SoylentNews is people
SoylentNews
from the unterminated-strings-cause-inflation dept.
Submitted via IRC for SoyCow1984
Our universe: An expanding bubble in an extra dimension
According to string theory, all matter consists of tiny, vibrating "stringlike" entities. The theory also requires there to be more spatial dimensions than the three that are already part of everyday knowledge. For 15 years, there have been models in string theory that have been thought to give rise to dark energy. However, these have come in for increasingly harsh criticism, and several researchers are now asserting that none of the models proposed to date are workable.
In their article, the scientists propose a new model with dark energy and our Universe riding on an expanding bubble in an extra dimension. The whole Universe is accommodated on the edge of this expanding bubble. All existing matter in the Universe corresponds to the ends of strings that extend out into the extra dimension. The researchers also show that expanding bubbles of this kind can come into existence within the framework of string theory. It is conceivable that there are more bubbles than ours, corresponding to other universes.
Journal Reference:
Souvik Banerjee, Ulf Danielsson, Giuseppe Dibitetto, Suvendu Giri, Marjorie Schillo. Emergent de Sitter Cosmology from Decaying Anti–de Sitter Space. Physical Review Letters, 2018; 121 (26) DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevLett.121.261301
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Sunday December 30 2018, @11:24PM (4 children)
"but I think society has better things to focus its money and labor on."
The amount of money society "wastes" is truly monumental.
Did you know some people consider space exploration a waste of money while others consider the whole sports industry a waste. Why not go after one of the huge wastes ... Like plastic shopping bags... Ban them and save $4billion/year
https://conservingnow.com/plastic-bag-consumption-facts/ [conservingnow.com]
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 31 2018, @12:18AM (2 children)
Clearly, people value having plastic shopping bags at more than $4billion, otherwise they wouldn't spend that on them.
That there might be externalities that you don't like and which would be mitigated by a legal ban doesn't mean you are saving $4billion, if just means you are using legal means to control other peoples' behaviour.
The correct method is to determine the cost of the externality and charge it to the people making and using the plastic bags, and then to use that money to correct the problem. That is the important bit.
If it is not enough money to fix the problem, you raise the tax on bags until it is. At some price point people will start using less plastic bags. At some further point in the ratcheting tax, the money collected will be enough to fix the problem.
(Score: 1) by khallow on Monday December 31 2018, @08:03AM
And if that change of behavior doesn't happen at a price point that reflects the real externality, then it's a solid indication to move on, the problem doesn't need to be solved any further.
(Score: 0) by Anonymous Coward on Monday December 31 2018, @02:18PM
You are going to need 1000% tax on a 10 cent bag to even get people to notice. It is incandescent lights all over again, the current inefficient product is just too cheap and as long as it is even available people will keep using it. The alternative is to bring your canvas bags or re-use the store's boxes (from incoming shipments). other countries like the Philippines have done bans and just like incandescents, the US will be one of the last countries to implement a ban.
(Score: 2) by RandomFactor on Monday December 31 2018, @02:11AM
Cost to retailers of $4 Billion/Year does not mean that eliminating them will save $4 Billion a year and could easily result in highers costs, pollution and carbon footprint.
More details here on Paper vs Plastic
http://www.allaboutbags.ca/papervplastic.html [allaboutbags.ca]
В «Правде» нет известий, в «Известиях» нет правды