TED Conversations

Anh Vo

Ritsumeikan University APU

This conversation is closed.

The Hourglass Model


The idea first came to me when I read about the Randall-Sudrum model, a setup of two branes of which one is our universe (M-brane) and the other a gravity universe (G-brane). Even though our world, M-brane, is “supposed” to be an open, expanding universe with negative curvature of space because we can visibly count and see that there is not enough ordinary matter (stars, intergalactic gas, etc.) in this universe, it turned out that the WMAP and Planck spacecraft did measure the curvature to be nearly flat!

On the other hand, I noticed that if graviton is so densely concentrated in G-brane, its geometry should be different from that of M-brane. It should be a closed, contracting universe with positive curvature of space. So my hypothesis is that the curvatures of the two branes must have cancelled out each other and make our universe “look” flat. The appearance of this cancelling is dark matter and dark energy, which are energy oozing out from G-brane to M-brane.

Based on that, I suspect that our universe is cyclic: ever-increasing formation of dimension-tearing black holes which accelerate energy oozing will lead to an eventual collapse of the whole universe into a “5-dimensional soup,” which is so unstable that it immediately restructures back into the two-brane setup. if an observer can observe this Big Bounce event when the contracting G-brane and expanding M-brane bursting into two new branes, it would look like their contents have just swapped places.

Therefore, I call this model the Hourglass. It can provide explanation for the existence of dark energy, dark matter, and faster-than-light communication in quantum entanglement.


Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.

  • thumb
    Feb 10 2014: Anh, I have another thought for you. As you are at university in Japan, you might stop by the physics department and find a graduate student who studies theoretical particle physics. You might pose your question there.

    One of the often neglected advantages of being at university is that you have access to people who engage in rigorous formal study of theory and evidence and whose scientific training in this field has been vetted, as it were, by the university.

    Another author other than those I have referred you to already who is reliably expert in this area is Brian Green of Columbia University, which has one of the top theoretical physics departments in the world. Greene writes for the layperson, though, so anyone can understand his work.

    Good luck on getting fruitful feedback from someone well-versed in this area.
    • thumb

      Anh Vo

      • 0
      Feb 11 2014: Thank you Fritzie. My university is a business school and doesn't have a physics department.
      I read some books of Prof. Greene. He actually both popularize and mystify science with his multiverse explanations.
      Anyway, I used to send my inquiries directly to many professors but wasn't quite successful.
      Will not give up!

Showing single comment thread. View the full conversation.