[SinJin]

Hi. I'm not sure if this is a TOE or not, but I wanted to mention it anyways.

At the beginning of the universe, everything was in a highly ordered state. Since then, the amount of disorder has been increasing. Well, before the big bang, what if all that existed was an infinite field of energy, ordered at the highest possible level. Then there was a flux in the energy, which was the big bang, and the order started to decrease, resulting in the birth of our universe. The order continues to decrease for ever and ever...

Except that if it continues to decrease forever, forever implies infinity. On an infinite timeline, everything will happen, including an end. So if the universe continues for an infinite amount of time towards an increase of entropy, or decrease in order, then on that inifnite timeline it'll eventually return to it's original ultimately ordered state. And then there will eventually be a flux again, and the big bang will occure, and so forth.

So in other words, all that energy that became disordered and created the universe wants to eventually return to it's ultimately ordered state.

Please let me know what you think. I'm not sure if this theory is original or not, or if it's even a theory...

[Guille]

I'm not sure if a system can become more ordered in the pass of time..... Someone knows about this?


Do convert it into a T.O.E. you would need to have atleast some ideas about forces.....what do you think about them (in your theory)?

[SinJin]

From what I've read, disordered states can become ordered, however it is very unlikely. But the possibility is there. So on an infinite timeline, it will eventually return to it's ordered state (ending the universe), only to become disordered again (creating a new universe.)

If this cycle continues on forever, then eventually all possible universes will come into existence, including one with four fundemental forces. At some point there will be a universe with eight fundemental forces, and one with a thousand forces, and one with no forces! I don't want skirt the issue of why our universe has four forces, and why gravity does this and why the nuclear bonds do that, but if you're talking about an infinite amount of universes then eventually every possible universe will happen, and hence no reason to try determining why ours is the way it is. It's just one in infinity...

[subversion]

Originally Posted by SinJin

At the beginning of the universe, everything was in a highly ordered state. Since then, the amount of disorder has been increasing. Well, before the big bang, what if all that existed was an infinite field of energy, ordered at the highest possible level. Then there was a flux in the energy, which was the big bang, and the order started to decrease, resulting in the birth of our universe. The order continues to decrease for ever and ever...

Except that if it continues to decrease forever, forever implies infinity. On an infinite timeline, everything will happen, including an end. So if the universe continues for an infinite amount of time towards an increase of entropy, or decrease in order, then on that inifnite timeline it'll eventually return to it's original ultimately ordered state. And then there will eventually be a flux again, and the big bang will occure, and so forth.

I think it's an interesting concept. Still though, it suffers from the dillemma of null causality. In other words, what triggered the energy flux from an otherwise quiescent uniform field of energy? Also, at what point and in what manner does the universe go from becoming more disordered to becoming more ordered?

[Guille]

But, how are you going to deal with infinities. indeterminates, etz...? hese are exactl what we are trying to escape from. TOE should explain nature and infinity isn't nature or natural.

[SinJin]

When I thought about this theory, I was aiming for something more abstract. I thought one way to try and determine a TOE was to start from the outside and work inward, i.e. outside of the universe, instead of working from the inside out. Or course it's easier to work from the inside out, because we live on the inside and thus have access to it. We don't have access to the outside, aside from indirect observation, and so need to use abstract thought if taking that route.

I figured the best question to ask when starting with the outside of the universe is if anything exists. If nothing exists, and there is only our universe and nothing else, then determining why our physical constants and fundemental forces are the way they are would be very important. If, however, there is something outside our universe, then the question is... what? More universes? Energy? A giant chicken? And whatever is outside the universe, is it limited?

Basically I think the two most important possibilities of our existence are - a) We live in a finite world created from infinity? or b) Infinity doesn't exist, and there is some sort of limit (even if it may not seem like one because it's cyclical.) Unfortunately I don't see how either of these possibilities could be proven, but if they could I think it would determine alot about how the quest for a TEO would unfold.

[Guille]

Infinity can't be proven: this is why it is NOT scientific (or mathematical, or real, or natural).

This is why theories about infinity aqr eos abstract. There is no problem in your otuwards-inwards manner, it is very original. But dealing with infinity, no method works.

[subversion]

Originally Posted by SinJin

If, however, there is something outside our universe, then the question is... what? More universes? Energy? A giant chicken?

Ha ha, that was funny. Oh wait, actually you might be on to something! A GIANT CHICKEN! that's IT!

[Epslion]

I understand that the concept of an infinite timeline would yield all possible universes. What if one of the universes (behaviors, laws, or what ever you want to call it) did not make it more disorderly. It made it become more orderly, and the universe that preceded it was becoming more disorderly. Then the universes would push the "timeline" to a stand still where order is non-existent (because both “order directions” are pushing in opposite directions).

[Guille]

Or maybe each eliminates each other by pushing into the other's direction. This could also be, no?