[英中] 多重宇宙背後的真實科學(2)

看板Translation (筆譯/翻譯)作者時間12年前 (2013/05/13 01:29), 編輯推噓2(2022)
留言24則, 3人參與, 最新討論串1/1
So let's cut to the chase: in physics, the word "Multiverse" normally refers to one of three distinct and largely unrelated proposed physical models for the universe - none of which has been tested or confirmed by experiment, by the way. The three "multiverse" models are: Type 1) Bubble universes or baby black hole universes. This is the most straightforwrad kind of multiverse: the basic idea is that perhaps there are other parts of the universe which are so far away that we will never see them(or are inside black holes so similarly we will never see them). This kid of model was created as an attempt to explain why our universe is so good at making stars and galaxies and black holes and life -- as the argument goes, if each of these separate mutually un-seeable "bubbles" in the universe had slightly different laws of physics, then by definition we could only exist in one that had the right physical laws to allow us to exist. Like, we have to exist in the universe where the earth can form, because if the earth couldn't be formed, then we couldn't be here If you're not convinced by this logic, don't worry to much: there's not yet any experimental evidence for this multiverse. 那麼直接進入重點: 物理學上"多重宇宙"這個字一般指涉的是三種截然不同,有關 宇宙的物理模型--順便一提,沒有一種經過驗證。三種模型分別為: 第一種,泡泡宇宙 或稱嬰兒黑洞宇宙。這是多重宇宙中最直觀的一種: 基本想法是也許存在其他的宇宙, 但它們離我們太遠了(或者它們在黑洞裡),導致我們根本看不到。這種說法是為了解釋 為什麼我們的宇宙這麼擅於創造天體、銀河、黑洞還有生命。隨著參數不同,如果每個 互不可見的"泡泡",它們的物理定律都略有差異,依照定義,我們只在適合我們物理定律 的泡泡裡才能生存。像是我們必須存在於地球可形成的宇宙裡,因為如果不能的話,我們 就不會在這裡了。如果你不相信這個邏輯的話,別太擔心,這個理論還沒有任何實驗證據 呢。 (請問 "as the argument goes" 這句應該是跟前面還是後面那句接在一起。還有雖然 "there are other parts of the universe" 是 "還有宇宙的其他部分",但我發現 (1)"un-seeable "bubbles" in the universe" 和 (2)"we have to exist in the universe where the earth can form" 接不起來。直接翻(還有宇宙的其他部分)的話是-- 一個宇宙,裡面有許多泡泡;但 (2) 說的明顯是--許多宇宙,每個宇宙是一個泡泡,這也 跟我找到的資料相符,所以我還是決定這樣翻。 資料是 http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse 還有 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bxWavzy6-6o#t=13m00s)
Multiverse type 2) Membranes and extra dimensions. Inspired in part by the inability of the mathematics of string theory to predict the right number of dimensions for the universe in which we live, string theorists proposed the idea that perhaps what we think of as our universe is actually just a three-dimensional surface embedded within a larger super-universe with 9 spatial dimensions. Kind of like how each page of a newspaper is its own two-dimensional surface embedded within our three-dimensional world. And of course, if space had 9 dimensions rather than three, there'd be plenty of space for other three-dimensional surfaces that appeared, like ours, to be universes in their own right, but, like the pages of a newspaper, were actually part of a bigger whole. These kinds of surfaces are called "membranes" or "branes" for short. And as a reminder, there is not yet any experimental evidence for this kind of multiverse. 第二種,膜宇宙和額外的維度。部分靈感來自於弦論在數學上沒辦法預測我們所處 宇宙的維度。弦論學家提出也許我們所認知的宇宙,其實是嵌在九維空間的超集宇宙 裡的三維表面。有點像是我們的三維世界涵蓋了報紙的每一頁,而每頁又處於自身的 二維表面。當然若空間有九個維度的話,那在其中應該有很多三維表面的空間,看起 來就像我們的宇宙一樣。但就像報紙的每一頁,我們的空間實際上是更大整體的一部份。 這種表面稱做膜。提醒一下,這種多重宇宙也還未有任何實驗證據。 (這篇文章我覺得很難翻,錯誤可能很多,請大家多指教!!) -- ※ 發信站: 批踢踢實業坊(ptt.cc) ◆ From: 118.165.127.95

05/13 22:13, , 1F
(看樣子還是得對照原影片,不然光看文字我(之前那篇)我
05/13 22:13, 1F

05/13 22:13, , 2F
也會搞錯) http://ppt.cc/sL8L 我塗黃色的部份也有stars
05/13 22:13, 2F

05/13 22:14, , 3F
(等等) -- bubble 外的也是"universe(的一部份)"。換句話
05/13 22:14, 3F

05/13 22:14, , 4F
說,他是用同一個字(universe),但是有兩種意義(如果要按
05/13 22:14, 4F

05/13 22:14, , 5F
照你的邏輯來說/來分的話):
05/13 22:14, 5F

05/13 22:14, , 6F
1. "整個的"universe(就想像是整個照片範圍都是)
05/13 22:14, 6F

05/13 22:14, , 7F
2. 個別bubble裡頭(or black hole裡頭)的個別universe
05/13 22:14, 7F

05/13 22:14, , 8F
真的要畫的話應該是這樣子: http://ppt.cc/~qSu
05/13 22:14, 8F

05/13 22:15, , 9F
因為"bubble"的界線代表的是我們無法"觀察到"的界線. "觀
05/13 22:15, 9F

05/13 22:15, , 10F
察"的一個意義是用我們所處的這個宇宙裡頭的各種基本物理
05/13 22:15, 10F

05/13 22:17, , 11F
上的粒子/作用力/波..."光"...來觀察的話,那些"基本粒子/
05/13 22:17, 11F

05/13 22:17, , 12F
..."也無法到達的界線 -- 換句話說,這範圍之外的"地方"有
05/13 22:17, 12F

05/13 22:18, , 13F
可能有其它不同的粒子/作用力...(因為無法靠我們這宇宙裡
05/13 22:18, 13F

05/13 22:18, , 14F
頭的基本粒子/作用力/波.."光".."觀察到",所以無從得知,
05/13 22:18, 14F

05/13 22:18, , 15F
也因為無從得知所以才說"有可能")
05/13 22:18, 15F

05/14 04:44, , 16F
回原po: as the argument goes 前的短 hyphen (-) 應該改為
05/14 04:44, 16F

05/14 04:46, , 17F
em dash,作用在帶起新的擴大說明或釋義用的句子,改成冒號
05/14 04:46, 17F

05/14 04:47, , 18F
(:)功能一樣,所以as the argument goes修飾逗號後的if句,
05/14 04:47, 18F

05/14 04:50, , 19F
大意:這個「Bubble Universes模型」的論點是這樣的:如果
05/14 04:50, 19F

05/14 04:50, , 20F
每個獨立、互不可見的泡泡……
05/14 04:50, 20F

05/14 04:58, , 21F
打字時若無法打出一個em dash,用兩個連續hyphen(--)代替之
05/14 04:58, 21F

05/14 14:03, , 22F
謝謝dunchee你的圖和解說~我一直糾結在宇宙的範圍,看來
05/14 14:03, 22F

05/14 14:05, , 23F
是你說的那樣。我中文還是用一種邏輯講再保留英文對照。
05/14 14:05, 23F

05/14 14:08, , 24F
謝謝l10nel提醒 我馬上修正!(應該是L1OneL1吧= =好像...)
05/14 14:08, 24F
※ 編輯: Minilogo 來自: 1.171.48.104 (05/14 14:14)
文章代碼(AID): #1HZz5ZTX (Translation)
文章代碼(AID): #1HZz5ZTX (Translation)