On 11/15/2017 2:40 PM, [email protected] wrote:
On Wednesday, November 15, 2017 at 2:37:02 PM UTC-7, Brent wrote:
On 11/15/2017 12:06 PM, [email protected] <javascript:> wrote:
>
> But if it tunnels into existence at t=0, how can it be infinite in
> extent? I find that egregiously hard to imagine, plus the fact that
> one has to use QM to explain the tunneling, and that, ipso facto,
> seems to imply it's infinitesimally small in spatial extent t=0 at
A limitation of imagination. Nothing about tunneling assumes a size.
Brent
Agreed. My imagination is not the be-all, or end-all of anything. But
isn't it claimed that Einstein's field equations breakdown earlier
than Planck time, and this is where QM must be invoked, when the
universe is presumably very small in spatial extent?
The part of the universe visible to us now (and any other finite patch)
was very small.
Alternatively, doesn't tunneling assume QM, which is a theory about
the micro world. As I recall the concept is limited to QM. AG
No. It's theory about the energy barrier between states. It can be
states of anything.
Brent
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at https://groups.google.com/group/everything-list.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
