Black Holes and the Birth of Our Universe? Making the Infinite Finite

There's a remarkable new theory out about the origins of our universe, space and time.  Nikodem Poplawski of Indiana University has just presented a paper in which he concludes: "Accordingly, our own Universe may be the interior of a black hole existing in another universe." For the original MIT blog piece go here.  For the July 4 abstract go here, which states:

"The Einstein-Cartan-Kibble-Sciama theory of gravity provides a simple scenario in early cosmology which is alternative to standard cosmic inflation and does not require scalar fields. The torsion of spacetime prevents the appearance of the cosmological singularity in the early Universe filled with Dirac particles averaged as a spin fluid. Instead, its expansion starts from a state at which the Universe has a minimum but finite radius. We show that the dynamics of the closed Universe immediately after this state naturally solves the flatness and horizon problems in cosmology because of an extremely small and negative torsion density parameter, $\Omega_S\approx -10^{-69}$. This scenario also suggests that the contraction of our Universe preceding the state of minimum radius could correspond to the dynamics of matter inside the event horizon of a newly formed black hole existing in another universe."

But beware!  The comments section is full of angry armchair physicist-critics shouting things like:

"Worst of all is the idea that somehow time has a direction of flow, i.e., an arrow. The idea that we are moving in time in one direction or another is a conceptual disaster. Why? Because time cannot change by definition. This is the reason that Karl Popper called spacetime "Einstein's block universe in which nothing happens" (source: Conjectures and Refutations). Absolutely nothing can move in spacetime for this reason. Why isn't Poplawski aware of this fact and how did his Star-Trek voodoo physics paper pass peer review? This is truly a sad commentary on the state of modern physics. This stuff is not even wrong. ... Physicists do not even understand motion and yet they feel confident enough to create all sorts of silliness like wormholes, multiple universes and time travel. How dare they think that they are qualified to teach us about the origin of the universe when they are wallowing in ignorance about the most basic aspects of the universe? Ask a physicist to explain why two bodies in relative inertial motion remain in motion and you'll come face to face with abject ignorance. ... Let me add that I am deeply disappointed that publications like TR are still printing such pseudoscientific fairy tales under the banner of legitimate science." 

This is followed by: "No, I would consider this being open minded, something it seems is lacking in today's world. Many theories have gone through stages of "crack-pottery" as you would call it. Quantum physics, Big Bang theory, theory of evolution, Chaos theory to name just a few areas of science that were considered "crack-pottery" at one time. Sign of a good scientist always keep an open mind until the theory is dis-proven."

And: "We followed Einsteins method and invented GPS. We followed Popper's method and created a criticism of Einstein. We followed Feyerabend's method and created a criticism of Popper! All have some value. Which will persist?"

And: "I happen to know that the reason that physicists still don't understand why the universe is probabilistic is that they are handicapped by their belief (mostly because of Einstein's influence) in the existence of a time dimension, a concept that is trivially easy to falsify. The number of things that are wrong with Einstein's physics are so numerous that it boggles the mind it is still considered one of the greatest achievements of 20th century science. Shame, really. The fact is that Einstein has shot physics in the foot and got everybody chasing after a red herring for a hundred years. Fortunately, this is the beginning of the end of the Einstein era. Sooner than you think."

And: "I believe what he is saying is that the torsion force and gravity reach some new equlibrium which is on the other side of the event horizon. So although there is no true space-time singularity nothing can escape once it is past the event horizon barring Hawking radation being confirmed."

And: "Black holes have measurable mass--by the orbit of captured stars. So how can something that is finite have a related quality that is infinite? There is no arrow of time. All the particles in the universe is in constant motion. We cannot go back to the point that is yesterday at 10AM is because the particles have all 'moved on' and we don't know how to control those particles to get them to go back to the exact state at the precise time. We've been slapped in the face by the two notions in this article. The HORROR!"

And: "The concept of time is a powerful philosophical construct that allows us to view ourselves in the past, the present, and the future. It is a natural evolution of abstract thought, necessary for the psychological well being of the human species. Aside from the fact that it's used to callibrate certain physics experiments, I don't see where it exists anywhere else except in our own imaginations. "

Response: "Interesting thought. Let's meet last week and talk about it!"

It looks like physicists and their detractors are even worse than literary critics!  Seriously though, these all-too-human pitched battles reflect an ongoing transformation in cosmological theory.  Props to Lee Hamilton's excellent blog; he linked to this story first and has other comments on it.