are now on this.

If you pay attention to the last part of Lisa Randall's discussion you will notice she casually mentioned that she has an experiment at Cern to use the LHC to "make" matter that cannot exist in this universe. What she expects to find is that the particle will be created then "pop" out of existence as it goes to another universe. The theory is that there is a firm limit to the size of particles that can exist in this universe but by using the LHC to make large particles out of pure energy, they will "show up". They do this by increasing the mass of a proton greatly then turning it into pure energy. The density of the energy is so great, it "coalesces" into particles. Since there is much more energy there than the mass of the original proton, something "more" is expected to show up.

Simply fascinating. I hope the experiments will work. I had to rewind and first find out what LHC is and discovered that it is the largest and most advanced computer in the world that can do so many things for scientists.

For those just starting to enjoy the science world then this would be interesting to read.

The Large Hadron Collider

Our understanding of the Universe is about to change...

The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is a gigantic scientific instrument near Geneva, where it spans the border between Switzerland and France about 100 m underground. It is a particle accelerator used by physicists to study the smallest known particles – the fundamental building blocks of all things. It will revolutionise our understanding, from the minuscule world deep within atoms to the vastness of the Universe.

Two beams of subatomic particles called 'hadrons' – either protons or lead ions – will travel in opposite directions inside the circular accelerator, gaining energy with every lap. Physicists will use the LHC to recreate the conditions just after the Big Bang, by colliding the two beams head-on at very high energy. Teams of physicists from around the world will analyse the particles created in the collisions using special detectors in a number of experiments dedicated to the LHC.

There are many theories as to what will result from these collisions, but what's for sure is that a brave new world of physics will emerge from the new accelerator, as knowledge in particle physics goes on to describe the workings of the Universe. For decades, the Standard Model of particle physics has served physicists well as a means of understanding the fundamental laws of Nature, but it does not tell the whole story. Only experimental data using the higher energies reached by the LHC can push knowledge forward, challenging those who seek confirmation of established knowledge, and those who dare to dream beyond the paradigm.

This is alot of reading but I think it is well worth it. It can also create new questions for you perhaps.

Why the LHC?

A few unanswered questions...

The LHC was built to help scientists to answer key unresolved questions in particle physics. The unprecedented energy it achieves may even reveal some unexpected results that no one has ever thought of!

For the past few decades, physicists have been able to describe with increasing detail the fundamental particles that make up the Universe and the interactions between them. This understanding is encapsulated in the Standard Model of particle physics, but it contains gaps and cannot tell us the whole story. To fill in the missing knowledge requires experimental data, and the next big step to achieving this is with LHC.



Newton's unfinished business...

What is mass?

What is the origin of mass? Why do tiny particles weigh the amount they do? Why do some particles have no mass at all? At present, there are no established answers to these questions. The most likely explanation may be found in the Higgs boson, a key undiscovered particle that is essential for the Standard Model to work. First hypothesised in 1964, it has yet to be observed.

The ATLAS and CMS experiments will be actively searching for signs of this elusive particle.


An invisible problem...

What is 96% of the universe made of?

Everything we see in the Universe, from an ant to a galaxy, is made up of ordinary particles. These are collectively referred to as matter, forming 4% of the Universe. Dark matter and dark energy are believed to make up the remaining proportion, but they are incredibly difficult to detect and study, other than through the gravitational forces they exert. Investigating the nature of dark matter and dark energy is one of the biggest challenges today in the fields of particle physics and cosmology.

The ATLAS and CMS experiments will look for supersymmetric particles to test a likely hypothesis for the make-up of dark matter.


Nature's favouritism...

Why is there no more antimatter?

We live in a world of matter – everything in the Universe, including ourselves, is made of matter. Antimatter is like a twin version of matter, but with opposite electric charge. At the birth of the Universe, equal amounts of matter and antimatter should have been produced in the Big Bang. But when matter and antimatter particles meet, they annihilate each other, transforming into energy. Somehow, a tiny fraction of matter must have survived to form the Universe we live in today, with hardly any antimatter left. Why does Nature appear to have this bias for matter over antimatter?

The LHCb experiment will be looking for differences between matter and antimatter to help answer this question. Previous experiments have already observed a tiny behavioural difference, but what has been seen so far is not nearly enough to account for the apparent matter–antimatter imbalance in the Universe.



Secrets of the Big Bang

What was matter like within the first second of the Universe’s life?
Matter, from which everything in the Universe is made, is believed to have originated from a dense and hot cocktail of fundamental particles. Today, the ordinary matter of the Universe is made of atoms, which contain a nucleus composed of protons and neutrons, which in turn are made of quarks bound together by other particles called gluons. The bond is very strong, but in the very early Universe conditions would have been too hot and energetic for the gluons to hold the quarks together. Instead, it seems likely that during the first microseconds after the Big Bang the Universe would have contained a very hot and dense mixture of quarks and gluons called quark–gluon plasma.

The ALICE experiment will use the LHC to recreate conditions similar to those just after the Big Bang, in particular to analyse the properties of the quark-gluon plasma.



Hidden worlds…

Do extra dimensions of space really exist?

Einstein showed that the three dimensions of space are related to time. Subsequent theories propose that further hidden dimensions of space may exist; for example, string theory implies that there are additional spatial dimensions yet to be observed. These may become detectable at very high energies, so data from all the detectors will be carefully analysed to look for signs of extra dimensions.

not so. i'll accept that disconnected universes have been hypothesized but nothing that reaches the status of a scientific theory. for a theory to exist, it must be tested showing predictable and consistent results. such has not happened with the disconnected universe HYPOTHESIS.

We should write a letter to Wikipedia indicating that they should change theory to hypothesis in that first paragraph.

knock yourself out. why don't you just go change it yourself? you can do that you know? i would never refer to wiki for "information" for that very reason.

I realize that I don't know much about this subject but was recently "turned on" to M theory and the videos mtealwing referenced (plus a number of related videos & I personally like the Charlie Rose/Lisa Randall ones) are perfect for laymen/women like me! She makes it all very easy to understand!

These people are considered experts and are from renowned university environments. I confess that I get a little bogged down with the concept of the math (but if I accept the theory, it doesn't really MATTER if I can do the math myself...just whether or not I can believe the people who DO the math are supporting what they theorize and why would they not?) Can't one consider the math predictable and consistent and therefore the theory IS a theory?

From a purely "gut reaction," these theories meld my long term beliefs about the origins of the universe in a way that blend the secular/scientific - which is bringing two schools of thought together, giving each credibility it didn't have before/alone.

Not that everyone has to agree, but given that these scientists ate all from premier universities and considered some of the best in the world, what they say makes sense!

Well here on Mingle2, I can't change it anymore. It is too late.

On Wikipedia I can't change it can I? Are you saying I can change the information on a wikipedia website? Interesting!

Yes I guess Wikipedia isn't a good resource to use afterall. If it is that easy to change its information then it can be easily manipulated to individual interests only, regardless if it is true or not.

Not good! I agree.

I am better off just reading out of my Encyclopedias I have sitting on my bookshelves.

yes you can change what wiki says. just click on edit and do your thing. you can even create your own topic and everybody who considers wiki as a source can point to you as the expert. encyclpedias are entertaining, neet pics and such but i'd recommend science texts and articles for scientific info.

Thanks for the tips jrbogie! I read all kinds of stuff in every direction!

Okay here are some interesting information to share. One can tear it up if they like or agree with this information provided. Your choice folks!



There are an estimated 50 thousand million galaxies in the universe, with the typical galaxy containing 50 thousand million to 100 thousand million stars. It is estimated that there are (1022 - 22 is written small next to the 10) stars in total in the universe.

We have not observed a supernova in the Milky Way galaxy since the invention of the telescope. Supernovae were recorded in 1572 and 1604, while Hans Lippershey invented the telescope in 1608 and Galileo first used the telescope to observe the heavens in 1609.
The telescope was invented in 1608 when spectacle-maker Hans Lippershey's apprentice was playing games. The apprentice was amusing himself with lenses and found a combination that made things seem closer. When Lippershey was shown this combination, he enclosed the lenses at two ends of a tube.

The philosopher Immanuel Kant (1724–1804) was the first person to propose that what we now call galaxies lay outside the Milky Way and were indeed galaxies (or "island universes", as Kant called them) in their own right.

As late as 1820, the universe was thought by European scientists to be 6,000 years old. It is now thought to be about 13,700,000,000 years old.

The Earth is rotating on its axis at a rate of 460 metres per second at the equator, and is orbiting the sun at a rate of about 30 kilometres per second. The sun is orbiting the centre of the Milky Way at a rate of about 220 kilometres per second. The Milky Way is moving at a speed of about 1000 kilometres per second towards a region of space 150 million light years away called the Great Attractor.

It is possible that many planets in the galaxy may not orbit around stars. Recent work by Kailash Sahu found six gravitational lenses in the star cluster M22 from objects smaller than brown dwarfs, the smallest type of star. Only one gravitational lensing event by a star was found in the same work.

huh?