Francisco José Sohler Gill of the University of Seville and Manuel Ofencica of the Autonomous University of Madrid analyzed two different hypotheses about the infinite cycle of history, which were based on classical cosmology and quantum mechanics respectively. Both of these hypotheses claim that we live in an infinite universe with an infinite historical cycle. Sohler Gill and Offensika pointed out that although the theory of infinite cycle seems reasonable, it is only a speculation. In addition, they claim that human beings actually don't know whether they live in an infinite universe, just as whether a finite universe exists is still an unknown.
The view that history is infinitely circulating in space is that if you change your red shirt to blue, there will be another you somewhere, just like you except this change. Change your shirt to purple, and there will be a third you. Change the soda in your hand to tea, and you will have another you. Together, it is a copy of everything in the universe-an infinite number of copies. In their papers, Jill and Ofenica quoted popular science books The Sound of the Big Bang, The Microwave Background of the Universe and The New Cosmology written by Amidio Balbi: "In the endless universe, anything is possible. Not only that, but it will happen countless times. "
This view of infinite cycle can be found in early philosophy, ancient mythology and today's science fiction, but does it originate from the theory of cosmic physics and can it occupy a place in science?
In the first hypothesis analyzed by Sohler Gill and Orfensika, Ellis and Blond Park Jung Su believe that the theory of infinite cycle is logically derived from classical relativistic physics. The general argument is as follows: If the number of universes, planets and galaxies and the number of possible histories (as we are familiar with13.7 billion years of history) are infinite, Moreover, the probability of life based on DNA is greater than zero, and the number of DNA-based organisms is limited (because DNA molecules are not of any size), so an infinite universe must contain a limited number of infinite copies of DNA-based organisms, and some of them will follow similar or even the same historical route. In other words, the infinite history of life and limited species mean that the history of those life forms is infinitely repeated.
Soler Gill and Ofenica questioned several of these hypotheses. One of their main arguments seems strange at first glance: we can't confirm that the probability of life based on DNA is greater than zero. At least in the logical sense, neither our existence nor the limited number of life individuals we found on other planets is enough to infer that this probability is greater than zero. The conclusion is that infinite history is greater than infinite individual life, so every living planet can have its own unique history.
"If there is infinite possible history, then the historical period (or infinite number) that produces life itself is
Impossible: the probability of this happening is 1, not the probability of infinite happening is 0. Ofencika explained, "To get a probability greater than zero, you need an infinite number of paths. However, under this assumption, the number of history is greater than the number of life in any case, so the same life that is infinitely repeated will still have different histories. "
Although the second hypothesis put forward by Garriga and Vilankin contains a limited history, it is rooted in quantum theory, that is, there is limited energy in discrete regions of space. In the decoherence historical explanation of quantum mechanics, the infinite universe can be divided into finite regions. Because these areas are separated by the horizon, they will not affect each other (for example, there is no causal relationship). Garriga and Wirankin believe that the number of possible histories in each region is limited, because the energy in each region is limited, and according to quantum mechanics, the energy is quantitative. In short, an infinite number of regions plus a limited number of possible histories in each region means that each history will inevitably repeat indefinitely.
Soller Gill and Offenchka refuted almost all the assumptions in this view, the first is the application of quantum theory in cosmology. As there is no evidence, this is only a guess at this stage. Considering the gravitational effect of black holes and the expansion of the universe, problems follow. Both methods are likely to increase the number of possible histories indefinitely, thus avoiding cycles.
However, the biggest criticism of scientists on the concept of infinite cycle is the infinite hypothesis of the universe. The exhaustiveness of the universe is an open cosmological question that scientists can never answer. Sohler Gill and Ofenica noted that throughout the history of physics, although the improved theory ruled out infinity, it could not be completely avoided in some cases. At present, two basic physical theories, general relativity and quantum theory, show the existence of infinity. In the theory of relativity, the evidence is the gravitational singularity in the black hole and the big bang; In quantum theory, evidence is some parts of vacuum energy and quantum field theory. Perhaps both of these theories are approximate theories that do not contain the infinite third general theory. Soller Gill and Offensika explained that, according to paul dirac, the most important challenge of physics is to "get rid of infinity".
Although Soller Gill and O 'Finska can't refute the hypothesis of infinite cycle, they emphasize that their criticism of this hypothesis aims to show that the viewpoint of infinite cycle still belongs to the field of philosophy, mythology and science fiction stories, rather than modern cosmology. Borrowing the term used by science journalist John Hogan to describe those choices that pursue interests rather than truth, they call this speculation about the infinite cycle of history "ironic science". Although many popular science books have such descriptions, the view that our lives are endlessly circulating in the universe is uncertain anyway, which is not only far from possible, but also unreliable.