Astronomy without a telescope - bubblology

July 25, 2011 By Steve Nerlich, Universe Today
Multiverse hypotheses suggest that bubble universes should eventually interact and we should be able to determine the existence of the multiverse from such interactions. Credit:

One model of a hypothetical multiverse has, perhaps appropriately, some similarity to a glass of beer. Imagine an eternal false vacuum – that’s a bit like a fluid, though not all that much like a fluid – since it doesn’t have volume, in fact it doesn’t have any spatial dimensions. Then imagine that this eternal false vacuum expands.

This sounds rather contradictory since expansion implies there are spatial dimensions, but a string theorist will assure you that it all happens at the sub-Planck scale, where lots of immeasurable and unknowable things can happen – and after a few more drinks you might be willing to go along with this.

So – next, we introduce bubbles to the false vacuum. The bubbles – which are essentially independent baby universes – are true vacuums and can rationally and reasonably expand since they have four overt dimensions of space-time – albeit they may also have the other immeasurable and unknowable dimensions in common with the encompassing false vacuum.

The bubbles are the reason why it is necessary for the false vacuum to expand, indeed it must expand faster than the bubbles – otherwise an expanding bubble universe could ‘percolate’ – that is, spread throughout the all-encompassing false vacuum – so that your multiverse would just become a universe. And where’s the fun in that?

Anyhow, within such an eternal expanding fluid, bubble universes may nucleate at random points – taking us away from the coffee analogy and back to the beer. In bubblology terms, nucleation is the precursor of inflation. The sub-Planck energy of the non-dimensional false vacuum occasionally suffers a kind of hiccup – perhaps a quantum tunnelling event – making the sub-Planck virtual nothingness commence a slow roll down a potential energy hill (whatever the heck that means).

The light cone of our bubble universe showing the stages of the energy release driving cosmic inflation (reheating), the surface of last scattering (recombination) and the subsequent disolution of the cosmic fog (reionisation) - cosmic microwave background photons from the surface of last scattering could show signs of a collision with an adjacent bubble universe. Credit: Kleban.

At a certain point in that slow roll, the energy level shifts from a sub-Planck potential-ness into a supra-Planck actual-ness. This shift from sub-Planck to supra-Planck is thought to be a kind of phase transition from something ephemeral to a new ground state of something lasting and substantial – and that phase transition releases heat, kind of like how the phase transition from water to ice releases latent heat.

And so you get the characteristic production of a gargantuan amount of energy out of nothing, which we denizens of our own bubble universe parochially call the Big Bang – being the energy that drove an exponential cosmic inflation of our own bubble, that exponential inflation lasting until the energy density within the bubble was cool enough to form matter – in an e=mc2 kind of way. And so another bubble of persistent somethingness formed within the eternal beer of nothingness.

Good story, huh? But, where’s the evidence? Well, there is none, but despite the usual criticisms lobbed at string theorists this is an area where they attempt to offer testable predictions.

Within a , one or more collisions with another bubble universe are almost inevitable given the beer-mediated timeframe of eternity. Such an event may yet lie in our future, but could equally lie in our past – the fact that we are still here indicating (anthropically) that such a collision may not be fatal.

A collision with another bubble might pass unnoticed if it possessed exactly the same cosmological constant as ours and its contents were roughly equivalent. The bubble wall collision might appear as a blue-shifted circle in the sky – perhaps like the Cold Spot in the cosmic microwave background, although this is most likely the result of a density fluctuation within our own universe.

We could be in trouble if an adjacent universe’s bubble wall pushed inwards on a trajectory towards us – and if it moved at the speed of light we wouldn’t see it until it hit. Even if the wall collision was innocuous, we might be in trouble if the adjacent universe was filled with antimatter. It’s these kind of factors that determine what we might observe – and whether we might survive such an, albeit hypothetical, event.

Explore further: Scientists find first evidence that many universes exist

More information: Matthew Kleban, Cosmic Bubble Collisions -

Related Stories

Scientists find first evidence that many universes exist

December 17, 2010

( -- By looking far out into space and observing what’s going on there, scientists have been led to theorize that it all started with a Big Bang, immediately followed by a brief period of super-accelerated ...

Holographic dark information energy

May 30, 2011

Holographic Dark Information Energy gets my vote for the best mix of arcane theoretical concepts expressed in the shortest number of words – and just to keep it interesting, it’s mostly about entropy.

Doubly special relativity

March 21, 2011

General relativity, Einstein’s theory of gravity, gives us a useful basis for mathematically modeling the large scale universe – while quantum theory gives us a useful basis for modeling sub-atomic particle physics ...

Big rips and little rips

July 4, 2011

One of a number of seemingly implausible features of dark energy is that its density is assumed to be constant over time. So, even though the universe expands over time, dark energy does not become diluted, unlike the rest ...

Dark statistics

March 28, 2011

The hypothetical dark flow seen in the movement of galaxy clusters requires that we can reliably identify a clear statistical correlation in the motion of distant objects which are, in any case, flowing outwards with the ...

Astronomy without a telescope -- Through a lens darkly

December 6, 2010

Massive galactic clusters – which are roughly orientated in a plane that is roughly face-on to Earth – can generate strong gravitational lensing. However, several surveys of such clusters have reached the conclusion ...

Recommended for you

Fast radio bursts may be firing off every second

September 21, 2017

When fast radio bursts, or FRBs, were first detected in 2001, astronomers had never seen anything like them before. Since then, astronomers have found a couple of dozen FRBs, but they still don't know what causes these rapid ...

Ageing star blows off smoky bubble

September 20, 2017

Astronomers have used ALMA to capture a strikingly beautiful view of a delicate bubble of expelled material around the exotic red star U Antliae. These observations will help astronomers to better understand how stars evolve ...


Adjust slider to filter visible comments by rank

Display comments: newest first

4.7 / 5 (6) Jul 25, 2011
" and after a few more drinks you might be willing to go along with this."

I know that the author shouldn't place his opinion about string theory in this article, but... That was terribly funny.
5 / 5 (2) Jul 25, 2011
I have brewed beer at home does that make me (a) God?

So if God tops up his Stella Artois with some Etoile du Nord, string theorist will finally get to party?
not rated yet Jul 26, 2011
I posit the universe is nucleating in a nice creamy Oatmeal stout.

Wait till it starts to cavitate, then we're really screwed.
3 / 5 (2) Jul 26, 2011
"Sub-Planck energy", "non-dimensional false vacuum", and "one or more collisions with another bubble universe are almost inevitable" - do we need more to tell unfalsifiable fairy tales?
How do we define "collision" in a non-dimensional false vacuum?
1 / 5 (1) Jul 26, 2011
It should be "zero-dimensional false vacuum!" That way one can go from zero to one to two. Get it?

The sub-Planck realm contains a potential energy not mentioned in this article.
not rated yet Aug 04, 2011
At last, people are taking the idea of multiple universes seriously. For decades I have been telling how we are living in just one universe (our collections of galaxies), while there are other universes existing all around our own.

I have likened space to a fireworks display, where there are big bangs going off all the time, pushing against each other, pushing each bang further away from the next.

And now someone has taken my theory and turned it into bubbles. The exact same theory I had decades ago about everything being like an Aero chocolate bar.

I posted the theory that Black Holes existed at the heart of galaxies decades ago, and again it was someone else who ran with my theory.

It just goes to show how theorist like myself are ignored, until someone with even a modicum of a reputation decides to run with it.

It really is a shame for people like myself, as there are thousands of us, who cannot get their theories heard.

Universe Theorist

Stephen Peel

Please sign in to add a comment. Registration is free, and takes less than a minute. Read more

Click here to reset your password.
Sign in to get notified via email when new comments are made.