Cited by 128Cosmology and Gravitation TheoriesNoncommutative and Quantum Gravity TheoriesRelativity and Gravitational Theory

Can the Universe create itself?

Open access
Gott, J. Richard, Li, Li-Xin·1998·Physical Review D

Abstract

The question of first-cause has troubled philosophers and cosmologists alike. Now that it is apparent that our universe began in a big bang explosion, the question of what happened before the big bang arises. Inflation seems like a very promising answer, but as Borde and Vilenkin have shown, the inflationary state preceding the big bang could not have been infinite in duration---it must have had a beginning also. Where did it come from? Ultimately, the difficult question seems to be how to make something out of nothing. This paper explores the idea that this is the wrong question---that that is not how the Universe got here. Instead, we explore the idea of whether there is anything in the laws of physics that would prevent the Universe from creating itself. Because spacetimes can be curved and multiply connected, general relativity allows for the possibility of closed timelike curves (CTCs). Thus, tracing backwards in time through the original inflationary state we may eventually encounter a region of CTCs---giving no first-cause. This region of CTCs may well be over by now (being bounded toward the future by a Cauchy horizon). We illustrate that such models---with CTCs---are not necessarily inconsistent by demonstrating self-consistent vacuums for Misner space and a multiply connected de Sitter space in which the renormalized energy-momentum tensor does not diverge as one approaches the Cauchy horizon and solves Einstein's equations. Some specific scenarios (out of many possible ones) for this type of model are described. For example, a metastable vacuum inflates producing an infinite number of (big-bang-type) bubble universes. In many of these, either by natural causes or by action of advanced civilizations, a number of bubbles of metastable vacuum are created at late times by high energy events. These bubbles will usually collapse and form black holes, but occasionally one will tunnel to create an expanding metastable vacuum (a baby universe) on the other side of the black hole's Einstein-Rosen bridge as proposed by Farhi, Guth, and Guven. One of the expanding metastable-vacuum baby universes produced in this way simply turns out to be the original inflating metastable vacuum we began with. We show that a Universe with CTCs can be stable against vacuum polarization. And it can be classically stable and self-consistent if and only if the potentials in this Universe are retarded---which gives a natural explanation of the arrow of time in our universe. Interestingly, the laws of physics may allow the Universe to be its own mother.

AI snapshot

Written from the paper’s full text.

TL;DR

The paper argues that the Universe need not have a first cause or be created from nothing: if general relativity permits closed timelike curves (CTCs), the Universe could be multiply connected and create itself. It constructs self-consistent vacuum examples in Misner space and multiply connected de Sitter space where the renormalized energy-momentum tensor does not diverge at the Cauchy horizon, and argues self-consistency forces retarded potentials and an arrow of time.

Key findings

  • In Misner space, the adapted Rindler vacuum gives \(T^\nu_{\ \mu\,R,\mathrm{ren}} = \frac{1}{1440\pi^2\xi^4}\left[(2\pi/b)^4 - 1\right]\mathrm{diag}(-3,1,1,1)\); if \(b=2\pi\), this is zero everywhere and solves the vacuum Einstein equations, while otherwise it diverges as the Cauchy horizon \(\xi\to0\) is approached.
  • In multiply connected de Sitter space \(dS/B\), the adapted conformal Rindler vacuum gives \(T^\nu_{\ \mu\,CR,\mathrm{ren}} = \frac{1}{1440\pi^2 r_0^4(1-r^2/r_0^2)^2}\left[(2\pi r_0/\beta)^4 - 1\right]\mathrm{diag}(-3,1,1,1) - \frac{1}{960\pi^2 r_0^4}\delta^\nu_\mu\); if \(\beta=2\pi r_0\), then \(T_{ab\,CR,\mathrm{ren}} = -g_{ab}/(960\pi^2 r_0^4)\), regular and self-consistent when \(r_0^2 = \frac{3}{2\Lambda}\left(1 \pm \sqrt{1-\Lambda/(270\pi)}\right)\).
  • Self-consistency near the Cauchy horizon requires retarded potentials in region \(F\), advanced potentials in region \(P\), and anti-correlated retarded/advanced choices in \(R\) and \(L\); this naturally produces an arrow of time and entropy, with \(R,L\) cold and \(F,P\) hot. Particle detectors in \(R\) see nothing, while in \(F\) they see Gibbons-Hawking radiation with \(T_{G-H}=1/(2\pi r_0)\), plus grey-body corrections near the Cauchy horizon.
  • Baby-universe scenarios can make the Universe its own mother: Farhi-Guth-Guven tunneling has probability \(P=10^{-10^{18}}\) for typical GUT scales; bubble percolation requires \(5.8\times10^{-9}<\epsilon_{\rm cr}<0.24\), and for \(b=2\pi\), \(\tau_0\simeq0.086r_0\), \(V_{II}\simeq0.011V_I\), \(P_{II}\simeq0.011P_I\), with \(\epsilon<2\times10^{-3}\) for less than a 5% chance of a bubble in \(V_I\).

Methods

  • Theoretical study in general relativity and quantum field theory in curved spacetime; no new observational data are presented, though observational constraints on \(\Omega\), \(h\), and inflation are cited.
  • Constructs multiply connected spacetimes—Misner space and a multiply connected de Sitter space \(dS/B\)—by topological identifications/boost transformations, then uses the method of images to compute Hadamard and Wightman functions, renormalized energy-momentum tensors, and particle-detector response functions.
  • Checks divergence at Cauchy horizons, solves semiclassical Einstein equations for self-consistent vacua, uses the conformal relation between multiply connected de Sitter space and Misner space to transplant results, and analyzes classical stability via \(T_{ab}T^{ab}\) for electromagnetic pulses and photon collisions.

Limitations

  • Stated: there is no quantum theory of gravity or theory-of-everything, so the chronology protection conjecture cannot be settled and the Hawking vs. Kim-Thorne dispute cannot be judged; the simplest solutions are not geodesically complete to the past; further research is needed for a self-consistent vacuum in the time-nonorientable antipodal model; whether Cassidy and Hawking’s entropy conclusion holds generally remains open.
  • Stated: many problems remain, and the paper does not prove the chronology protection conjecture false; it relies on self-consistency arguments and assumptions about bubble formation, absorption, and the absence of real particles crossing Cauchy horizons.
  • Evident from the text: the work is purely theoretical and proposes no direct observational test; scenarios involving advanced civilizations creating baby universes and the associated probabilities are speculative, and some conclusions depend on exponentially small tunneling rates and specific vacuum choices.

Model-written summary. Check it against the paper before relying on it.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1103/physrevd.58.023501

Cites

178 of 178 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Nothing to recompute.

Claims the paper makes

0 of 236 cited sources checked · 0 supported · 0 flagged

  • Findingreasoning

    A Universe with CTCs can be stable against vacuum polarization.

    “We show that a Universe with CTCs can be stable against vacuum polarization.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingnone given

    A Universe with CTCs can be classically stable and self-consistent if and only if the potentials in this Universe are retarded.

    “And, it can be classically stable and self-consistent if and only if the potentials in this Universe are retarded -which gives a natural explanation of the arrow of time in our universe.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    Self-consistent vacuums exist for a multiply connected de Sitter space in which the renormalized energy-momentum tensor does not diverge as one approaches the Cauchy horizon and solves Einstein's equations.

    “We illustrate that such modelswith CTCs -are not necessarily inconsistent by demonstrating self-consistent vacuums for Misner space and a multiply connected de Sitter space in which the renormalized energy-momentum tensor does not diverge as one approaches the Cauchy horizon and solves Einstein's equations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingnone given

    Self-consistent vacuums exist for Misner space in which the renormalized energy-momentum tensor does not diverge as one approaches the Cauchy horizon and solves Einstein's equations.

    “We illustrate that such modelswith CTCs -are not necessarily inconsistent by demonstrating self-consistent vacuums for Misner space and a multiply connected de Sitter space in which the renormalized energy-momentum tensor does not diverge as one approaches the Cauchy horizon and solves Einstein's equations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Findingown data

    For a multiply connected de Sitter space there also exists a self-consistent vacuum state for a conformally coupled scalar field.

    “In this paper, we find that for a multiply connected de Sitter space there also exists a self-consistent vacuum state for a conformally coupled scalar field (see section IX).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims. 130
  • The quote only partly states this claim. 2
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. 84
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    A de Sitter space with r0 given by Eq. (92) automatically satisfies the semiclassical Einstein equations, and such a de Sitter space and its corresponding vacuum are self-consistent.

    “A de Sitter space with r 0 given by Eq. ( 92) automatically satisfies the semiclassical Einstein's equations (90).Such a de Sitter space and its corresponding vacuum are thus self-consistent.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    If β = 2πr0, the adapted conformal Rindler vacuum energy-momentum tensor is regular on the whole space; otherwise both T^ν_μ CR,ren and T^μν CR,ren T_μν CR,ren diverge as the Cauchy horizon is approached.

    “We find that, if β = 2πr 0 ,(96) this energy-momentum tensor is regular on the whole space.[Eq.( 96) corresponds to b = 2π via Eq.( 83)].Otherwise both T ν µ CR,ren and T µν CR,ren T µν CR,ren diverge as the Cauchy horizon is approached.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    There always exists a locally conformal map between F and F-O (defined by t^2 - x^2 - y^2 - z^2 < 1 in F), and future infinity (t → ∞) in F corresponds to the hyperbola η^2 = 1 + y^2 + z^2 (i.e. t^2 - x^2 - y^2 - z^2 = 1) in F.

    “This means that there always exists a locally conformal map between F and F-O (defined by t 2 -x 2 -y 2 -z 2 < 1 in F), and future infinity ( t → ∞) in F corresponds to the hyperbola η2 = 1 + y 2 + z 2 (i.e.t 2 -x 2 -y 2 -z 2 = 1) in F.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    The self-consistent vacuum for Misner space is the adapted Rindler vacuum, and b = 2π is the self-consistent condition.

    “We [30] have called this vacuum the self-consistent vacuum for Misner space, and b = 2π is the self-consistent condition.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [30]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    For de Sitter space, R_ab = Λ g_ab, R = 4Λ, and thus (1)H_ab = 0 and (3)H_ab = (1/3)Λ^2 g_ab = 3/r0^4 g_ab.

    “For de Sitter space we have R ab = Λg ab , R = 4Λ, and thus (1) H ab = 0, (3) H ab = 1 3 Λ 2 g ab = 3 r 4 0 g ab .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    In our multiply connected de Sitter spacetime, as also in Misner space, there is no diverging mechanism near the horizon; a light ray propagating in de Sitter space will focus rather than diverge.

    “Unfortunately, in our multiply connected de Sitter spacetime (as also in Misner space) there is no such diverging mechanism.A light ray propagating in de Sitter space will focus rather than diverge.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [183]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    In the case b = 2π, as T → ∞, the contribution of all n ≠ 0 terms decreases exponentially to zero; thus, at events far from the Cauchy horizon in F, the particle detector perceives pure Hawking radiation given by the n = 0 term.

    “As T → ∞, the contribution of all n = 0 terms decreases exponentially to zero.Thus, at events far from the Cauchy horizon in F , the particle detector perceives pure Hawking radiation given by the n = 0 term.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingnone given

    The solutions to Eq. (91) are r0^2 = (3/(2Λ))(1 ± sqrt(1 - Λ/(270π))).

    “If Λ = 0, we find that the solutions to Eq. ( 91) are r 2 0 = 3 2Λ 1 ± 1 - Λ 270π .(92)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    For the multiply connected Minkowski spacetime S^1 × R^3 with the adapted Minkowski vacuum, the renormalized energy-momentum tensor of a conformally coupled scalar field is constant, finite everywhere, and has the form of radiation.

    “We find that this energy-momentum tensor is constant and finite everywhere and has the form of radiation.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    The energy-momentum tensor in the adapted conformal Minkowski vacuum in dS/B diverges at the Cauchy horizon as r → r0 for any finite β, and the divergence is coordinate independent since T^μν T_μν also diverges there.

    “Similar to Misner space, this energy-momentum tensor diverges at the Cauchy horizon as r → r 0 for any finite β; and the divergence is coordinate independent since T µν CM,ren T µν CM,ren also diverges there.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    In dS/B with the adapted Rindler vacuum, region R is cold (temperature zero) but region F is hot (temperature T_G-H); similarly, region L is cold but P is hot.

    “From the above discussion, we find that in our multiply connected de Sitter space with the adapted Rindler vacuum, region R is cold (where the temperature is zero) but region F is hot (where the temperature is T G-H ).Similarly, region L is cold but P is hot”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    The response function for a detector in Vilenkin's tunneling universe is dF/dT = r_0/(2π) ∆E/(e^{2πr_0∆E}-1), which is thermal radiation with the Gibbons-Hawking temperature T_G-H = 1/(2πr_0).

    “Thus we have dF dT = r 0 2π ∆E e 2πr0∆E -1 ,(55) which is just the response function for a detector in a thermal radiation with the Gibbons-Hawking temperature [100] T G-H = 1 2πr 0 .(56)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [100]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Any hypersurface of τ = constant has topology R^1 × S^2 and has four Killing vectors.

    “Any hypersurface of τ = constant has topology R 1 × S 2 and has four killing vectors.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingown data

    The adapted conformal Minkowski vacuum is not self-consistent for the multiply connected de Sitter space dS/B; it does not solve the semiclassical Einstein equations.

    “Though the conformal Minkowski vacuum is a good vacuum for simply connected de Sitter space [158,159], it (in the adapted version) is not self-consistent for the multiply connected de Sitter space dS/B.(That is, it does not solve the semiclassical Einstein's equations.)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [158]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [159]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    In region R of Misner space, both the retarded and the advanced potential are self-consistent.

    “Therefore in region R both the retarded and the advanced potential are self-consistent, but the part-retarded-and-part-advanced potential is not self-consistent.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    In region L of Misner space, both the retarded and the advanced potential are self-consistent, but a part-retarded-and-part-advanced potential is not self-consistent.

    “This conclusion also holds for region L.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    The horizon at r = r0 in static de Sitter coordinates corresponds to the horizon ξ = 0 in Rindler space, and the worldline r = 0 in de Sitter space corresponds to the worldline with ξ = 1 and y = z = 0 in Rindler space.

    “The horizon at r = r 0 in the static de Sitter space coordinates corresponds to the horizon ξ = 0 in Rindler space, and the worldline r = 0 in de Sitter space corresponds to the worldline with ξ = 1 and y = z = 0 in Rindler space.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    The Euclidean section of dS/B is a four-sphere S^4 embedded in a five-dimensional flat Euclidean space with points related by an azimuthal rotation with angle β/r0 identified, and there are conical singularities unless β/r0 = 2π.

    “The Euclidean section of our multiply connected de Sitter space is a four-sphere S 4 embedded in a five dimensional flat Euclidean space with those points related by an azimuthal rotation with angle β/r 0 being identified.There are conical singularities unless β/r 0 = 2π.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    Under the identification generated by the boost transformation, dS/B has closed timelike curves in regions R and L, but has no closed causal curves in regions F and P.

    “Under the identification generated by the boost transformation, clearly dS/B has CTCs in regions R and L, but has no closed causal curves in regions F and P.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    A spacetime obtained from Minkowski spacetime by identifying points related by time translation is closed in the time direction, has no Cauchy horizon, and all events in it are threaded by CTCs.

    “Such a spacetime is closed in the time direction and has no Cauchy horizon.All events in this spacetime are threaded by CTCs.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    For a particle detector moving along a worldline with r, θ, φ = constants in region R, the response function F(ΔE) is zero and no particles are detected.

    “Therefore the response function F (∆E) is zero and no particles are detected.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    As T → ∞ (or L → ∞), the n ≠ 0 contribution exponentially drops to zero; therefore, at events far from the Cauchy horizon in F, the detector only perceives pure Hawking radiation, the same as in case 2.

    “As T → ∞ (or L → ∞), d dT n =0 F n exponentially drops to zero; therefore, at events far from the Cauchy horizon in F , the particle detector only perceives pure Hawking radiation (the same as that in case 2).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    The boundaries at W = ±V and X^2 + Y^2 + Z^2 = r0^2 are Cauchy horizons separating causal regions F and P from acausal regions R and L, and are generated by closed null geodesics.

    “The boundaries at W = ±V and X 2 + Y 2 + Z 2 = r 2 0 are the Cauchy horizons which separate the causal regions F and P from the acausal regions R and L and are generated by closed null geodesics (Fig. 4).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingcitation

    dS/B solves the semiclassical Einstein equations with a cosmological constant Λ and the energy-momentum tensor in Eq. (97), and thus is self-consistent, if r0^2 = (3/(2Λ))(1 ± sqrt(1 - Λ/(270π))).

    “Similarly, our multiply connected de Sitter space solves the semiclassical Einstein's equations with a cosmological constant Λ and the energy-momentum tensor in Eq. ( 97) (and thus it is self-consistent) if r 2 0 = 3 2Λ 1 ± 1 -Λ 270π (if Λ = 0, we have the two solutions r 2 0 = 1/360π and r 0 = ∞ [89]).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [89]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    For a particle detector moving along a comoving worldline in the steady-state coordinate system, when the detector is in region R, dF/dT = 0, so it sees nothing while it is in region R.

    “Obviously in region R all poles are in the upper-half plane of complex ∆τ .Therefore dF dT = 0, (134 ) when the particle detector is in region R.So the particle detector sees nothing while it is in region R.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    For electromagnetic fields, T^a_a = 0, so only T_ab T^ab need be considered; for T_ab in Eq. (138), T_ab T^ab = 0.

    “For electromagnetic fields we always have T a a = 0, so we need only consider T ab T ab .For T ab in Eq. ( 138), we also have T ab T ab = 0. (141 )”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingreasoning

    Inserting Eq. (32) into Eq. (88) and using Eqs. (79-83), one obtains the energy-momentum tensor for the adapted conformal Rindler vacuum of a conformally coupled scalar field in dS/B, given by Eq. (95).

    “Inserting Eq. ( 32) into Eq.( 88) and using Eqs.(79-83), we obtain the energy-momentum tensor for the adapted conformal Rindler vacuum of a conformally coupled scalar field in our multiply connected de Sitter space”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • The quote only partly states this claim.

    Findingreasoning

    For a particle detector moving along a geodesic with l, θ, φ = constant in region F, the contribution of the n = 0 term is just the Hawking radiation with the Gibbons-Hawking temperature T_G-H = 1/(2πr0) in simply connected de Sitter space.

    “We see that the contribution of the n = 0 term is just the Hawking radiation with the Gibbons-Hawking temperature T G-H = 1/2πr 0 in the simply connected de Sitter space.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    A necessary condition for a bubble formed in F not to collide with itself is that from time τ when the bubble forms to future infinity a light signal moving along the l direction propagates a co-moving distance less than β/2, which leads to τ > τ0 ≡ r0 ln((e^{b/2}+1)/(e^{b/2}-1)).

    “A necessary condition for a bubble formed in F not to collide with itself is that from time τ when the bubble forms to future infinity (τ → ∞) a light signal moving along the l direction [where τ and l are defined in Eq. ( 69) and Eq. ( 71)] propagates a co-moving distance less than β/2, which leads to the condition that τ > τ 0 ≡ r 0 ln e b/2 +1 e b/2 -1 .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    For b = 2π, τ0 ≈ 0.086 r0, V_II ≈ 0.011 V_I, and thus P_II ≈ 0.011 P_I.

    “For b = 2π we have τ 0 ≃ 0.086r 0 , V II ≃ 0.011V II , and thus P II ≃ 0.011P I .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    F + R is a Hausdorff manifold with a null boundary, and thus F + R is geodesically incomplete to the past.

    “F + R is a Hausdorff manifold with a null boundary, and thus F + R is geodesically incomplete to the past.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    Regions 0 < a < a1 and a > a2 are classically allowed, region a1 < a < a2 is classically forbidden.

    “Regions 0 < a < a1 and a > a2 are classically allowed, region a1 < a < a2 is classically forbidden.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingown data

    One copy of this Euclidean bouncing solution has two boundaries with minimum radius a1.

    “One “copy” of this Euclidean bouncing solution is shown in this diagram, which has two boundaries with minimum radius a1.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    With our adapted conformal Rindler vacuum, our multiply connected de Sitter space is cold (with zero temperature) in R and L, but hot (with the Gibbons-Hawking temperature) in F and P.

    “With our adapted conformal Rindler vacuum, our multiply connected de Sitter space is cold (with zero temperature) in R and L, but hot (with the Gibbons-Hawking temperature) in F and P.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    In Fig. 4b, region F + R is partially bounded by two null surfaces, the lower one is the future light cone of an event E, and the upper one is the future light cone of an event E′ which is identified with E under the action of a boost.

    “In Fig. 4b region F + R is partially bounded by two null surfaces, the lower one is the future light cone of an event E, and the upper one is the future future light cone of an event E ′ which is identified with E under the action of a boost.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    This model has no earliest event and some timelike geodesics infinitely extendible to the past, but is nevertheless geodesically incomplete to the past.

    “Interestingly, this model, although having no earliest event and having some timelike geodesics that are infinitely extendible to the past, is nevertheless geodesically incomplete to the past.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    The fundamental cells R and L have a finite four-volume, whereas the fundamental cells F and P have an infinite four-volume.

    “The fundamental cells R and L have a finite four-volume, whereas the fundamental cells F and P (which extend infinitely to the future and the past, respectively) have an infinite four-volume.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingreasoning

    The potentials in R and L cannot be both retarded or both advanced, otherwise the collision of two waves from R and L respectively will destroy the Cauchy horizon.

    “But the potentials in R and L cannot be both retarded or both advanced, otherwise the “collision” of two waves from R and L respectively will destroy the Cauchy horizon.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingnone given

    Region P + L is partially bounded by the past light cone of an event F and the past light cone of an event F′ which is identified with F under the action of a boost.

    “Region P + L is partially bounded by the past light cone of an event F and the past light cone of of an event F ′ which is identified with F under the action of a boost.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Findingnone given

    These two bubble universes both form after the Cauchy horizon CH as do an infinite number of others.

    “These two bubble universes both form after the Cauchy horizon CH as do an infinite number of others.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Findingnone given

    N1N2 is a CTC; CTCs occur on the N1N2 side of the Cauchy horizon CH.

    “N1N2 is a CTC; CTCs occur on the N1N2 side of the Cauchy horizon CH.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingnone given

    Inside bubble A the cosmological constant is Λ1.

    “Inside bubble A the cosmological constant is Λ1.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingnone given

    In a region of cosmological constant Λ1, a bubble B of cosmological constant Λ2 is formed by tunneling at the epoch BB1.

    “In a region of cosmological constant Λ1, a bubble B of cosmological constant Λ2 is formed by tunneling at the epoch BB1.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Findingnone given

    At a later time, within bubble B a bubble A forms at epoch AA1 by tunneling.

    “At a later time, within bubble B a bubble A forms at epoch AA1 by tunneling.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    To produce a region of CTCs, the universe must, at some later time, be able to reproduce conditions as they were earlier, so that a multiply connected solution is possible.

    “To produce such a region of CTCs, the universe must, at some later time, be able to reproduce conditions as they were earlier, so that a multiply connected solution is possible.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The early universe contains a region of CTCs.
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Li and Gott found that there is a self-consistent vacuum in Misner space for which the renormalized energy-momentum tensor of vacuum polarization is zero everywhere.

    “In particular, Li and Gott [30] have recently found that there is a self-consistent vacuum in Misner space for which the renormalized energy-momentum tensor of vacuum polarization is zero everywhere.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [30]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Since an infinite number of baby universes are created, as long as the probability of a particular multiple connection forming is not exactly zero, then such a connection might be expected, eventually.

    “Since an infinite number of baby universes are created, as long as the probability of a particular multiple connection forming is not exactly zero, then such a connection might be expected, eventually.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The probability of a particular multiple connection forming is not exactly zero.
    • Rests on an assumption: An infinite number of baby universes are created.
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Hawking proposed the chronology protection conjecture, which states that the laws of physics do not allow the appearance of CTCs.

    “Some of these results motivated Hawking [19,20] to propose the chronology protection conjecture which states that the laws of physics do not allow the appearance of CTCs.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [19]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [20]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Then the Universe neither tunneled from nothing, nor arose from a singularity; it created itself.

    “Then the Universe neither tunneled from nothing, nor arose from a singularity; it created itself (Fig. 1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The early universe contains a region of CTCs.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The probability of a particular multiple connection forming is not exactly zero.
    • Rests on an assumption: An infinite number of baby universes are created.
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Gott noted that what was needed to produce a realistic open model with Ω of a few tenths today was to have the inflation continue inside the bubble for about 67 e-folding times.

    “Gott [89] noted that what was needed to produce a realistic open model with Ω of a few tenths today was to have the inflation continue inside the bubble for about 67 e-folding times.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [89]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Hawking has noted that in this case, in Hartle and Hawking's formulation, the point (V=-r0, W=0, X=0, Y=0, Z=0) is not special, the curvature does not blow up there: it is like other points in the Euclidean hemispherical section.

    “Hawking has noted that in this case, in Hartle and Hawking's formulation, the point (V = -r 0 , W = 0, X = 0, Y = 0, Z = 0) is not special, the curvature does not blow up there: it is like other points in the Euclidean hemispherical section [13].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [13]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Data on cosmic microwave background fluctuations for spherical harmonic modes from l=2 to l=500 will provide a strong test of these models.

    “Data on cosmic microwave background fluctuations for spherical harmonic modes from l = 2 to l = 500 will provide a strong test of these models.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    If τ1 = 67r0, then Ω is a few tenths today; if τ1 ≫ 67r0, then Ω ≃ 1 today.

    “If τ 1 = 67r 0 , then Ω is a few tenths today; if τ 1 ≫ 67r 0 , then Ω ≃ 1 today [89].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [89]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    If shorter roll-down times were more probable than large ones, we might not be surprised to find ourselves in a model which had Ω of a few tenths.

    “if shorter roll-down times were more probable than large ones, we might not be surprised to find ourselves in a model which had Ω of a few tenths”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    A complete de Sitter space may be covered with an S^3 coordinate system (a k=1 cosmology) whose radius varies as a(t)=r0 cosh(t/r0) so that for early times (t<0) the universe would be contracting and bubbles would quickly collide preventing the inflation from ever reaching t=0.

    “Recall that a complete de Sitter space may be covered with an S 3 coordinate system (a k = 1 cosmology) whose radius varies as a(t) = r 0 cosh(t/r 0 ) so that for early times (t < 0) the universe would be contracting and bubbles would quickly collide preventing the inflation from ever reaching t = 0.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    With COBE normalization, with Ω=1, (δM/M)_{8h^-1 Mpc}=1.1-1.5 and this would require galaxies to be anti-biased and would lead to an excess of large-separation gravitational lenses over those observed.

    “With the COBE normalization there is also the problem that with Ω = 1, (δM/M ) 8h -1 Mpc = 1.1 -1.5 and this would require galaxies to be anti-biased [since for galaxies (δM/M ) 8h -1 Mpc = 1] and would also lead to an excess of large-separation gravitational lenses over those observed [117].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [117]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Thus, our universe was one of the bubbles and this solved the problem of Guth's inflation that in general one expected the bubbles not to percolate.

    “Thus, our universe was one of the bubbles and this solved the problem of Guth's inflation that in general one expected the bubbles not to percolate [94,95].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [94]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [95]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Individual bubbles could tunnel across the barrier at different values of φ, and hence have different roll-down times τ1 and thus different values of Ω.

    “Then individual bubbles could tunnel across the barrier at different values of φ, and hence have different roll-down times τ 1 and thus different values of Ω.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    If we observe Ω < 1 and Ω_Λ = 0, then k = -1 and we need inflation more than ever; we still need it to explain the isotropy of the microwave background radiation and we would now have a large but finite radius of curvature to explain, which 67 e-folds of inflation could naturally produce.

    “If we observe Ω < 1 and Ω Λ = 0, then k = -1 and we need inflation more than ever -we still need it to explain the isotropy of the microwave background radiation and we would now have a large but finite radius of curvature to explain, which 67 e-folds of inflation could naturally produce.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    We require h<0.56 if Ω=1, but a more acceptable h<0.65 if Ω=0.4, ΩΛ=0.

    “we require h < 0.56 if Ω = 1, but a more acceptable h < 0.65 if Ω = 0.4, Ω Λ = 0.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The time-reversed version of this process would show tunneling from a point at (V=-r0, W=0, X=0, Y=0, Z=0) to a three sphere at V=0 of radius r0 which then expands with proper time like a(t)=r0 cosh(t/r0) giving a normal de Sitter space, thus Vilenkin's universe created from nothing is obtained.

    “The time-reversed version of this process would show tunneling from a point at (V = -r 0 , W = 0, X = 0, Y = 0, Z = 0) to a three sphere at V = 0 of radius r 0 which then expands with proper time like a(t) = r 0 cosh(t/r 0 ) giving a normal de Sitter space -thus Vilenkin's universe created from nothing is obtained [11].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [11]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    This produces Hawking radiation; and, if r0 is of order the Planck length, then the Gibbons-Hawking thermal state should be dynamically important.

    “This produces Hawking radiation; and, if r 0 is of order the Planck length, then the Gibbons-Hawking thermal state [100] (which looks like a cosmological constant due to the trace anomaly [101]) should be dynamically important [89].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [100]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [101]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [89]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    They then have to explain the small ratio of the cosmological constant to the Planck density (10^-120).

    “They then have to explain the small ratio of the cosmological constant to the Planck density (10 -120 ).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Currently we do not have such a natural explanation for a small yet finite Λ as inflation naturally provides for explaining why the radius of curvature should be a big number in the k=-1 case.

    “Currently we do not have such a natural explanation for a small yet finite Λ as inflation naturally provides for explaining why the radius of curvature should be a big number in the k = -1 case.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    If it starts with a three-sphere of radius r0 at time t=0, and after that expands like a(t)=r0 cosh(t/r0), the bubbles do not percolate (given that the bubble formation rate per four volume r0^4 is ε≪1) and the inflation continues eternally to t=∞ producing an infinite number of open bubble universes.

    “If it starts with a three-sphere of radius r 0 at time t = 0, and after that expands like a(t) = r 0 cosh(t/r 0 ), the bubbles do not percolate (given that the bubble formation rate per four volume r 4 0 is ǫ ≪ 1) and the inflation continues eternally to t = ∞ producing an infinite number of open bubble universes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The bubble formation rate per unit four volume r0^4 is ε≪1.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    If h>0.55 this implies Ω<0.55, which agrees with the age argument and measured masses in groups and clusters of galaxies.

    “If h > 0.55 this implies Ω < 0.55, which also agrees with what one would deduce from the age argument as well as the measured masses in groups and clusters of galaxies [116].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [116]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Kochanek was able to set a 95% confidence lower limit of 0.34<Ω in flat models where Ω+ΩΛ=1, and a 90% confidence lower limit 0.15<Ω in open models with ΩΛ=0.

    “Kochanek [121] was able to set a 95% confidence lower limit of 0.34 < Ω in flat models where Ω + Ω Λ = 1, and a 90% confidence lower limit 0.15 < Ω in open models with Ω Λ = 0.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [121]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The fine tuning in these models is only logarithmic and therefore not so serious.

    “Importantly, they have explained [104,105] that the fine tuning in these models is only “logarithmic” and, therefore, not so serious.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [104]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [105]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Vilenkin suggested that the initial spherical S^3 universe could be formed from quantum tunneling.

    “Vilenkin [11] suggested that it could be formed from quantum tunneling.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [11]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    If the inflation within the bubble is of order 67 e-folds, then we can have Ω of a few tenths; but if it is longer than that, we will usually see Ω near 1 today.

    “If the inflation within the bubble is of order 67 e-folds, then we can have Ω of a few tenths; but if it is longer than that, we will usually see Ω near 1 today.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: For the rest of the paper, the authors assume single-bubble open inflationary models for our Big Bang universe.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    In this picture our universe (our bubble) is only 12 billion years old, but the Universe as a whole (the entire bubble forming inflationary state) is of a finite but arbitrarily old age.

    “In this picture our universe (our bubble) is only 12 billion years old, but the Universe as a whole (the entire bubble forming inflationary state) is of a finite but arbitrarily old age.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Recent estimates of h include h=0.65±0.06, 0.68≤h≤0.77, 0.55≤h≤0.61, and h=0.64±0.06.

    “A number of recent estimates of h (the present Hubble constant in units of 100 km s -1 Mpc -1 ) have been made (i.e., h = 0.65 ± 0.06 [111], 0.68 ≤ h ≤ 0.77 [112], 0.55 ≤ h ≤ 0.61 [113], and h = 0.64 ± 0.06 [114]).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 3 sources checked
    • cites [111]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [112]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [113]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Gott noted that this solution looks just like the interior of a Coleman bubble.

    “Gott [89] noted that this solution looks just like the interior of a Coleman bubble [92].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [89]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [92]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationnone given

    Since there does not exist a self-consistent quantum theory of gravity at present, we cannot judge who (Hawking or Kim and Thorne) is right.

    “Since there does not exist a self-consistent quantum theory of gravity at present, we cannot judge who (Hawking or Kim and Thorne) is right.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Li has argued that material will become opaque for waves or particles with extremely high frequency or energy, because absorption from scattering processes becomes very important.

    “Based on these examples, Li [26] has argued that material will become opaque for waves (particles) with extremely high frequency or energy, since in such cases the absorption caused by various types of scattering processes becomes very important.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [26]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Li and Gott have found that this quantum state is the adapted Rindler vacuum and is self-consistent because it solves the semiclassical Einstein equations exactly.

    “Li and Gott [30] have found that this quantum state is the “adapted” Rindler vacuum (i.e. the usual Rindler vacuum with multiple images) and it is a self-consistent vacuum state because it solves the semiclassical Einstein's equations exactly.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [30]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Vilenkin universe was supposed to be created from 'nothing', where according to Vilenkin 'nothing' means 'a state with no classical spacetime'.

    “The Vilenkin universe was supposed to be created from “nothing”, where according to Vilenkin “nothing” means “a state with no classical spacetime” [135].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [135]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Based on some of these calculations, Hawking has proposed the chronology protection conjecture which states that the laws of physics do not allow the appearance of CTCs.

    “Based on some of these calculations, Hawking [19,20] has proposed the chronology protection conjecture which states that the laws of physics do not allow the appearance of CTCs.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [19]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [20]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Using a simple example of a space with a region with CTCs separated from a region without closed causal curves by a complex geometric region, Li, Xu, and Liu have shown that in such a space the energy-momentum tensor of vacuum polarization is finite everywhere and the chronology protection conjecture has been challenged.

    “And, using a simple example of a space with a region with CTCs separated from a region without closed causal curves by a complex geometric region, Li, Xu, and Liu [22] have shown that in such a space the energy-momentum tensor of vacuum polarization is finite everywhere and the chronology protection conjecture has been challenged.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [22]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Li and Gott have also found that for the adapted Rindler vacuum in Misner space, an inertial particle detector perceives nothing.

    “Li and Gott [30] have also found that for this “adapted” Rindler vacuum in Misner space, an inertial particle detector perceives nothing.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [30]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    In such a case the spacetime contains neither closed null geodesics nor closed timelike geodesics, though it contains both closed timelike non-geodesic curves and closed null non-geodesic curves.

    “In such a case the spacetime contains neither closed null geodesics nor closed timelike geodesics, though it contains both closed timelike non-geodesic curves and closed null non-geodesic curves.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The back-reaction of vacuum polarization may not destroy the Cauchy horizon in spacetimes with CTCs, and thus such spacetimes can be stable against vacuum polarization.

    “The above arguments indicate that the back-reaction of vacuum polarization may not destroy the Cauchy horizon in spacetimes with CTCs, and thus such spacetimes can be stable against vacuum polarization.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Sushkov has found that for an automorphic complex scalar field in Misner space there is a vacuum state for which the energy-momentum tensor is zero everywhere.

    “Sushkov [28] has found that for an automorphic complex scalar field in Misner space there is a vacuum state for which the energy-momentum tensor is zero everywhere.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [28]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    As one approaches the Cauchy horizon the thermodynamic limit has already been violated and ordinary thermodynamics should be revised near the Cauchy horizon.

    “Thus, as one approaches the Cauchy horizon the thermodynamic limit has already been violated and ordinary thermodynamics should be revised near the Cauchy horizon.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: Ordinary continuous thermodynamics holds only for the case with N ≫ 1.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisereasoning

    The probability for the particle staying in the well is much greater than the probability for the particle running out of the barrier.

    “The probability for the particle staying in the well is much greater than the probability for the particle running out of the barrier.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Hawking noted that one would expect the quantum gravitational cut-off to occur when the invariant distance from the Cauchy horizon was of order the Planck length, and this would give a very strong perturbation on the metric so that the Cauchy horizon would be destroyed.

    “But, Hawking [20] noted that one would expect the quantum gravitational cut-off to occur when the invariant distance from the Cauchy horizon was of order the Planck length, and this would give a very strong perturbation on the metric so that the Cauchy horizon would be destroyed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [20]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    By quantum processes, a time traveler may tunnel from the region without closed causal curves to the region with CTCs (or vice versa), and the spacetime itself can also tunnel from one side to the other side of the quantum barrier.

    “By quantum processes, a time traveler may tunnel from the region without closed causal curves to the region with CTCs (or vice versa), and the spacetime itself can also tunnel from one side to the other side of the quantum barrier [22].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [22]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Cassidy and Hawking have argued that the number of states may enforce the chronology protection conjecture because this quantity tends to zero as one tries to introduce CTCs.

    “On the other hand, Cassidy and Hawking [143] have argued that the “number of states” may enforce the chronology protection conjecture since “this quantity will always tend to zero as one tries to introduce CTCs”.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [143]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Li has argued that if an absorbing material with appropriate density is introduced, vacuum polarization may be smoothed out near the Cauchy horizon so that metric perturbation from vacuum fluctuations is very small and a spacetime with CTCs can be stable against vacuum polarization.

    “Based on calculation of the renormalized energy-momentum tensor and the fluctuation in the metric, Li [26] has argued that if an absorbing material with appropriate density is introduced, vacuum polarization may be smoothed out near the Cauchy horizon so that the metric perturbation caused by vacuum fluctuations will be very small and a spacetime with CTCs can be stable against vacuum polarization”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [26]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Thorne has noted that, even if Hawking's quantum gravitational cut-off argument is correct, using two wormholes can make metric fluctuations near the Cauchy horizon arbitrarily small, so a spacetime with CTCs created from two wormholes can be stable against vacuum polarization.

    “Thorne [9] has noted that, even if Hawking's argument that a quantum gravitational cut-off would occur when the geometric invariant distance from the Cauchy horizon is of order the Planck length is correct, by using two wormholes the metric fluctuations near the Cauchy horizon can be made arbitrarily small so a spacetime with CTCs created from two wormholes can be stable against vacuum polar”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [9]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Kay, Radzikowski, and Wald have argued that their results may be interpreted as indicating that in order to create CTCs it would be necessary to enter a regime where quantum effects of gravity will be dominant.

    “Kay, Radzikowski, and Wald [144] have also argued that their results may be interpreted as indicating that in order to create CTCs it would be necessary to enter a regime where quantum effects of gravity will be dominant (see also the discussions of Visser [148,149]); this is also consistent with Li, Xu, and Liu's arguments [22].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 4 sources checked
    • cites [144]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [148]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [149]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [22]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Li has shown that the appearance of an absorber in a spacetime with CTCs may make the spacetime stable against vacuum polarization.

    “Recently, with a very general argument, Li [26] has shown that the appearance of an absorber in a spacetime with CTCs may make the spacetime stable against vacuum polarization.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [26]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    If the probability and current are conserved, there must be a finite probability for the universe being in the state before tunneling (i.e., a=0) and this probability is much bigger than the probability for tunneling.

    “If the probability and current are conserved (in fact there does exist a conserved current for the Wheeler-DeWitt equation [137], and a classically allowed solution with a = 0 and zero “energy”), there must be a finite probability for the universe being in the state before tunneling (i.e., a = 0) and this probability is much bigger than the probability for tunneling.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [137]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    For the particular spacetime with CTCs constructed by Cassidy and Hawking, the entropy of a massless scalar field diverges to minus infinity when the spacetime develops CTCs.

    “Their arguments are based on the fact that for the particular spacetime with CTCs they constructed [which is the product of a multiply connected (via a boost) three-dimensional de Sitter space and S 1 ] the entropy of a massless scalar field diverges to minus infinity when the spacetime develops CTCs [143].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [143]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    The energy of the particle in the well cannot be zero, otherwise the uncertainty principle is violated; thus there is always a finite zero-point-energy.

    “The energy of the particle in the well cannot be zero, otherwise the uncertainty principle is violated.Thus there is always a finite zero-point-energy.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Kim and Thorne claimed that quantum gravitational effects would cut the divergence off when an observer's proper time from crossing the Cauchy horizon was the Planck time, and this would only give such a small perturbation on the metric that the Cauchy horizon could not be destroyed.

    “Kim and Thorne claimed that quantum gravitational effects would cut the divergence off when an observer's proper time from crossing the Cauchy horizon was the Planck time, and this would only give such a small perturbation on the metric that the Cauchy horizon could not be destroyed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [16]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Li, Xu, and Liu have argued that if the effects of quantum gravity are considered, in a spacetime with CTCs the region with CTCs and the region without closed causal curves may be separated by a quantum barrier (e.g. a region where components of the metric have complex values) instead of a Cauchy horizon generated by closed null geodesics.

    “Li, Xu, and Liu [22] have argued that if the effects of quantum gravity are considered, in a spacetime with CTCs the region with CTCs and the region without closed causal curves may be separated by a quantum barrier (e.g. a region where components of the metric have complex values) instead of a Cauchy horizon generated by closed null geodesics.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [22]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    Cassidy and Li and Gott have independently found that for the real conformally coupled scalar field in Misner space there exists a quantum state for which the energy-momentum tensor is zero everywhere.

    “More recently, Cassidy [31] and Li and Gott [30] have independently found that for the real conformally coupled scalar field in Misner space there exists a quantum state for which the energy-momentum tensor is zero everywhere.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [31]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [30]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    If the Universe is created from something, that something could have been itself; thus it is possible that the Universe is its own mother.

    “On the other hand, if the Universe is created from something, that something could have been itself.Thus it is possible that the Universe is its own mother.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The divergence of the energy-momentum tensor at the Cauchy horizon does not mean that the Cauchy horizon must be destroyed by the back-reaction of vacuum polarization, but instead means that near the Cauchy horizon the usual quantum field theory on a prescribed classical spacetime background cannot be used and the quantum effect of gravity must be considered.

    “(2) the divergence of the energy-momentum tensor at the Cauchy horizon does not mean that the Cauchy horizon must be destroyed by the back-reaction of vacuum polarization, but instead means that near the Cauchy horizon the usual quantum field theory on a prescribed classical spacetime background cannot be used and the quantum effect of gravity must be considered.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [22]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The entropy cannot continuously tend to negative infinity; it should jump from k_B ln 3 to k_B ln 2, jump from k_B ln 2 to zero, and then stand on zero as one approaches the Cauchy horizon.

    “The entropy cannot continuously tend to negative infinity; it should jump from k B ln 3 to k B ln 2, jump from k B ln 2 to zero (but in Cassidy and Hawking's arguments [143] we have not seen such a jump), then the uncertainty principle demands that the entropy should stand on the zero value as one approaches the Cauchy horizon.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [143]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • Rests on an assumption: In ordinary statistical thermodynamics, entropy is always positive.
    • Rests on an assumption: The uncertainty principle requires ∆p_i ∆q_i ≥ 2πh.
    • Rests on an assumption: The number of states N is always an integer.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    In the self-consistent case, T_ab^ren = -g_ab/(960π^2 r0^4) itself is the source term producing the de Sitter geometry, and this may give rise to inflation at the Planck scale.

    “In this self-consistent case, T ab ren = -g ab /960π 2 r 4 0 itself is the source term producing the de Sitter geometry [89].This may give rise to inflation at the Planck scale [89].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [89]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    For a conformally coupled scalar field in a conformally flat spacetime, the Green function of the conformal vacuum and the renormalized energy-momentum tensors are related to their flat-spacetime counterparts by Eq. (84) and Eq. (85).

    “For a conformally coupled scalar field in a conformally flat spacetime, the Green function G(X, X ′ ) of the conformal vacuum is related to the corresponding Green function G(X, X ′ ) in the flat spacetime by [153]”
    • Also stated in: § B. Conformal Relation between Our Multiply Connected de Sitter Space and Misner Space · plain
      “the renormalized energy-momentum tensors are related by [153]”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [153]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    In simply connected de Sitter space, an inertial particle detector perceives thermal radiation with the Gibbons-Hawking temperature if the conformally coupled scalar field is in the conformal Minkowski vacuum.

    “It is well known that in the simply connected de Sitter space, an inertial particle detector perceives thermal radiation with the Gibbons-Hawking temperature [Eq.( 56)] if the conformally coupled scalar field is in the conformal Minkowski vacuum [100,153].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [100]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [153]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    In the b = 2π case, the vacuum Einstein equations without cosmological constant are automatically satisfied, so this is an example of a spacetime with CTCs at the semiclassical quantum gravity level.

    “In such a case, the vacuum Einstein's equations without cosmological constant are automatically satisfied.Thus this is an example of a spacetime with CTCs at the semiclassical quantum gravity level.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The ill-definedness of the energy-momentum tensor on the Cauchy horizon only happens in a set of measure zero, which does not make much sense in physics; if the renormalized energy-momentum tensor is zero everywhere except on a set of measure zero where it is formally ill-defined, continuity would seem to require setting it to zero there also.

    “But we note that this only happens in a set of measure zero which does not make much sense in physics for if the renormalized energy-momentum tensor is zero everywhere except on a set of measure zero where it is formally ill-defined, then continuity would seem to require setting it to zero there also [30].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [30]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    A particle detector cannot distinguish Vilenkin's tunneling universe from an eternal de Sitter space, and they have the same energy-momentum tensor for the conformally coupled scalar field.

    “Though the boundary between the Lorentzian section and the Euclidean section behaves as a reflecting boundary, a particle detector cannot distinguish Vilenkin's tunneling universe from an eternal de Sitter space, and they have the same energy-momentum tensor for the conformally coupled scalar field.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Gott called the vacuum state in de Sitter space with r0 = (360π)^(-1/2) the self-consistent vacuum state, and it has a Gibbons-Hawking thermal temperature T_G-H = 1/(2πr0).

    “Gott [89] has called the vacuum state in de Sitter space with r 0 = (360π) -1/2 the self-consistent vacuum state (it has a Gibbons-Hawking thermal temperature T G-H = 1/2πr 0 ) [100].”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [89]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [100]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The adapted Minkowski vacuum is not self-consistent for Misner space; it does not solve Einstein's equations given the Misner space geometry.

    “This indicates that though the Minkowski vacuum is a good and self-consistent vacuum for simply connected Minkowski space, the adapted Minkowski vacuum is not self-consistent for Misner space (i.e. it does not solve Einstein's equations given the Misner space geometry).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    De Sitter space is a solution of the vacuum Einstein equations with a positive cosmological constant Λ and is one of the maximally symmetric spacetimes.

    “De Sitter space is a solution of the vacuum Einstein's equations with a positive cosmological constant Λ, which is one of the maximally symmetric spacetimes (the others being Minkowski space and anti-de Sitter space) [39,40].”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [39]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [40]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The quotient of the bundle of linear frames over de Sitter space by the boost group is a Hausdorff manifold and is well-behaved everywhere.

    “However, as in Hawking and Ellis's arguments for Misner space [40], the quotient of the bundle of linear frames over de Sitter space by the boost group is a Hausdorff manifold and thus is well-behaved everywhere.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [40]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    There must be a correlation between time arrows in region L and region R: if the retarded potential is chosen in R, the advanced potential must be chosen in L; if the advanced potential is chosen in R, the retarded potential must be chosen in L.

    “Furthermore, there must be a correlation between time arrows in region L and region R: if we choose the retarded potential in R, we must choose the advanced potential in L (see Fig. 6b); if we choose the advanced potential in R, we must choose the retarded potential in L.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Li [26] has calculated the renormalized energy-momentum tensor of vacuum polarization with the effect of absorption.

    “Li [26] has calculated the renormalized energy-momentum tensor of vacuum polarization with the effect of absorption.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [26]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    Such a metastable vacuum inflates, and an infinite number of bubble universes form later, with perhaps many different laws of physics depending on how they tunnel away from the metastable vacuum and which of the many potential minima they roll down into.

    “But then, such a metastable vacuum inflates in the knob, and an infinite number of bubble universes form later, with perhaps many different laws of physics depending on how they tunnel away from the metastable vacuum and which of the many potential minima they roll down into.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [32]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Hawking's argument works only if one can pick a particular frame like the frame of a timelike observer crossing the Cauchy horizons and observe the blow up of the energy in that frame; thus Hawking's approach is observer-dependent, while our approach with T_ab T^ab is observer-independent.

    “Hawking's argument works only if one can pick a particular frame like the frame of a timelike observer crossing the Cauchy horizons and observe the blow up of the energy in that frame.(Thus Hawking's approach is observer-dependent, while our approach with T ab T ab is observer-independent.)”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [20]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    In the scenario where the first universe is one of the infinite ones formed later by intelligent civilizations, the Universe would be multiply connected and would have a region of CTCs.

    “Then the Universe -note capital U -would be multiply connected, and would have a region of CTCs”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: One of the created baby universes is the original universe that one started with.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The principle of self-consistency produces classical stability of the Cauchy horizons and naturally gives rise to an arrow of time in our model of the Universe.

    “Thus, the principle of self-consistency [178,179] produces classical stability of the Cauchy horizons and naturally gives rise to an arrow of time in our model of the Universe.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [178]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [179]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    F and R can have retarded potentials, while P and L have advanced potentials.

    “F and R can have retarded potentials, while P and L have advanced potentials, as we have noted.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    If we observe a coincidence in physical constants, according to Carter [62], it simply means that if it were otherwise, we would not be here.

    “If we observe such a coincidence, according to Carter [62], it simply means that if it were otherwise, we would not be here.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [62]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    There is no instability caused by particles crossing the Cauchy horizons; and since there are no timelike observers in region R to be hit by photons as the Cauchy horizon separating R from P is approached, there is no instability, as indicated by T_ab T^ab not blowing up as that Cauchy horizon is approached.

    “Thus, there is no instability caused by particles crossing the Cauchy horizons; and since there are no timelike observers in region R to be hit by photons as the Cauchy horizon separating R from P is approached, there is no instability, as indicated by the fact T ab T ab does not blow up as that Cauchy horizon is approached.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Harrison's model could occur in many generations, making it likely that we were produced as great, great, ..., great grandchildren universes from a sequence of intelligent civilizations.

    “Harrison's model could occur in many generations, making it likely that we were produced as great, great, ..., great grandchildren universes from a sequence of intelligent civilizations.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [33]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    As Farhi, Guth, and Guven [32] note, the probability for forming such a universe is exponentially small, so an exponentially large number of trials would be required before an intelligent civilization would achieve this feat.

    “As Farhi, Guth, and Guven [32] note, the probability for forming such a universe is exponentially small, so an exponentially large number of trials would be required before an intelligent civilization would achieve this feat.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [32]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Using the method of images, the N-th image is from N cycles around the multiply connected spacetime.

    “Using the method of images, note that the N -th image is from N cycles around the multiply connected spacetime.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The de Sitter solution then bounces and becomes an expanding de Sitter solution which can spawn an infinite number of open bubble universes.

    “The de Sitter solution then bounces and becomes an expanding de Sitter solution which can in turn spawn an infinite number of open bubble universes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [55]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Harrison [33] noted correctly that if super-civilizations in a universe can create many baby universes, then baby universes created in this way should greatly outnumber the parent universes.

    “He noted correctly that if super-civilizations in a universe can create many baby universes, then baby universes created in this way should greatly outnumber the parent universes”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [33]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    F + R and P + L are both stable and causally disconnected from each other.

    “Thus, we expect F + R and P + L to both be stable, and causally disconnected from each other.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The renormalized energy-momentum tensor does not blow up at the Cauchy horizon, so that a self-consistent solution is possible.

    “It would seem that it can be arranged that the renormalized energy-momentum tensor does not blow up on this Cauchy horizon so that a self-consistent solution is possible.”
    • Also stated in: § X. BABY UNIVERSE MODELS · hedged
      “Thus, we expect that the renormalized energy-momentum tensor will not blow up at the Cauchy horizon [26], so that a self-consistent solution is possible.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [26]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Thus, in a wide class of scenarios, the epoch of CTCs would be long over by now, as we would be one of the many later-formed bubble universes.

    “Thus, in a wide class of scenarios, the epoch of CTCs would be long over by now, as we would be one of the many later-formed bubble universes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Region F + R (including the Cauchy horizon separating F from R) forms a causal unit, and region P + L (including the Cauchy horizon separating P from L) forms another causal unit.

    “Then region F + R (including the Cauchy horizon separating F from R) forms a causal unit, and region P + L (including the Cauchy horizon separating P from L) forms another causal unit.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    You, being not special, are simply likely to live in one of the many baby universes, because there are so many more of them.

    “and that you (being not special) are simply likely to live in one of the many baby universes, because there are so many more of them.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [33]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    As any black hole collapses, before the curvature reaches the singularity, it will convert into a collapsing de Sitter solution.

    “Then, as any black hole collapses, the curvature increases as the singularity is approached; but before getting there it will convert into a collapsing de Sitter solution.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [55]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    If the probability for a civilization to form on a habitable planet like Earth and eventually succeed at creating a universe in the lab is some finite number greater than zero, then our universe, if it is an open bubble universe, should spawn an infinite number of such baby universes.

    “In fact, if the probability for a civilization to form on a habitable planet like the Earth and eventually succeed at creating a universe in the lab is some finite number greater than zero (even if it is very low), then our universe (if it is an open bubble universe) should spawn an infinite number of such baby universes.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: The probability for a civilization to form on a habitable planet like Earth and eventually succeed at creating a universe in the lab is some finite number greater than zero.
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Our universe is open.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable). May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    According to the Copernican principle, out of all the places for intelligent observers to be, there are only a few special places and many non-special places, and you are simply more likely to be in one of the many non-special places.

    “Here he is using implicitly the formulation of Gott [63] that according to the Copernican principle, out of all the places for intelligent observers to be, there are, by definition, only a few special places and many non-special places, and you are simply more likely to be in one of the many non-special places.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [63]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The geodesic incompleteness of F + R may not be important in physics because in the inflationary scenario all real particles are created during the reheating process after inflation within bubbles created in region F and these particles emit only retarded photons which never run off the spacetime because here the geodesic incompleteness takes place only in the past direction.

    “But, the geodesic incompleteness of F +R may not be important in physics because in the inflationary scenario all real particles are created during the reheating process after inflation within bubbles created in region F and these particles emit only retarded photons which never run off the spacetime because here the geodesic incompleteness takes place only in the past direction.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    If the metastable vacuum is at the Planck density, the number of trials required is expected to be not too large.

    “If the metastable vacuum is at the Planck density, the number of trials required is expected to be not too large”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [32]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationnone given

    Harrison's model could occur.

    “Harrison's model could occur”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Harrison's model can explain all the universes by this mechanism except for the first one.

    “Harrison [33] was able to explain all the universes by this mechanism except for the first one!”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [33]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    There would be a multiply connected region of CTCs bounded by a past Cauchy horizon which would be stable because of the self-consistency requirement as in the previous section, and this would also engender pure retarded potentials.

    “There would be a multiply connected region of CTCs bounded by a past Cauchy horizon which would be stable because of the self-consistency requirement as in the previous section, and this would also engender pure retarded potentials.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S1 (asserted), S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    In this case, the reason that we observe such coincidences is that a previous intelligent civilization made them that way.

    “In this case, the reason that we observe such coincidences is that a previous intelligent civilization made them that way.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    If our universe is open, it would likely have some super-civilizations powerful enough to succeed at such a creation event, or at least have so many super-civilizations (an infinite number) that even if they each tried only a few times, then some of them (again an infinite number) would succeed.

    “and it would likely have some super-civilizations powerful enough to succeed at such a creation event, or at least have so many super-civilizations (an infinite number) that even if they each tried only a few times, then some of them (again an infinite number) would succeed.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: Our universe is open.
    • Rests on an assumption: If our universe is open, it has an infinite number of galaxies.
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    In that scenario, all individual universes would owe their birth to some intelligent civilization.

    “all of the individual universes would owe their birth to some intelligent civilization in particular in this picture.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: One of the created baby universes is the original universe that one started with.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    Controlling these phase transitions would seem difficult.

    “Controlling these phase transitions would seem difficult.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    According to Li [23], this kind of spacetime can be stable against vacuum polarization.

    “According to Li [23], this kind of spacetime can be stable against vacuum polarization.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [23]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    In our multiply connected de Sitter space, the arrow of time in region F is in the future direction and the arrow of time in region P is in the past direction.

    “In our multiply connected de Sitter space, this is realized, since the arrow of time in region F is in the future direction and the arrow of time in region P is in the past direction”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    There are several different baby universe scenarios, any one of which could accommodate our type of model.

    “There are several different baby universe scenarios -any one of which could accommodate our type of model.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    If there are many baby universes created by intelligent supercivilizations in an infinite open bubble universe, then you are likely to live in a baby universe created in this way.

    “Thus, if there are many baby universes created by intelligent supercivilizations in an infinite open bubble universe, then you are likely to live in a baby universe created in this way.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Although these null generators are converging just before the tunneling event, they are diverging just after the tunneling event, having jumped to the other side of the Einstein-Rosen bridge.

    “Another novel effect is that although these null generators are converging just before the tunneling event, they are diverging just after the tunneling event, having jumped to the other side of the Einstein-Rosen bridge.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    The observer sees his side of the Einstein-Rosen bridge and an event horizon at r = 2M which hides the external spacetime at late times from him.

    “The observer sees his side of the Einstein-Rosen bridge and an event horizon at r = 2M which hides the external spacetime at late times from him.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    There may be two epochs of inflation, one at the Planck scale caused by T_ab^ren = -g_ab/(960π^2 r0^4) which later decays in region F at τ ≫ τ0 into an inflationary metastable state at the GUT scale produced by a potential V(φ), which, still later, forms bubble universes.

    “Also note that there may be two epochs of inflation, one at the Planck scale caused by T ab ren = -g ab /960π 2 r 4 0 [Eq.( 97)] which later decays in region F at τ ≫ τ 0 into an inflationary metastable state at the GUT scale produced by a potential V (φ), which, still later, forms bubble universes.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationcitation

    If intelligent civilizations made baby universes with such coincidences, then the majority of universes would have laws of physics conducive to the formation of intelligent life.

    “If that were the case, then the majority of universes would have laws of physics conducive to the formation of intelligent life.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationcitation

    The stability of the Cauchy horizon requires that the regions with CTCs (R and L) must be confined in the past and in these regions all quantum fields must be in vacuum states.

    “the stability of the Cauchy horizon requires that the regions with CTCs (R and L) must be confined in the past and in these regions all quantum fields must be in vacuum states”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [30]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisecitation

    The strong anthropic principle as advanced by Carter [62] says that the laws of physics, in our universe at least, must be such as to allow the development of intelligent life.

    “The strong anthropic principle as advanced by Carter [62] says that the laws of physics, in our universe at least, must be such as to allow the development of the intelligent life.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [62]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This gives rise to an arrow of time and an arrow of entropy in this model.

    “This gives rise to an arrow of time and an arrow of entropy in this model.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    There are no real particles in regions L and R (because these are vacuum states) and no real particles in regions F and P until the vacuum state there decays by forming bubbles at a timelike separation |τ| > τ0 from the origin.

    “There are, as we shall show in the next subsection, no real particles in regions L and R (because these are vacuum states) and no real particles in region F and P until the vacuum state there decays by forming bubbles at a timelike separation |τ | > τ 0 from the origin”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Under the supposition that one of these open bubble universes is the original open universe where the advanced civilization made the baby de Sitter universe, the model is multiply connected, with no earliest event.

    “Now suppose one of these open bubble universes simply turns out to be the original open universe where that advanced civilization made the baby de Sitter universe in the first place (Fig. 7).Now the model is multiply connected, with no earliest event.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • The authors state this as an assumption: One of these open bubble universes turns out to be the original open universe where the advanced civilization made the baby de Sitter universe.
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    If one of these baby universes simply turns out to be the original universe that one started out with, we have a multiply connected solution in many ways similar to our multiply connected de Sitter space.

    “If one of these baby universes simply turns out to be the original universe that one started out with, we have a multiply connected solution in many ways similar to our multiply connected de Sitter space.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable).

    Interpretationreasoning

    If such solutions exist, it might be possible to find a solution in which there was an early epoch of CTCs that would be geodesically complete to the past as well by simply identifying an earlier bubble with a later one.

    “If such solutions exist, it might be possible to find a solution in which there was an early epoch of CTCs that would be geodesically complete to the past as well by simply identifying an earlier bubble with a later one.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    Such an early region of CTCs could well be over by now, being bounded to the future by a Cauchy horizon.

    “Such an early region of CTCs could well be over by now, being bounded to the future by a Cauchy horizon.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The early universe contained a region of CTCs.
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Grant space is multiply connected, has T_ab = 0 everywhere, and includes CTCs.

    “Grant space is multiply connected, has T ab = 0 everywhere, and includes CTCs.It can be pictured as a cylinder.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [18]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    In the special case where Λ1 = Λ2, the recycling steady state solution becomes a simple single de Sitter space geometry with Λ1, and the usual steady-state coordinate system in a single de Sitter space is not geodesically complete to the past.

    “However, in the special case, where Λ 1 = Λ 2 , one can show that the recycling steady state solution becomes a simple single de Sitter space geometry with Λ 1 and the usual steady-state coordinate system in a single de Sitter space is not geodesically complete to the past.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    These two surfaces are identified creating a periodic boundary condition for P + L, where self-consistency as CH separating P from L is approached requires advanced potentials.

    “These two surfaces are identified creating a periodic boundary condition for P + L, where self-consistency as CH separating P from L is approached requires advanced potentials.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    After the Cauchy horizon, for a certain amount of proper time depending on bubble formation probability per four volume r^4_0, no bubbles or real particles form, but eventually the model expands to infinite volume, creating an infinite number of open bubble universes, which do not percolate.

    “After the Cauchy horizon for a certain amount of proper time (depending on the bubble formation probability per four volume r 4 0 ) no bubbles (or real particles) form, but eventually this model expands to infinite volume, creating an infinite number of open bubble universes, which do not percolate.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    This oscillating universe is metastable, so it could not have existed forever; after a finite half-life, it is likely to decay.

    “It is metastable, so this oscillating universe could not have existed forever: after a finite half-life, it is likely to decay.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Negative curvature is added each time the genus is increased; positive curvature can be added to reduce the genus by 1.

    “Negative curvature is added each time the genus is increased.Conversely, positive curvature can be added to reduce the genus by 1.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    An entropy arrow of time is automatically produced, with the region of CTCs in the simplest models sitting automatically in a cold vacuum state, with the universe becoming heated after the Cauchy horizon.

    “An entropy arrow of time is automatically produced as well, with the region of CTCs in the simplest models sitting automatically in a cold vacuum state, with the universe becoming heated after the Cauchy horizon.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Since the zero-point-energy of the conformally coupled scalar field cannot be neglected, the true solution should be that given by diagram 3a, which does not enforce Hartle and Hawking's no-boundary proposal.

    “But we argue that since the “zero-point-energy” of the conformally coupled scalar field cannot be neglected, the true solution should be that given by diagram 3a, which does not enforce Hartle and Hawking's no-boundary proposal.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisereasoning

    This four-sphere has no-boundary, which is the basis of Hawking's quantum cosmology.

    “This four-sphere has no-boundary, which is the basis of Hawking's quantum cosmology.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    With pure retarded potentials throughout, the issue of whether the spacetime was geodesically complete to the past is less compelling, and our model, having a periodic boundary condition, would not need further boundary conditions, unlike a simply connected recycling model that was geodesically incomplete to the past.

    “With pure retarded potentials throughout, the issue of whether the spacetime was geodesically complete to the past is less compelling, as we have argued above, and our model, having a periodic boundary condition, would not need further boundary conditions, unlike a simply connected recycling model that was geodesically incomplete to the past.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisereasoning

    If there is a conformal scalar field φ, then the energy levels should be E_n = n + 1/2, and even for n=0 there is a zero-point-energy.

    “If there is a conformal scalar field φ, then the”
    • Also stated in: § X. BABY UNIVERSE MODELS · plain
      “energy”
    • Also stated in: § XI. CONCLUSIONS · plain
      “levels should be E n = n + 1 2 .Even for n = 0 there is a”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    A contracting de Sitter phase would be destroyed by the formation of bubbles which would percolate before the minimum radius was ever reached.

    “Besides, a contracting de Sitter phase would be destroyed by the formation of bubbles which would percolate before the minimum radius was ever reached.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    Cassidy and Hawking have proposed that the formally defined entropy appears to diverge to negative infinity as the Cauchy horizon is approached.

    “Recently, Cassidy and Hawking [143] have proposed yet another supposed difficulty for CTCs, in that the formally defined entropy appears to diverge to negative infinity as the Cauchy horizon is approached.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [143]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The original oscillating universe could have formed by a similar tunneling process from a contracting de Sitter phase, but such a phase would have been much more likely to have simply classically bounced to an expanding de Sitter phase instead of tunneling into the oscillating metastable state at the origin.

    “The original oscillating universe could have formed by a similar tunneling process from a contracting de Sitter phase, but such a phase would have been much more likely to have simply classically bounced to an expanding de Sitter phase instead of tunneling into the oscillating metastable state at the origin.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    General relativity in principle allows solutions with CTCs.

    “One of the remarkable properties of the theory of general relativity is that in principle it allows solutions with CTCs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    When the zero-point-energy is neglected, the minimum radius is zero, and one copy of the bouncing Euclidean solution is a four-sphere.

    “In this case the minimum radius is zero, and thus one copy of the bouncing Euclidean solution is a four-sphere.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing). May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The integrated Gaussian curvature over a sphere (genus=0) is 4π, over a donut (genus=1) is zero, and over a figure 8 pretzel (genus=2) is -4π.

    “Thus, the integrated Gaussian curvature over a sphere (genus=0) is 4π, while the integrated Gaussian curvature over a donut (genus=1) is zero, and the integrated Gaussian curvature over a figure 8 pretzel (genus=2) is -4π.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    In our model, there would be a strong self-consistency reason for pure retarded potential, whereas in the Garriga-Vilenkin recycling model, there would be no such strong reason for it.

    “In our model, there would be a strong self-consistency reason for pure retarded potential, whereas in the Garriga-Vilenkin recycling model, there would be no such strong reason for it.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The Universe did not arise out of nothing, but rather created itself.

    “In this paper, we consider instead the notion that the Universe did not arise out of nothing, but rather created itself.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The early universe contained a region of CTCs.
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim. May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    As long as Λ2 > 0, there is a finite but small probability per unit four volume that the Λ2 state could tunnel to form a bubble of Λ1 state, which could inflate, decay into bubbles of Λ2 vacuum, which could recycle forming Λ1 bubbles, and so forth.

    “As long as Λ 2 > 0, then Garriga and Vilenkin assert that there is a finite (but small) probability per unit four volume that the Λ 2 state could tunnel to form a bubble of Λ 1 state, which could therefore inflate, decaying into bubbles of Λ 2 vacuum, which could recycle forming Λ 1 bubbles, and so forth.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [36]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    If the conformally coupled scalar field is in the ground state, it has a zero-point-energy 1/2.

    “If the conformally coupled scalar field is in the ground state, it has a “zero-point-energy” 1/2.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisecitation

    As Garriga and Vilenkin have indicated, it would violate no known theorems for some type of recycling universe (making bubble universes within bubble universes ad infinitum) to exist that was geodesically complete to the past.

    “Alternatively, as Garriga and Vilenkin have indicated, it would violate no known theorems for some type of recycling universe (making bubble universes within bubble universes ad infinitum) to exist that was geodesically complete to the past.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites Garriga and Vilenkin

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing), S4 (based).

    Premisenone given

    For a compact two-dimensional surface, the integrated Gaussian curvature divided by 4π equals 1 minus the genus.

    “For a compact two dimensional surface, the integrated Gaussian curvature over the surface divided by 4π is equal to 1 minus the genus.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Premisenone given

    Other counter-examples to the chronology protection conjecture have been found, as discussed in section V.

    “Other counter-examples to the chronology protection conjecture have also been found, as discussed in section V.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    If the Universe contained an early region of CTCs, there would be no first-cause; every event would have events to its past, and yet the Universe would not have existed eternally in the past.

    “If the Universe contained an early region of CTCs, there would be no first-cause.Every event would have events to its past.And yet the Universe would not have existed eternally in the past (see Fig. 1).”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The early universe contained a region of CTCs.
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    If the zero-point-energy is neglected, the Universe could start out at the metastable minimum as a point with a = 0, tunneling through the barrier out to become a de Sitter universe.

    “If the “zero-point-energy” is neglected, the Universe could start out at the metastable minimum as a point with a = 0, tunneling through the barrier out to become a de Sitter universe.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Premisenone given

    For such a model to work, the Universe has to reproduce at some later time the same conditions that obtained at an earlier time.

    “For such a model to work the Universe has to reproduce at some later time the same conditions that obtained at an earlier time.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
    • Rests on an assumption: The early universe contained a region of CTCs.
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    In this paper we argue that we have no reason to neglect the zero-point-energy so that it is the tiny oscillating universe initial state that applies.

    “In this paper we argue that we have no reason to neglect the “zero-point-energy” so that it is the tiny oscillating universe initial state that applies.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    This may not be a problem in physics if retarded potentials are the only ones allowed.

    “This thus may not be a problem in physics if retarded potentials are the only ones allowed.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    The oscillating universe reaches maximum radius a1 and then tunnels to a classical de Sitter state at minimum radius a2 where a2 < a0.

    “It reaches maximum radius a 1 , and then tunnels to a classical de Sitter state at minimum radius a 2 where a 2 < a 0 .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    In this model, the evolution can be seen as a particle representing the universe starting as a point a=0 at the bottom of the metastable potential well with E=0, tunneling through the barrier, emerging at a=a0 with E=0, and becoming a classically inflating de Sitter solution.

    “Thus, the evolution can be seen as a particle, representing the universe, starting as a point, a = 0, at the bottom of the metastable potential well, with E = 0. Then it tunnels through the barrier and emerges at a = a 0 with E = 0, whereupon it becomes a classically inflating de Sitter solution.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 2 sources checked
    • cites [89]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

    • cites [98]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S2 (checkable), S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    A similar conversion might in principle be possible with these cosmological models.

    “A similar thing might in principle be possible with these cosmological models.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Being bubble universes, they will all be open with negative curvature as in Gott's model, but they will be asymptotically open de Sitter models at late times with a(t) = r0 sinh(t/r0) and Λ = Λ2.

    “Being bubble universes, they will all be open with negative curvature as in Gott's model [89] but they will be asymptotically open de Sitter models at late times with a(t) = r 0 sinh(t/r 0 ) and Λ = Λ 2 .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [89]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    Gott's two-string spacetime is simply connected, identical to Grant space at large distances from the strings, and contains CTCs.

    “Gott's two-string spacetime is simply connected, but is identical to Grant space at large distances from the strings.It also contains CTCs.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [8]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    The two strings in Gott's spacetime provide positive energy density and do not violate the weak energy condition.

    “The two strings provide positive energy density (i.e. they do not violate the weak energy condition).”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [8]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Premisecitation

    If the roll down is slow, within the Λ2 bubble as it forms, it will have at least 67 e-folds of inflation with Λ ≃ Λ1 before it falls off the plateau into the absolute minimum at Λ2, and this will be an acceptable Big Bang model with the usual Big Bang properties except that it will eventually be dominated by a lambda term Λ2.

    “If the roll down is slow, within the Λ 2 bubble as it forms, as in Gott's open bubble universe [89], then it will have at least 67 e-folds of inflation with Λ ≃ Λ 1 before it falls off the plateau into the absolute minimum at Λ 2 , and this will be an acceptable Big Bang model which will have the usual Big Bang properties except that it will eventually be dominated by a lambda term Λ 2 .”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim0 of 1 sources checked
    • cites [89]

      Couldn’t be matched to a paper in Crossref, so it can’t be checked.

  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Because pure retarded potentials are established automatically in this model, there are no waves propagating to the past, so there may be no problem in physics with the model's past geodesic incompleteness.

    “This is not a property we should have thought desirable, but since pure retarded potentials are established automatically in this model, there are no waves propagating to the past and so there may be no problem in physics with this, since there are never any waves that run off the edge of the spacetime.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • May combine two claims.

    Interpretationnone given

    If our multiply connected model was geodesically complete to the past, so would the covering space (a simply connected Garriga-Vilenkin model) be; if it was geodesically incomplete to the past, so would the covering space be also.

    “If our multiply connected model was geodesically complete to the past, so would the covering space (a simply connected Garriga-Vilenkin model) be.If our multiply connected model was geodesically incomplete to the past, so would the covering space (a simply connected Garriga-Vilenkin model) be also.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Classified as probably not a substantial claim.

    Interpretationreasoning

    Now we identify the two hypersurfaces denoted by A1AA2 to obtain a model of the Universe creating itself.

    “Now we identify the two hypersurfaces denoted by A1AA2 to obtain a model of the Universe creating itself.”
    Quote in the paperSubstantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S4 (based).

    Interpretationnone given

    We identify M1N1 with M2N2, to obtain a model of the Universe creating itself.

    “We identify M1N1 with M2N2, to obtain a model of the Universe creating itself.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
  • Probably not a substantial claim: may not pass S3 (load-bearing).

    Interpretationreasoning

    If Λ1 = Λ2, this reduces to our multiply connected de Sitter model F + R shown in Fig. 4b.

    “If Λ1 = Λ2, this reduces to our multiply connected de Sitter model F + R shown in Fig. 4b.”
    Quote in the paperNot a substantial claim
199 of 199
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The early universe contains a region of CTCs.

    “But, suppose the early universe contains a region of CTCs.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The probability of a particular multiple connection forming is not exactly zero.

    “as long as the probability of a particular multiple connection forming is not exactly zero”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    An infinite number of baby universes are created.

    “Since an infinite number of baby universes are created”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    For the rest of the paper, the authors assume single-bubble open inflationary models for our Big Bang universe.

    “For the rest of this paper we shall usually assume single-bubble open inflationary models for our Big Bang universe”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The authors assume an initial metastable vacuum which decays by forming bubbles through barrier penetration.

    “In any case, we will be assuming an initial metastable vacuum which decays by forming bubbles through barrier penetration.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The bubble formation rate per unit four volume r0^4 is ε≪1.

    “given that the bubble formation rate per four volume r 4 0 is ǫ ≪ 1”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    In ordinary statistical thermodynamics, entropy is always positive.

    “And, from ordinary statistical thermodynamics we know that entropy is always positive, so the physical meaning of a negative entropy is unclear.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The uncertainty principle requires ∆p_i ∆q_i ≥ 2πh.

    “The uncertainty principle demands that ∆p i ∆q i ≥ 2πh and thus we should always have N ≥ 1.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    Ordinary continuous thermodynamics holds only for the case with N ≫ 1.

    “On the other hand, ordinary continuous thermodynamics holds only for the case with N ≫ 1.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The number of states N is always an integer.

    “When N is small, quantization of the entropy becomes important (remember that the number of states N is always an integer).”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The tunneling probability ε is exponentially small.

    “This should be no problem because we expect that this tunneling probability ǫ should be exponentially small.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    One of these open bubble universes turns out to be the original open universe where the advanced civilization made the baby de Sitter universe.

    “Now suppose one of these open bubble universes simply turns out to be the original open universe where that advanced civilization made the baby de Sitter universe in the first place (Fig. 7).”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    During the tunneling event, the trajectory may be approximated as a classical space with four spacelike dimensions solving Einstein's equations, with the potential inverted.

    “During the tunneling event, the trajectory may be approximated as a classical space with four spacelike dimensions solving Einstein's equations, with the potential inverted, so that this Euclidean section bridges the gap between the two classical turning points.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    The probability for a civilization to form on a habitable planet like Earth and eventually succeed at creating a universe in the lab is some finite number greater than zero.

    “In fact, if the probability for a civilization to form on a habitable planet like the Earth and eventually succeed at creating a universe in the lab is some finite number greater than zero (even if it is very low), then our universe (if it is an open bubble universe) should spawn an infinite number of such baby universes.”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    Our universe is open.

    “However, if our universe is open, it has an infinite number of galaxies”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    If our universe is open, it has an infinite number of galaxies.

    “However, if our universe is open, it has an infinite number of galaxies”
  • The authors state this as an assumption.

    One of the created baby universes is the original universe that one started with.

    “In our scenario, suppose that”
    “if one of those created baby universes turns out to be the original universe that one started with.”
    “Now take this recycling model where it turns out that one of the Λ 1 bubbles formed inside an Λ 2 bubble inside a Λ 1 region is, in fact, the Λ 1 region that one started out with.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The early universe contained a region of CTCs.

    “If instead there were a region of CTCs in the early universe, then asking what was the earliest point in the Universe would be like asking what is the easternmost point on the Earth.”
    “Such an early region of CTCs could well be over by now, being bounded to the future by a Cauchy horizon.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    One of the baby universes produced by inflation turns out to be the universe we started with.

    “If one of these baby universes simply turns out to be the universe we started with, then a multiply connected model with early CTCs bounded by a Cauchy horizon is produced.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    A super-civilization can create an expanding bubble of de Sitter metastable vacuum.

    “After recombination a super-civilization creates, at the right, an expanding bubble of de Sitter metastable vacuum.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The dense absorber can make the Cauchy horizon stable against vacuum polarization effects.

    “where the dense absorber can make the Cauchy horizon stable against vacuum polarization effects.”
  • The paper relies on this without support.

    The quantum behavior of the universe can be modeled by a minisuperspace Wheeler-DeWitt equation with potential U(a).

    “The potential function in the Wheeler-DeWitt equation in the minisuperspace model.”
22 of 22

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

Each contradiction between two passages listed here was confirmed by an independent check.

  • Early-region volume is stated as a fraction of itself

    Minor

    The paper gives the early-region volume as approximately 0.011 times itself. Its preceding formula defines a positive volume for τ0 > 0, so the comparison must refer to a different volume.

1 of 1

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Research works printed but not linked: 19

  1. C. W. Misner, 1967, Relativity Theory and Astrophysics I: Relativity and Cosmology
  2. K. S. Thorne, 1993, General Relativity and Gravitation 1992: Proceedings of the 13th International Conference on General Relativity and Gravitation
  3. S. W. Hawking, 1992, Proceedings of the 6-th Marcel Grossmann Meeting
  4. L.-X. Li, 1993, Phys. Rev. D, 48, 4735
  5. E. R. Harrison, 1995, Q. J. R. Astron. Soc., 36, 193
  6. G. Lemaitre, 1933, Ann. Soc. Sci. Bruxelles A., 53, 51
  7. C. Barrabès, 1996, Helv. Phys. Acta, 69, 253
  8. B. Carter, 1974, Confrontation of Cosmological Theories with Observations
  9. E. W. Kolb, 1990, The Early Universe
  10. S. A. Shectman, 1995, Wide Field Spectroscopy and the Distant Universe, the 35th Herstmonceux Conference
  11. J. R. Gott, 1975, Astron. Astrophys., 45, 365
  12. J. Mould, 1996, Nature (London), 381, 555
  13. A. Sandage, 1996, Nature (London), 381, 555
  14. M. Fukugita, 1990, Mon. Not. R. Astron. Soc., 246, 24P
  15. A. A. Starobinsky, 1986, Field Theory, Quantum Gravity, and Strings, Lectures in Physics, edited M. J. de Vega and N. Sánchez
  16. I. D. Novikov, 1983, Evolution of the Universe
  17. C. W. Misner, 1969, Sov. Phys. JETP, 28, 122
  18. C. W. Misner, 1973, Gravitation
  19. T. Rothman, 1993, Q. J. R. Astron. Soc., 34, 201

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Gott, J. R., & Li, L.-X.
Affiliations
Princeton University (US)
Venue
Physical Review D
Published
1998-05-29
Volume
58
Issue
2
ISSN
  • 0556-2821 (ISSN-L)
  • 1089-4918
OpenAlex
W2064913826
Cited by
127
References
161
Citations by year
2026: 3 · 2025: 1 · 2024: 2 · 2023: 4 · 2022: 4 · 2021: 3 · 2020: 22 · 2019: 5 · 2018: 2 · 2017: 7 · 2016: 3 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 8 · 2013: 4 · 2012: 6
FWCI
4.72
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • Physical review. D. Particles, fields, gravitation, and cosmology/Physical review. D. Particles and fields (publishedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University) (submittedVersion)
  • CERN Document Server (European Organization for Nuclear Research) (submittedVersion)
  • arXiv (Cornell University)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • National Aeronautics and Space Administration
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Cosmology and Gravitation Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Statistical and Nonlinear Physics › Noncommutative and Quantum Gravity Theories
  • Physical Sciences › Physics and Astronomy › Astronomy and Astrophysics › Relativity and Gravitational Theory
Keywords
closed timelike curves, cosmic inflation, baby universes, metastable vacuum, de Sitter space, Cauchy horizon, arrow of time, vacuum polarization, black hole tunneling, bubble universes, renormalized energy-momentum tensor, retarded potentials

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Claims read by deepseek-v4.1-flash under definition version 3 (extract-v3) on 2026-11-06.

Classified by jev-1.13-20260917 (gold-guideline-v0.2) on 2026-11-06.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review