"The Big Crunch" --Supercomputer Predicts Universe Had 10 Dimernsions at Big Bang

                    

A group of three researchers from the High-Energy Accelorator Research Organization (KEK), Shizuoka University and Osaka University has for the first time revealed the way our universe was born with 3 spatial dimensions from 10-dimensional superstring theory in which spacetime has 9 spatial directions and 1 temporal direction, obtained by numerical simulation on a supercomputer.  

According to "Standard Model" cosmology, the universe originated in an explosion from an invisibly tiny point. This theory is strongly supported by observation of the cosmic microwave background and the relative abundance of elements. However, a situation in which the whole universe is a tiny point exceeds the reach of Einstein's general theory of relativity, and for that reason it has not been possible to confirm how the universe actually originated.

In superstring theory, which is considered to be the "theory of everything", all the elementary particles are represented as various oscillation modes of very tiny strings. Among those oscillation modes, there is one that corresponds to a particle that mediates gravity, and thus the general theory of relativity can be naturally extended to the scale of elementary particles. 

Therefore, it is expected that superstring theory allows the investigation of the birth of the universe. However, actual calculation has been intractable because the interaction between strings is strong, so all investigation thus far has been restricted to discussing various models or scenarios.

Superstring theory predicts a space with 9 dimensions, which poses the big puzzle of how this can be consistent with the 3-dimensional space that we live in.

A group of 3 researchers, Jun Nishimura (associate professor at KEK), Asato Tsuchiya (associate professor at Shizuoka University) and Sang-Woo Kim (project researcher at Osaka University) has succeeded in simulating the birth of the universe, using a supercomputer for calculations based on superstring theory. This showed that the universe had 9 spatial dimensions at the beginning, but only 3 of these underwent expansion at some point in time.

In this study, the team established a method for calculating large matrices (in the IKKT matrix model), which represent the interactions of strings, and calculated how the 9-dimensional space changes with time. In the figure, the spatial extents in 9 directions are plotted against time.

If one goes far enough back in time, space is indeed extended in 9 directions, but then at some point only 3 of those directions start to expand rapidly. This result demonstrates, for the first time, that the 3-dimensional space that we are living in indeed emerges from the 9-dimensional space that superstring theory predicts.

This calculation was carried out on the supercomputer Hitachi SR16000 (theoretical performance: 90.3 TFLOPS) at the Yukawa Institute for Theoretical Physics of Kyoto University.

It is almost 40 years since superstring theory was proposed as the theory of everything, extending the general theory of relativity to the scale of elementary particles. However, its validity and its usefulness remained unclear due to the difficulty of performing actual calculations. The newly obtained solution to the space-time dimensionality puzzle strongly supports the validity of the theory.

Furthermore, the establishment of a new method to analyze superstring theory using computers opens up the possibility of applying this theory to various problems. For instance, it should now be possible to provide a theoretical understanding of the inflation that is believed to have taken place in the early universe, and also the accelerating expansion of the universe, whose discovery earned the Nobel Prize in Physics this year. 

It is expected that superstring theory will develop further and play an important role in solving such puzzles in particle physics as the existence of the dark matter that is suggested by cosmological observations, and the Higgs particle, which is expected to be discovered by LHC experiments.

The Daily Galaxy via KEK

Early Universe image credit: Adolf Schaller/NASA-MSFC)

Comments

[Payner]

what the fuck is a "Dimernsions" lol

[Stephen]

Just a nit. The cosmic microwave background radiation has been coming towards us in more or less straight lines for 13.7 billion years. So, the Universe was at least that large at that time. If the Universe was a dot at the start, it would have been perhaps 700,000 light years across at last scattering (something like 350,000 years after the start) - much smaller than 13.7 billion light years (times at least 2) in size. If the Universe started as a dot, we wouldn't see the cosmic microwave background radiation today in an essentially flat Universe, such as the one we seem to be in.

It's more correct to say that the Universe started very hot and dense, or that all of the stuff in the currently visible Universe was contained in a very small point at the start.

One interesting upshot of this is that the Universe must be vastly larger than the bit of it that we can currently see. Before telescopes, people doubted that stars were like the Sun, only farther away. They'd have to be unimaginably far away to be so dim. I mean, how do you write the number "one trillion" in Roman numerals? Today, we call big numbers "astronomical". In the late 1800's, spectroscopy showed us that the "spiral nebulae" were star like, not gas like in nature. Many speculated that they were galaxies like our own. In 1925, Hubble presented his variable star findings, proving that these things are indeed galaxies. This made the Universe much bigger. As instruments have improved, the Universe has gotten even bigger. It isn't known for sure if the Universe is infinite in size. Even "astronomical" isn't big enough anymore, and there's talk of "cosmological distances".

A home computer with 4 cores can easily have 10 GIPS, about 1/1000th of the performance of this supercomputer and yet cost well under $1000. That doesn't count the performance of the video card, which can be 10 to 100 times faster, if you can make use of it. I can hardly wait for big simulations to take place on video cards. Download the CUDA SDK and start coding.

[Nebula0024]

What's a "Dimernsions"? Is that kind of like Dimensions?

[MAC]

Another nit: You can't actually "predict" something that already happened. Might want to go with "theorizes" or some such.

[mpknap]

our universe is a sim city of good. we'r in computer simulation. ;)

[qed]

" The cosmic microwave background radiation has been coming towards us in more or less straight lines for 13.7 billion years. So, the Universe was at least that large at that time. If the Universe was a dot at the start, it would have been perhaps 700,000 light years across at last scattering (something like 350,000 years after the start) - much smaller than 13.7 billion light years (times at least 2) in size. If the Universe started as a dot, we wouldn't see the cosmic microwave background radiation today in an essentially flat Universe."

One-word answer: Inflation.

[smartypants]

You know, it is possible that in 20 years the school kids will all laugh loud when someone mentions "big bang" and "inflation" and especially loud when someone brings up the "dimernsions".
Also, has anyone ever pinpointed the location the big bang was suppose to of happened? I mean other than being the probable center of the universe and a big boost towards the big bang theory, it might be useful for exo galactic navigation. I realize we are still a few weeks from needing anything like this, but still.

[God]

Instead of looking outward, my children, look inside. The entire Universe, after all, exists entirely in the mind.

[Ivar Nielsen]

KISS – KEEP IT SIMLPE STUPID . . .

From http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/String_theory#Cosmology – “String theory as currently understood makes a series of predictions for the structure of the universe at the largest scales. Many phases in string theory have very large, positive vacuum energy. Regions of the universe that are in such a phase will inflate exponentially rapidly in a process known as eternal inflation. As such, the theory predicts that most of the universe is very rapidly expanding. However, these expanding phases are not stable, and can decay via the nucleation of bubbles of lower vacuum energy. Since our local region of the universe is not very rapidly expanding, string theory predicts we are inside such a bubble”.

Why make it all so complicated and speculative?

1) Instead of thinking “strings”, think large connected cosmic filaments in the Universe.
2) Instead of thinking “local bubbles”, think electromagnetic circuit knots between these filaments.
3) Instead of thinking “many dimensions”, think 1 dimension and 1 Universe.
4) Instead of thinking a (BB) beginning, think eternal and cyclical formation.
5) Instead of thinking just expansion, think of universal formation movements of both expansion and contraction.
6) Instead of automatically and traditional thinking “gravity”, think electric explosions as creating molecular thermodynamics; hydrodynamics; electro-magneto-dynamics and nuclear dynamics.

Imaging that we are located in such a magnetic local knot/circuit: The movement in such a 3 D Cell-like knot can go from within the centre and out from the centre, creating both acceleration and deceleration velocity which can give the optical illusion of both an “expanding and a contraction Universe”. But such a local movement cannot of course be taken as evidence for the Universe in whole – this is just a local movement in the local electromagnetic knot in the Universe.

Ivar Nielsen
Natural Philosopher

[smartypants]

Ivar
It all sounds interesting, just 1 criticism.
On #6 the simplest would be the traditional thinking on gravity. For my little brain it seems a lot simpler than electric explosions as creating molecular thermodynamics; hydrodynamics; electro-magneto-dynamics and nuclear dynamics.
#5 seems kinda logical. I had a thought that how a nuclear blast expands then pulls back. May be the same kind of principle from the big bang (not that I am positive I believe in the big bang) that is pulling our galaxys towards "the great attractor". Have to wait for next batch of drugs to ponder more into it.

[Knize10]

Has to be Chinese cut and paste, failure every time.

[Mike h]

Let's program a computer with what we think we know about physics now to tell us something we don't know about physics. Just brilliant!

[Christopher Carr]

@qed

"Also, has anyone ever pinpointed the location the big bang was suppose to of happened? I mean other than being the probable center of the universe and a big boost towards the big bang theory, it might be useful for exo galactic navigation."

You are imagining that the universe is expanding into already-existing space. The idea is that space itself is expanding.

There is no "center;" look in any direction and you are looking back in time. At the largest scales, everything is getting farther apart from everything else. Where is the "center" of the surface of an expanding balloon?

[smartypants]

Christopher
I think it is you that is thinking wrong. qed kinda thinks that the center of the surface of an expanding balloon in inside. Whether the space is all-ready existing or expanding, why wouldnt the big bang location A: be locatable? B: Be the center or close to? From qeds understanding, there was nothing before the big bang, the big bang happened, and everything expanded out. Maybe not out in a perfect ball but out none the less. We are not riding along on the skin of spacetime, we are inside with all the rest of the filling. qed does agree with you that where ever you look you are looking back in time because that is the nature of light. Other than that ged thinks the rest is a different direction of what he was looking for. OK, where qed wrote universe, i dont think he meant milky way. I am pretty sure he meant all of everything inside the "balloon" that is expanding space. Personally I am not 100% sure of the big bang BUT I dont have anything better to claim so I wont argue about that right now. I am sure though that qed enjoys any input that makes him think so I will thank you for him.

[james]

@Christopher

Instead of being 3D think of space beinig only 2D and on the serface of a sphere (this would be a bounded model for the univere.) before inflation starts the universe is a 1D point as it inflates it becomes a sphere that the 2D space is the skin of to the beings inside this 2D space time there is no center as the true center is outside their 2D universe. also even if the univeres is not bounded if the expantion rate is equel to or grater than the speed of light then it would be imposable to see the entire univese since would take more time then the history of the univeres to see its egde.

[smartypants]

james
Why think 2d? Bounded or not we are clearly inside 3d spatial space. We would be inside the balloon wouldnt we? I agree there would be no center on a 2d model but so what? I just dont see what your point is. How about a little more info?