New theory of the universe. A bubble floating in a high (4th?) dimension

https://phys.org/news/2018-12-univer...dimension.html

Interesting, but I still think nk string theory prevails. If they could find a way to measure gravity bleed into the dimension, it would be a great first step.

If you don't mind the math, the pre-print is available.

On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 06:51:31 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

https://phys.org/news/2018-12-univer...dimension.html

Interesting, but I still think nk string theory prevails. If they could find a way to measure gravity bleed into the dimension, it would be a great first step.

If you don't mind the math, the pre-print is available.

They are looking at a 5th dimensional de Sitter sphere. The expanding
bubble we're in is 4-dimensional.

On Sunday, December 30, 2018 at 11:05:00 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 06:51:31 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

https://phys.org/news/2018-12-univer...dimension.html

Interesting, but I still think nk string theory prevails. If they could find a way to measure gravity bleed into the dimension, it would be a great first step.

If you don't mind the math, the pre-print is available.

They are looking at a 5th dimensional de Sitter sphere. The expanding
bubble we're in is 4-dimensional.

Are we in it, or on it?

On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 08:11:41 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

On Sunday, December 30, 2018 at 11:05:00 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 06:51:31 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

https://phys.org/news/2018-12-univer...dimension.html

Interesting, but I still think nk string theory prevails. If they could find a way to measure gravity bleed into the dimension, it would be a great first step.

If you don't mind the math, the pre-print is available.

They are looking at a 5th dimensional de Sitter sphere. The expanding
bubble we're in is 4-dimensional.

Are we in it, or on it?

We're on the 3D spatial surface of a 4D sphere. Time is the radial
axis.

On Sunday, December 30, 2018 at 5:03:56 PM UTC, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 08:11:41 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

On Sunday, December 30, 2018 at 11:05:00 AM UTC-5, Chris L Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 06:51:31 -0800 (PST), RichA
wrote:

https://phys.org/news/2018-12-univer...dimension.html

Interesting, but I still think nk string theory prevails. If they could find a way to measure gravity bleed into the dimension, it would be a great first step.

If you don't mind the math, the pre-print is available.

They are looking at a 5th dimensional de Sitter sphere. The expanding
bubble we're in is 4-dimensional.

Are we in it, or on it?

We're on the 3D spatial surface of a 4D sphere. Time is the radial
axis.

Hey lad, go read about the evolution of the t-party or a joke that got out of hand -

https://www.newscientist.com/article...erland-solved/

Nobody really had a feel for why mathematicians can't grasp the difference between time and timekeeping, after all, timekeeping can be explained in a straightforward technical way.

Better be ruthless than pity an enormous waste of life and effort.

On Sunday, December 30, 2018 at 6:51:34 AM UTC-8, RichA wrote:
https://phys.org/news/2018-12-univer...dimension.html

Interesting, but I still think nk string theory prevails. If they could find a way to measure gravity bleed into the dimension, it would be a great first step.

If you don't mind the math, the pre-print is available.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TeJTt5QH5VA

On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 10:03:55 -0700, Chris L Peterson
wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 08:11:41 -0800 (PST), RichA

wrote:

On Sunday, December 30, 2018 at 11:05:00 AM UTC-5, Chris L
Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 06:51:31 -0800 (PST), RichA

wrote:

https://phys.org/news/2018-12-univer...dimension.html

Interesting, but I still think nk string theory prevails. If
they could find a way to measure gravity bleed into the dimension, it
would be a great first step.

If you don't mind the math, the pre-print is available.

They are looking at a 5th dimensional de Sitter sphere. The
expanding
bubble we're in is 4-dimensional.

Are we in it, or on it?

We're on the 3D spatial surface of a 4D sphere. Time is the radial
axis.

But we must be inside the 4D sphere or else we would have no future.

On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 08:38:10 +0100, Paul Schlyter
wrote:

On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 10:03:55 -0700, Chris L Peterson
wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 08:11:41 -0800 (PST), RichA

wrote:

On Sunday, December 30, 2018 at 11:05:00 AM UTC-5, Chris L
Peterson wrote:
On Sun, 30 Dec 2018 06:51:31 -0800 (PST), RichA

wrote:

https://phys.org/news/2018-12-univer...dimension.html

Interesting, but I still think nk string theory prevails. If
they could find a way to measure gravity bleed into the dimension, it
would be a great first step.

If you don't mind the math, the pre-print is available.

They are looking at a 5th dimensional de Sitter sphere. The
expanding
bubble we're in is 4-dimensional.

Are we in it, or on it?

We're on the 3D spatial surface of a 4D sphere. Time is the radial
axis.

But we must be inside the 4D sphere or else we would have no future.

No, we are on the surface. The surface is "now". The center is t=0
(actually, it is (0,0,0,0), the location of the Big Bang). The past is
inside the sphere, where it is not accessible to us.

The culmination of the 19th century mathematical pre-occupation with space-time was a 1898 science fiction novel 'The Time Machine' -

"‘Now, it is very remarkable that this is so extensively overlooked,’ continued the Time Traveller, with a slight accession of cheerfulness. ‘Really this is what is meant by the Fourth Dimension, though some people who talk about the Fourth Dimension do not know they mean it. It is only another way of looking at Time. There is no difference between time and any of the three dimensions of space"

https://www.bartleby.com/1000/1.html

In the early 20th century they re-worked Newton's absolute/relative definitions into a formal version of the science fiction novel -

https://www.bartleby.com/173/31.html


Of course people get some sort of perverse pleasure being caught up inside this celestial sphere RA/Dec bubble but this represents the concerns of theorists who were never astronomers anyway whether the world knows it or not.

I wouldn't care to burst the celestial bubble as it really isn't my business even though I can do it easily. It doesn't matter if it survives, the game is up nonetheless.

On Mon, 31 Dec 2018 09:28:28 -0700, Chris L Peterson
wrote:
But we must be inside the 4D sphere or else we would have no
future.

No, we are on the surface. The surface is "now". The center is t=0
(actually, it is (0,0,0,0), the location of the Big Bang). The past
is
inside the sphere, where it is not accessible to us.

Which means that in one second we will be almost one lunar distance
outside this sphere? Since outside the sphere is where the future is.