Black holes and multiple dimensions.

I have been thinking of something recently, and I was wondering if anyone else had heard of a theory that has brought this up before.

I know that M-Theory states that there could be up to 11 dimensions of space.

Is it possible that our universe was once more densly packed with matter, and that all the galaxies we see with their swirl patterns, are being formed by "black holes" that are simply (ha) flushing this matter into another spacial dimension?

Think of our universe as a mass of matter and energy, and the black holes are kind of like a cosmic toilet bowl flushing all of that matter and energy into another spacial dimension. Is there any type of theoretical physics that talks of this sort of an idea, or am I just insane? :)

These are things that make me wish I had went to college, and keep me up at night. :D

and all know how well that one backfired on them

and what I was reading talked about some scientists who actually believe that it's theoretically possible that there are unlimited alternate universes in different dimensions, each one containing random different outcomes than our universe. So for example, on this planet, you don't get the girl/boy of your dreams, but in the next dimension you're married to that dream girl/guy, and in the next dimension, you were married but now you're divorced, etc....

It blew my mind, and I've been trying to jump to that alternate planet ever since.

Imagine that. In another dimension, on another planet Earth, Bush, Cheney, Wolfowitz, etc.... are all rotting in a prison cell somewhere. Oh, if only I could see that. :)

I believe (and I could be wrong) that it's a consequence of the Heisenberg Uncertainty Principle. Short and sweet, it (MWI) says that for every irreversible event- such as a glass breaking- an single, individual universe is created to accommodate the possibilities, the consequences, the effects of that event.

In the case of the glass, a seperate universe would be created for each way the glass could have broken, and more for each shard of that glass, as it spins and rotates and whatnot immediately after.

It's mind-boggling. Additionally, since each imagining of your brain carries with it a finitie probability (no matter how small), this means that, no matter how improbable, your imagination is seeing something that either is, was, or will be, at some point in time, in some universe.

Freaky interpretation of quantum physics.

Think of it this way-- we percieve three spatial dimensions, so if anything can be "flushed into another dimension" we should be able to do that in the three dimensions we can see, right? Start with something in one dimension-- a line-- and push it into a second dimension. It doesn't disappear, or go anywhere. It becomes part of a plane, an aspect of a larger entity that exists in two dimensions. Likewise a plane pushed into three dimensions becomes a solid. The reverse is true too-- when a solid's dimensionality is reduced to passes through it's lower dimensional aspects-- planes and lines-- but it doesn't go anywhere, and which planes and lines we perceive depend upon our frame of reference relative to each dimensional representation (it's getting hard to do this without drawing pictures or handwaving so I'd better stop).

Anyway, anything that exists in this universe should have some representation in our four dimensional space-time mileu I think. But it's not my field, so that's just my guess.

Many advanced concepts in physics these days (string theory, M-Theory, supergravity) are all going toward the existance of more than 3 spacial dimensions.

It's very hard to imagine dimensions beyond the 3rd, because we are 3 dimensional beings.

If I stick to the 3D model of the universe, what you say is true. However when you add in extra spacial dimensions, I think the idea has merit.

...representations in lower dimensions.

But that is where the black holes come in. A black hole is reduced to sub-atomic space like a particle. We wouldn't see higher spacial dimensions of they are sub-atomic.

Very cool discussion BTW :)

the way our three dimensions do. Higher dimensions have "curled up" into an infinitely small "space" outside of our 3-D world. So, even according to string theory, there are not higher dimensions as you might think of them.

arbitrary extension a while ago. (No have link on me though - heard on radio)

Also, the 3 we have are not necessarily infinite. (I mean, they could be, but it is still bieng decided over if we have a finite-but-unbounded universe)

You are assuming a theoretical 1 dimensional creature is equipped to perceive 2 dimensions, or a 2D creature can perceive 3. If they aren't equipped to see further dimensions, objects in their "space" that are pushed into those other dimensions might well just disappear.

In our case, we are 3D creatures (ignoring time, for now) and we seem to have trouble "seeing" a 4th. Like your supposed object in a 1D space that is "pushed off" to form a plane, objects which are falling into Black Holes might be being shunted off into 3+nD space. There may be some 6D creatures out there, looking at us and wondering how we can be so blind as to not be able to see where all that mass is going.

Physics is trying to give us extra-dimensional vision. String and M theory the results of people wondering what those other dimensions might look like.

Ew gross!

I believe that there is a theory of a "multiverse" that sort of fits your question.

"Another universe", "extra spacial dimensions", however you want to say it, those two things are the same concept. An "alternate world" based in reality is not going to be a "Back to the Future-esque" timelines that contain differences. In reality, I think "alternate universes" are simply the worlds that exist in the higher dimensions that we 3D beings cannot sense.

someone better versed in physics that I am would have to explain it.

The idea of multiple universes (if we could demonstrate it) neatly solves little problems like just what is infinity. It also helps answer the question-- what would be here if there were no universe?

Science fiction writers have had a field day with multiple universes, space warps, black holes as entry points... Eventually, science will catch up to the fantasies.

are here, and black holes do strange things, we don't really see either the decrease in observable matter in time (as we would expect if it were bieng flushed out), and

Actually, wait a second! We already ARE in 11 dimensions!
(for a long time it was believed that they were curled up, and that is why they did not interact, but recently, someone or other said that you could extend them arbitrary lengths ie. forever)

The rest of the dimensions are just like the ones we have, if I understand correctly. (However the math is beyond my current skill..... for a few years at least)

First of all, the 'Swirl' patterns observed in galaxies are no mystery. In fact, they are easily explained by 'ancient' newtionian physics. They are caused by tides and density fluctuations. No string theory needed.

But I would like to stress something very, very important to all of you. Ever since I was a kid, I engaged in this kind of 'foolish' philosophing. I say foolish because its almost certainly without merit. You don't get any wiser, in fact, probably more confused. Unfortunatly (I am not implying you, btw) many people forget that there are tens of thausands of professional physicists around the world who in their daily job and most of their spare time are researching and analysing new theories, it is very unlikely that outsiders without the time and training come up with something that either hasn't been thought of yet or shown to be false.

To really say anything useful about some concept, you must first have a reasonable understanding. To get that, you must at minimum follow a full-time 5 year university course in physics and mathematics. Then you know the basics and fundamentals of modern science and physics. To be able to talk about and truly understand String Theory or any other specialized subject, you need another 3 to 4 year Phd comparable course.

Don't get me wrong, I really applaud and encourage your interest, I wish more people were. What I say, I say from personal experience. If you really like to know and understand, go to the library and read several good books. Even if you don't have have a lot of spare time, but you're serious about getting a decent grip on the matter, read some mathematical treatments about basic mechanics about newtonian physics, (most importantly conservation of momentum and energy, etc). After you have a decent understanding of the basic equations involved, then and only then can you appreciate how for example quantum mechanics and general relativity differ from the classical worldview and you can see some of the implications.

By the way, the guy who mentioned Einstein was considered 'insane': thats simply an untruth. No serious scientist ever doubted Einstein in any way. In fact, when he as a complete nobody first published special relativity, he was an instant scientific celebrity. Why? Because his theory was very sound and solid. And that is all that matters to scientists.

edit: type fixes

pretty much yes, it takes a long time.

1st year bastard who wants to study the UFT, reporting!

One question: Tachyons! I was under the impression that they did not, in fact, exist (though my sources were old), but the other day, I was told (from a lead researcher person thingy no less) that they did in fact exist! Suprised, I was. So, do they physically exist or simply mathematically?

(Or not at all - any answer is fine, this is just part of looking for multiple sources)

engaging in wonder and supposition is never "foolish".

Sure, no one on here is going to be the next Einstein, then again, I dont think Einstein quite followed your paradigm in coming up with something useful.

Engaging in these types of "foolish" speculation is what leads people to watch television specials on this, or help fund those who do this professionally, or even do as you say and go read or take a class.

No one here really believes they have the next theory of relativity, if you want to be productive, stick to clarifying wrong suppositions or answering questions, not lecturing.

...Was written by Mr Einstien, Not Dr Einstien or Prof. Einstien. The Nobel-winning paper on the photoelectric effect was also written by Mr. Einstien.

A brilliant education is certainly helpful, but it's no substitute for a brilliant mind.

My question was, does this fit in with any actual theories in physics. Basically I am wondering if there are any concepts like this, and if so, point me in the right direction to read about them.

I never suggested I had stumbled upon some new insight. I was merely curious if this idea holds any merit whatsoever. I respect science. I know that physicists know infinitely more than I do about this sort of thing, but I'm STILL curious about it. The public at large doesn't give a shit about these sorts of questions, and I'm met with too many blank stares when I try to talk about this sort of thing.

In his book Black Holes and Baby Universes, Hawking goes through the possibility of black holes being links to other universes instead of just a sort of extradimensional pit.

The good news: Hawking concedes that, yes, it would be possible to travel to another universe through a "wormhole" (a theoretical black hole connecting two universes)

The bad news: The gravitational forces of the black hole would rip your body into each of its individual atoms as you travel through, utterly disintegrating you before spewing you out through a "white hole" (like wormholes, purely theoretical -- no white hole has ever been documented) on the other side.

So, while it may be possible to travel from one dimension or universe to another in this fashion, you probably wouldn't enjoy the ride.

we just need someone to "transport" us through then :P that way we are already dematerialized!

Although rematerialization may be a bit tricky! lol

I think the jury is still out on what happens when you go into and through a black hole. I think the day before I die, I wish I could be shot through one so I could see what happens for myself...or not...either way, worm food in the ground or spaghetti in the black hole, I'd be dead sooner or later.

Hidden Dimensions is a guide to understanding that which can't be conceived by using analaogies and metaphors on the multiverse. It is written by Lisa Randall of MIT & Harvard. She explains the use of the uncertainty principle as well for the general reader. She is a particle physcist so the minute has her interest and that is where the math of quantum mechanics can send you into a black hole.

Still waiting on that grand unified theory though...:freak:

The matter in the universe was in fact more dense in the past than it is now -- as time passes, the matter density drops steadily, because the Universe is expanding. That does have some connection to galaxy formation, though probably not as much as you might think.

Galaxies formed due to gravitational attraction (including that of dark matter). Matter wants to clump together. More clumping happened early in the universe when the matter density was higher. However, the original "seeds" came from amplification of quantum fluctuations during a period of enormous expansion very early.

Most galaxies do, in fact, have supermassive black holes at their centers. However, those black holes formed from the collapse of matter that accumulated at the center of the galaxy, where the gravitational attraction was strongest. The "swirls" (spiral arms) are generally believed to be the consequence of galactic mergers, i.e. two or more galaxies collide and merge, and the gravitational interactions among their matter and their dark halos (all galaxies have dark halos) create the spiral arms.

The biggest galaxies are actually football-shaped. They are the result of many collisions and mergers and typically reside at the centers of large galaxy clusters. They also have really big black holes at their centers.

Any matter than falls into a black hole is simply crushed at the center to whatever the highest possible density is. It doesn't go into any other dimensions.

The 11-dimensional models usually have 10 "spacelike" and 1 "timelike" dimension (i.e. there are still space and time). The other other space dimensions are "compactified" into extremely tiny lengths. So they're all around us--we just can't directly observe them.

> They also have really big black holes at their centers.
...
> Any matter than falls into a black hole is simply crushed at the center
> to whatever the highest possible density is. It doesn't go into any other
> dimensions.
...

The starting point of any factual explanation is a 'hypothesis'.
If consistently supported by evidence, it becomes more acceptable.

In the meantime, it is a fancy name for a 'guess' and so as long as
people understand this - i.e., appreciate that neither repetition
nor past qualification actually strengthen the argument in the
absence of factual evidence - then there is no problem whatsoever.

The *fact* is that the object described as a "black hole" is
defined by an event horizon across which no light (nor other form
of information, recent hypotheses notwithstanding) can cross.

In the absence of contrary information, your guess is as good as
mine ... or the OPs or the muttering old guy picking up things from
the gutter in the middle of the night ...