Stephen Hawking has said it is theoretically possible to build

File: swf.gif (14KB, 205x147px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 205x147px

>>8972154
>*blocks your space ring*

>>8972154
>Stephan hawking said
>instantly dropped
Everything that dude said since he joined the Dawkins boy club is trash. Muh New universes. People who study physics don't come up with shit like that.

>>8972154
>False vacuum
There's literally no evidence we live in a false vacuum and there have been sufficiently large energy bursts in the history of the universe to have already unmade itself if we did.

>Interuniversal travel
Pure sci-fi theoretical physics.

>>8972154

Considering higher energy collisions are going on in the upper atmosphere, inside stars, and supernova, that seems unlikely

>>8972171
Quantum fluctuations are evidence for a false vacuum

>>8972154
stephen hawking is a crackpot

what about my higgs field

>>8972175
No they aren't.

>>8972200
*crackbot

>>8972171
Given the current values of [math]M_H[/math] and [math]m^{pole}_t[/math] there's actually a good chance we're in a false vacuum, unless there are unknown BSM things going on that would change this.

>>8972154
Hawking lost his mind somewhere along the way.

It should keep the next generation of physicists busy for many years, trying to figure out exactly at what point his theorizing became uncoupled from reality.

>>8972340
>there's actually a good chance we're in a false vacuum,

>there is not.

>>8972154
I wish that wheelchair monkey would just die. Imagine not being able to jerk yourself off. You would probably fantasize about planet destroying aliens, killer AI, mass plagues, universe annihilating particle accelerators and other existential risk too.

>>8973249
Not this >>8972340 guy, but why do you think he's wrong?

The latest results of the Higgs and top mass place the universe in a meta-stable state.
The stable state is still inside the error, but still.

>>8972154
That is obviously false.
The universe is so vast that there should exist some species willing to destroy it, for example because of some crazy religion.
But since we're still here it means that during the previous billions of years that didn't happen, which means it's not possible.

>>8972327
Kek

File: CMB-in-time.jpg (117KB, 800x800px) Image search: [Google]

117KB, 800x800px

>>8972154
The proposal as I've read it suggests that if you create a universe inside a universe, the new universe is effectively moving away from the source universe at faster than the speed of light. It doesn't replace the universe it spawned in, but is instantly separated from it. Universes could be being created inside our own all the time, with no noticeable effects.

I've never heard of any way to travel between two universes that isn't as physics breaking as any other idea for FTL travel.

>>8972171
Higgs is the evidence. There's no way to tell until we can measure the energy level of the top particle (which would require a collider even larger than the one OP is suggesting). If the universe is unraveling, it will unravel from the collapse point outward at the speed of light. As many of the galaxies are already redshifted "out of existence" any such cascade incidents that occurred in them may never reach of us. Not that you can't of course, have several such cascades in progress, but you can't observe them, as they expand at the speed of light.

Though, if you have some evidence that we do not live in a false vacuum, I'd be interested in reading about it.

Why has physics been nothing but theory for the past 50 years? When will all the bullshit we pay these people to write on paper actually produce any useful products? Seems like they're just making shit up these days.

>>8973485
Physics has been nothing but theory since its inception. Engineers make products, physicists just provide theoretical opportunities.

Does your phone's GPS work? Then that special relativity Einstein made so popular was useful - to some engineers. Does your microwave cook food? Well that's because the engineer Percy Spencer took James Clerk Maxwell's theories to pop an egg in his face. Does your internet work? Well that's because Abraham Van Heel, Harold. H. Hopkins, Elias Snitzer, and Dr. C.K. Kao all did some crazy math with no practical application due to the lack of relevant materials, and eventually some bastard engineers at Corning Glass came up with something to make use of it, and thus data carrying fiber optics were born (though that can all be traced to even more useless observations, by physicists, going back to the 1840's).

Physicists are the thinkers providing the groundwork for the engineers, who are the doers. Once in a grand while you get two in the same package, and there's always some overlap, but a hand with no brain, or visa versa, is rather useless.

>>8972154
Basically what this guy said >>8972174. Particle accelerators do nothing that doesn't happen all the time in the universe, it is just happening in a way we can watch it happen.

>>8973507
All work published over 50 years ago. And these people were doing maths on real things such as glass fibres and not fantasy bullshit like "multiverses"

>>8972175
>>8972175
There are no evidence of quantum fluctuation outside of the musing of theoretical physisists who literally pull shit out of their asses to make their theories somehow make sense to someone who wants to be appear smart.

Nerd culture and no lense glasses proved it's better to attempt at appearing intelligent than actually being intelligent.

>>8973544
Your waifu might live in another universe, anon.

>>8973808
my waifu is too perfect to exist.

File: 1493226667897.jpg (14KB, 200x200px) Image search: [Google]

14KB, 200x200px

>>8972154
Ahhh yes the physicist-shaman preaching about nonsense, as usual.

File: 1497222110624.png (12KB, 420x420px) Image search: [Google]

12KB, 420x420px

>>8972327
kek'd

File: X on SCI.png (31KB, 694x968px) Image search: [Google]

31KB, 694x968px

>>8972154

>>8973560
https://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/quantum-fluctuations-and-their-energy/
https://profmattstrassler.com/articles-and-posts/particle-physics-basics/virtual-particles-what-are-they/

File: science_is_boring-steinsgate.png (260KB, 892x500px) Image search: [Google]

260KB, 892x500px

>>8973544
Fiber optic data is less than fifty years old, as are the cell phones that make common use of that GPS. How often do you expect world altering inventions to happen anyways?

Besides, there's not a lot of physicists working on shit like multi-verse theory. It's just the media likes to hype on such things. There's plenty of theory being turned into inventions all the time - just the bulk of them tend to be rather boring and not easily turned into click-bait, or easily explained to the layman.

I mean how do you sell something like this to media consumers?
https://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/vaop/ncurrent/full/nphys4147.html

Plus, as I pointed out, a lot of these civilization-changing inventions are built on theories hundreds of years old that had no practical applications at the time. This century's crazy theory the next century's crazy invention.