New Year's 1925: Hubble's Discovery Reveals the Immense Scale of the Cosmos
You Create the Caption

Was Our Universe Created By a Collision With a Parallel Universe? Two of the World's Leading Physicists Present a Radical Theory

Galaxy-am-0500-620 String theorists Neil Turok of Cambridge University and Paul Steinhardt, Albert Einstein Professor in Science and Director of the Princeton Center for Theoretical Science at Princeton believe that the cosmos we see as the Big Bang was actually created by the cyclical trillion-year collision of two universes (which they define as three-dimensional branes plus time) that were attracted toward each other by the leaking of gravity out of one of the universes. 

In their view of the universe the complexities of an inflating universe after a Big Bang are replaced by a universe that was already large. flat, and uniform with dark energy as the effect of the other universe constantly leaking gravity into our own and driving its acceleration. According to this theory, the Big Bang was not the beginning of time but the bridge to a past filled with endlessly repeating cycles of evolution, each accompanied by the creation of new matter and the formation of new galaxies, stars, and planets. 

Turok and Steinhardt were inspired by a lecture given by Burt Ovrut who imagined two branes, universes like ours, separated by a tiny gap as tiny as 10-32 meters. There would be no communictaion between the two universes except for our parallel sister universe's gravitational pull, which could cross the tiny gap. 

Orvut's theory could explain the effect of dark matter where areas of the universe are heavier than they should be given everything that's present. With their theory, the nagging problems surrounding the Big Bang (beginning from what, and caused how?) are replaced by an eternal cosmic cycle where dark energy is no longer a mysterious unknown quantity, but rather the very extra gravitational force that drives the universe to universe (brane-brane) interaction. 

Casey Kazan 



Mostly about Africa. White man's guilt I guess. Never does he mention the the real cause. Brown on brown war. Marxist / socialist governments. Other than that skip it, it barely touches on the above subject.

Neil Turok: What a fascinating story! What a wonderful plan! One just has to support it and if it is only to post this site and have other people see this great video, this great speech. Yes, Africa will make a difference in this world soon. It is a vision on the way to become true.
This shows what a difference one man - Neil Turok - can make.

Oh Mannnnnnnn....Less Africa and more Branes.......Fred Hoyle would be happy with this theory....a static or eternal universe!!!! Wow what a concept...the universe has always been here...hey wait one....didn't Fred come up with this one? I have read books by several of these Brane Guys and they are all the same, but I am not sold as yet. Anything to explain string theory. Oh by the way I get lots of emails from Africa...but they are all trying to sell me some scam....

Maybe our universe is mating with another universe. That would explain a lot, wouldn't it?

A mere waste of funds on the chairs... We could be doing something more meaningful even if not useful.

By the way, what is the meaning of distance when we don't even understand it in our local space, to talk about it in the past (10 to 32 meters, huh...?)

It is disastorous to see such postings even in the net when there are enough "Scientific" periodicals, edited by close knit groups who keeps publishing these alreay year after year (I have glimpsed through these for the last two decades) - may not even be a good fit for a SciFi movie...

May be we should reduce science to take a voting of people (and implying the broadcasting and voicing of the various parties concerned) on whether this is so or not... A shame on how all we humans in some/any way could make our ends meet! Why not sell shrimps?

I can not stop myself from doing this - You could as well take this as imaginary and I request you to do so...

Back in time there was a presentation of a similar kind, where some our research students planned to pose specific and basic questions (just for fun) to the author of the presentation (and related to the theory he is working on) who is one of the leading scientist (sic) in this field (well, sadly string theory).

He could not only answer any of the basic questions (reflecting also his lack of basic physics knowledge), he ventured to answer that this involved higher mathematics (which anyway we knew is not true as all of us are theoretical physicists with a good background of advanced mathematics).

The joke of the day was when one of our favourite colleague asked him (literally told him) that while it may be advanced mathematics that he is indulging in can he multiply 111 with 316 and tell us the answer (multiplication involving numbers such as 111 has a simple construct) - we had a day of our life time that day when the person stood stumbling in the podium... (There were many local 'string theorist' who were angry with us for years on this issue)

Folks, let's get away with this... There is also a Swamiji who is part of a gang (?) doing a 26 dimensional stuff to bring about an all-inclusive theory and funded by some governments...! (People should understand that finding a link to connect the weak and electromagnetic interactions does not imply that we can connect everything else - unless we straighten our mathematics or our lack of attention in funding it. We say of funding to fundamental science as the corner stone to advances in our technology, but fundamental sciences depend on mathematics to advance themselves...) I hope at least somebody understand's this...

Well, still I am not satisfied against the kind of science that you people are harbouring - while giving a picture of two closely viewed galaxies (I presume that they don't even belong to the same cluster - no captions given, it is not even one of the colliding galaxies (as per search in NASA); just probably an optical alignment) which is too small and far, far, far... from the theories of universe - what is being attempted here - to get mass votes?

Branes - whatever it is, is brainless is obvious...

K Sundar,

WHAT??? Do you 'speak' fluent English or are you just 'playing at it'??

Please read my theory of gravitoethertons and balloon inside balloon theory published in year 2002.

Ok, there is no evidence to support this theory at all. To sugest there is an infinite number of parallel universe's seems wierd and against science. The word science means observation. How can they observe something without seeing it, or having maths to prove them? We know Einstien's theory of relativity is right because it is proven through maths.
Also how did the first universe start? How did it collode with another to make another if it was the only one? How many of these universe's are there that keep growing? How did these phsicists come up with the idea? Is there an infinite number of me? Does this mean life is worthless if another one of me survives then can't I just kill myself and become him? Can't I just now kill everyone because they have an infinite number of twins somewhere having fun?
Science needs to get back on track and realise why it's called science. The chance that life is random in this universe in 1 to the power of 46thousand! a number with fortysix thousand digits on the end! The number of atoms in the universe is 10 to the power of 78 or 80 way not enough.
There would have to be fortysix thousand universe's for 1 universe with life and so each universe can't have parallel's with this one.
Also Thermaldynamics (laws of science) state that time, space and matter didn't come into exitence before the universe, so if 2 univere's colloded that had time, space and matter than some of the laws of science go down the drain.
This theory contradicts everything about science, and the scary thing is, is that many scientists say it's true because they 'feel' like they should have been somewhere else, so because they feel it a parallel universe must exist.
Well how about being somewhere where you don't make up stupid science? Or maybe it was heaven or grandma's house, instead of making up this theory.

Finger skate are used by a range of people from those utilizing them as toys to skateboarding and related sports professionals envisioning not only their own skating maneuvers but for others as well and can include the use for planning out competition courses as skating boarding develops into an international sport.

Skate with your fingers, another feeling

donate to my scientific research.

paypal info :

Verify your Comment

Previewing your Comment

This is only a preview. Your comment has not yet been posted.

Your comment could not be posted. Error type:
Your comment has been posted. Post another comment

The letters and numbers you entered did not match the image. Please try again.

As a final step before posting your comment, enter the letters and numbers you see in the image below. This prevents automated programs from posting comments.

Having trouble reading this image? View an alternate.


Post a comment

Your Information

(Name is required. Email address will not be displayed with the comment.)