All news
Universe Where Time Flows Backwards Discovered: It's on the Other Side of the Big Bang
On the other side of the Big Bang is another universe where time runs backwards. This intriguing concept of existence has been put forward by astrophysicist Head. Neil Turok Department of Physics, University of Edinburgh. Although his new concept may “blow your mind”, he believes that it is much simpler than all other theories and can easily and naturally answer the most perplexing questions about existence. “It is time to throw off the straitjacket in which mental inertia has trapped us,” he says. The article was published in the journal Annals of Physics.
The universe is not at all surprised by what it has. And what it doesn't have.
All the laws of physics allow that time can go backwards, that every matter has its own antimatter, and that space can be curved in the strangest ways.
But our time moves only forward, and all attempts to come up with some clever options (for example, "you can go back, but you don't want to") fail. Antimatter is also not observed. All we have are rare elementary antiparticles passing through accelerators or cosmic radiation streams. Since antimatter should annihilate together with our matter, we should see explosions and catastrophes even in the most remote corners of space. And we do see it, but all this has nothing to do with half the world. Finally, our Universe is almost flat. Where is the riot of curvature?
But we are witnessing a strange phenomenon. For example, in some places, gravity becomes too strong, although there is no massive object as a source of gravity. We suspect that dark matter may be behind this, but we cannot detect it.
To explain all these paradoxes, physicists have proposed perhaps at least 100 explanations, ranging from the famous string theory to exotic phenomena you've probably never heard of.
Much of the concept is based on one idea: something happened during the Big Bang. Time running backwards, antimatter, warped space — it was all there. But it went somewhere. The Big Bang could be called the Big Anomaly. I had to create every possible entity, but for some reason only half were created.
Experimental physicists are often skeptical of theorists (“You never know what you can prove on paper”), but theorists have their own standards for what is true and what is false. Sure, you can write any formula you want, as long as it is not divisible by zero and the sign is correct when transmitted. But theorists have many ways to test their formulas without experimentation. And so far, no exotic hypothesis has passed this test.
A striking example is the famous string theory, which was very popular in the 90s. The essence seemed simple, and therefore, most likely, true. Not all the variety of elementary particles observed in accelerators exist. There is only one particle, a string, which vibrates differently, creating the illusion of different entities. Entire legions of theorists spent a lot of effort on the theory. Many young physicists linked their professional future with the theory.
But the fundamentally simple idea suddenly became more complex. After all, it had to explain how exactly one string transformed into different particles. Several schools emerged, many interpretations, and it became clear that string theory was going to die. These days, no one takes this seriously.
So, all that remains on the stage of the cosmic circus is the standard model, the construction of which was largely completed after the discovery of the Higgs boson. But it only explains what exists, not what does not exist.
There is a world in our world where if you have only one half of the world, you have the other half. The new concept seems very simple.
She suggests that at the moment when the Big Bang happened (if that's the correct way to say it), the Big Bang started expanding, so to speak, in two directions. In our side, there is no antimatter, space is flat, and time flows where it should. And time is inverted, and space is bizarre, as if antimatter is at the core, as if it is coming from us.
Of course, the "side" analogy is superficial for the sake of clarity. In fact, this universe exists as if it were on the other side of the Big Bang, and therefore does not exist in our world. I think we can get to another world through a black hole. And here's an interesting situation (Neil Turok didn't write about this, but we remembered).
The theory of relativity suggests that along with black holes, there are also white ones. You can't get out of black, you can't get into white, everything flies. White and black are connected by specific corridors. That is, if you are sucked in by black, you or what is left of you will be blown away by white. But in our world there is not a single white hole. This means that they exist in this universe. And this is where our black hole leads.
Neil Turok says his concept provides a simple and straightforward explanation for what usually requires complex and unstable configurations.
For example: Dark matter? Neutrinos, particles of very low mass, are ideal for this role. The problem is that in our universe there are only left-handed neutrinos (i.e. with a specific property understood simply as "spinning to the left"). This makes it difficult to attribute the role of neutrinos to dark matter. But now there is no doubt. Since there are only right-handed people in this universe, dark matter is neutrinos.
We also don't need dark energy, the hypothetical substance that drives the expanding universe. Space itself does that, and that's its property. And that's as long as space is oriented in the opposite direction and supplied with waves. It's like someone pulling a tablecloth in one corner of the table, and the fork and cup fly to the other corner.
Of course, I'm not sure that Neil Turok is right. His writings must pass through the crucible of criticism. And that, too, foretells something. The effect may be minimal, but we are not supposed to know that. And when it is discovered, the debate will only intensify.
For now, we can only imagine time flowing backwards. "About the Big Bang," Turok explains, thinking that everyone now understands. No.
Why Russian ships reach the ISS in 3 hours, while others take 2 days (more)