Spontaneous Inflation and the Origin of the Arrow of Time · HackerPapers discussions

Spontaneous Inflation and the Origin of the Arrow of Time — mentioned by nabla9

Fri, 14 May 2021 12:01:51 GMT

Sean Carroll has also proposed two headed arrow of time. If the direction of time is towards increasing entropy, the starting point of time is the lowest entropy configuration in the universe. The arrow of time is pointing away from that point. https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/2004/10/27/the-arr... Spontaneous Inflation and the Origin of the Arrow of Time https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0410270 >Sean M. Carroll, Jennifer Chen >We suggest that spontaneous eternal inflation can provide a natural explanation for the thermodynamic arrow of time, and discuss the underlying assumptions and…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Spontaneous Inflation and the Origin of the Arrow of Time — mentioned by politician

Fri, 20 Jul 2018 17:49:16 GMT

If you're looking for a deep look at time -- a Total Perspective Vortex, I'd recommend "Spontaneous Inflation and the Origin of the Arrow of Time". https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0410270

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Spontaneous Inflation and the Origin of the Arrow of Time — mentioned by raattgift

Sat, 21 Apr 2018 21:21:20 GMT

> This looks like an eternal inflation model Yes, and the particular one I was thinking about was Carroll & Chen arXiv:hep-th/0410270. Rather than an expanding cosmology < (t-axis horizontal; x vertical) or an expanding and recollapsing <>, they have something closer to ><, which close to what I had in mind with, "... RW metric [might not be] always-expanding or always-contracting". Of course <> fits that too. I'm not sure we're really disagreeing on anything now - I think that we agree that while the homogeneity-on-every-slice constraint is a useful picture for many things, it's not really…

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.

Spontaneous Inflation and the Origin of the Arrow of Time — mentioned by givinguflac

Sat, 02 Jul 2016 20:50:01 GMT

Ok, well A.) It was clearly a joke. B.) That number was based off the Wikipedia heat death of the universe page reference for this: https://arxiv.org/abs/hep-th/0410270 C.) Regardless of the correct amount of time, no one will be there to verify it. We don't even understand enough yet to say with absolute confidence that heat death is the definitive final outcome of the universe. But thanks for the reply :)

Paper and discussion history. A mention is not an endorsement.