We May Be Living in a Black Hole from a Parent Universe, Here's Why That Matters
A group of physicists just put forward a theory that could shake our understanding of where we came from, and where we're going. According to their new model, our universe may have originated not in a singular explosion, but as a bounce from inside a black hole formed in a previous 'parent' universe.
That's right: you could be living inside a black hole.
This bold claim comes from a paper led by Professor Enrique Gaztanaga of the Institute of Cosmos Sciences in Barcelona published in Physical Review D. He and his team argue that the Big Bang wasn't the beginning of everything, but rather a cosmic transition point in a cycle that never really starts or ends.
The idea centers around the Pauli exclusion principle, which is a well-known quantum rule that prevents identical particles from occupying the same space. Gaztanaga believes this principle prevents the total collapse of matter in a dying universe, forcing it to "bounce" and expand again, forming a new universe inside what we would call a black hole.
Here's the twist: unlike many speculative physics models, this one doesn't require exotic particles or untestable fields. The bounce, according to the paper, occurs naturally within Einstein's framework of general relativity. Even the two phases of expansion, what we call inflation and dark energy, can be explained by the dynamics of the bounce itself.
What makes this model especially compelling is that it's testable. The team predicts a slightly curved universe and a small but measurable cosmological constant. These could potentially be confirmed by upcoming missions like the European Space Agency's Arrakihs satellite.
If proven correct, it would upend one of the most deeply held beliefs in modern physics—that the universe began with a singularity. Instead, we'd be part of an endless chain of universes, each born from the collapse of the last.
'We are not witnessing the birth of everything from nothing,' Gaztanaga writes. 'But rather the continuation of a cosmic cycle.'
And if he's right, the Big Bang wasn't our beginning. It was just our turn.
We May Be Living in a Black Hole from a Parent Universe, Here's Why That Matters first appeared on Men's Journal on Jun 9, 2025
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Medscape
an hour ago
- Medscape
UK Valproate Restrictions in Men Justified? New Data
A large Danish cohort study showed no significant increase in neurodevelopmental disorders (NDDs) among children fathered by men taking valproate during spermatogenesis, challenging earlier safety concerns and current UK restrictions on valproate use in men. As previously reported by Medscape Medical News , the decision to restrict the drug in women and in men younger than 55 years was made in January 2024, after the UK Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency issued new guidance on the drug's use. 'Paternal exposure to antiseizure medication in association with conception is unlikely to pose any major risk for the offspring,' the investigators led by Jakob Christensen, DrMedSci, consultant neurologist at Aarhus University Hospital and professor at Aarhus University, Aarhus, Denmark, noted. The study was published online on May 22 in JAMA Network Open . Unnecessary Precaution? In the US and Europe, there is strong guidance about avoiding valproate in pregnant women and women of childbearing age due to an elevated risk for birth defects and other developmental problems. In January 2024, the European Medicines Agency's (EMA's) safety committee (Pharmacovigilance Risk Assessment Committee [PRAC]) expanded precautionary measures on valproate use to men considering fatherhood. The advisory was fueled largely by an observational study by the contract research organization IQVIA. The study showed that about 5 out of 100 children had an NDD when born to fathers taking valproate during the 3 months before conception compared with about 3 out of 100 when born to fathers treated with lamotrigine or levetiracetam. Last summer, Christensen and colleagues were unable to replicate the IQVIA results in a study using a subset of the same IQVIA data. However, at the time, only limited information about the IQVIA study was publicly available. Once additional information from the IQVIA study became available, the researchers tried again to replicate the findings, aligning their methods more closely with the IQVIA study. Despite using the same methodology and incorporating additional data, they were still unable to replicate the IQVIA findings. Their conclusion remained unchanged — there was no statistically significant increased risk for NDDs. Specifically, among 961 children exposed to paternal valproate monotherapy and 1401 exposed to lamotrigine or levetiracetam, there was no significant increase in risk for NDDs (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR], 1.02; 95% CI, 0.67-1.54). 'This finding remained robust across analyses of specific NDDs, analyses of valproate dose, analyses accounting for time trends, analyses allowing for polytherapy, analyses expanding the definition of NDDs, analyses restricted to fathers with epilepsy, and analyses with a restricted exposure window,' Christensen and colleagues reported. Restricting analyses to fathers with epilepsy of unknown cause yielded a higher risk (aHR, 2.48; 95% CI, 1.13-5.44), but this association was no longer significant in analyses matched on birth year (aHR, 2.33; 95% CI, 1.00-5.44). Additional sensitivity analyses (restricting exposure window, excluding children with epilepsy or maternal epilepsy, and accounting for polytherapy) consistently showed no elevated risk for NDDs associated with paternal valproate exposure. 'We've examined this issue from many angles and still find no evidence supporting the concern behind EMA's recommendations,' Christensen said in a news release. Will the EMA Reconsider? Reached for comment, Aatif Husain, MD, epileptologist, neurologist, and sleep medicine specialist at DukeHealth, Durham, North Carolina, said, 'There seems to be a fair amount of literature' suggesting no increased risk for NDDs in children whose fathers use valproate. 'A recent systematic review that included 10 other studies came to this same conclusion,' said Husain, who wasn't involved in the Danish study. Taken together, the data 'would probably move EMA to relook at their guidance to see if it needs to be modified,' he said. Medscape Medical News reached out to the EMA press office for comment and received the following response. 'As with every medicine authorized in the EU, EMA continues monitoring and supervising the safety of these medicines. This includes monitoring information from various sources, such as spontaneous reports, clinical studies, scientific literature, and management of safety signals, which consists of a set of activities to determine whether there are new risks associated with an active substance or a medicine or whether known risks have changed. Should there be any updates, EMA will communicate them via the PRAC Highlights.' Husain told Medscape Medical News that neither the FDA nor the American Epilepsy Society has issued guidance on valproate use in men 'because the data has not been strong enough.'
Medscape
an hour ago
- Medscape
Low-Dose Colchicine May Help Stabilize Coronary Plaques
The LoDoCo2 trial found a reduced cardiovascular risk with low-dose colchicine in patients with chronic coronary disease. In this substudy, attenuation of pericoronary adipose tissue did not differ between patients receiving low-dose colchicine and those receiving placebo; however, people taking colchicine had a higher volume of dense calcified plaque, indicating improved plaque stability. METHODOLOGY: Elevated attenuation of pericoronary adipose tissue and a high burden of noncalcified plaque have been linked to adverse coronary outcomes caused by plaque rupture and instability; statins mitigate these risks by promoting plaque calcification. This cross-sectional substudy of the LoDoCo2 trial investigated if treatment with low-dose colchicine would attenuate coronary inflammation, as evidenced by less attenuation of pericoronary adipose tissue in 151 patients with chronic coronary disease (mean age, 64.4 years; 14% women). Patients were randomly assigned to receive either low-dose colchicine (0.5 mg once daily; n = 79) or placebo (n = 72). All patients had previously undergone coronary stenting at enrollment and were on antiplatelet and/or anticoagulant therapy; high-intensity statin therapy consisted of 40 mg and 80 mg doses of atorvastatin. After a median treatment duration of 28 months, coronary CT angiography (CCTA) was performed to evaluate the attenuation of pericoronary adipose tissue in the proximal segments of epicardial coronary arteries and to assess plaque characteristics. TAKEAWAY: Median attenuation did not differ significantly between the patients receiving colchicine and those receiving placebo. Compared with patients receiving placebo, those receiving colchicine showed a higher calcified plaque burden (adjusted difference, 2.4%), higher calcified plaque volume (adjusted difference, 59 mm 3 ), and higher volume of dense calcified plaque (adjusted difference, 61.5 mm 3 ; P < .05 for all). ), and higher volume of dense calcified plaque (adjusted difference, 61.5 mm ; < .05 for all). In patients on low-intensity statin therapy, colchicine treatment was associated with a lower burden of low-attenuation plaque, an effect not observed in those receiving high-intensity statins ( P for interaction = .037). IN PRACTICE: Low-dose colchicine was associated with an overall higher volume of calcified plaque, particularly dense calcified plaque, as well as a lower burden of low-attenuation plaque in participants treated with colchicine and low-intensity statins,' the researchers wrote. 'Although the cross-sectional design of the study limits causal inference, these are features of plaque stability and may partly explain the reduction in risk of cardiovascular events associated with colchicine in patients with chronic coronary disease.' SOURCE: This study was led by Aernoud T L Fiolet, MD, PhD, of University Medical Centre Utrecht, Utrecht, the Netherlands. It was published online on May 19, 2025, in Heart . LIMITATIONS: The researchers conducted this cross-sectional analysis at the end of treatment, without any baseline or temporal studies. This study had relatively fewer women than the proportion of women with cardiovascular disease in the general population. Additional imaging modalities were not used to confirm the findings from CCTA. DISCLOSURES: This study received grants from the Australian National Institutes of Health/National Heart, Lung, and Blood Institute, Withering Stichting Nederland, the Netherlands Heart Foundation, and the Netherlands Organisation for Health Research and Development. One author reported receiving software royalties from Cedars-Sinai Medical Center. Another author reported giving presentations, and three authors reported serving as consultants for pharmaceutical and healthcare companies without receiving any personal fees.
Medscape
2 hours ago
- Medscape
Two-Step Approach Cuts HFpEF Diagnostic Complexity
Assessing left atrial volume and natriuretic peptides (LA/NP) can identify heart failure with preserved ejection fraction (HFpEF) with an 88% specificity and 97% positive predictive value. The strategy reduces the need for additional diagnostics by decreasing intermediate Heart Failure Association pre-test assessment, echocardiography & natriuretic peptide, functional testing, final etiology (HFA-PEFF) or H₂FPEF (Heavy, two or more hypertensive drugs, atrial fibrillation, pulmonary hypertension, elder age > 60 years, elevated filling pressures) algorithm scores by 27%-56%. METHODOLOGY: Researchers developed the diagnostic approach to rule in HFpEF using LA indexed for height 2 (LAViH 2 ; cut-off above 35.5 mL/m 2 in sinus rhythm or above 38.6 mL/m 2 in atrial fibrillation) and natriuretic peptides (as per the HFA-PEFF major criterion) with data from 443 patients with suspected HFpEF and validated in two independent cohorts. (LAViH ; cut-off above 35.5 mL/m in sinus rhythm or above 38.6 mL/m in atrial fibrillation) and natriuretic peptides (as per the HFA-PEFF major criterion) with data from 443 patients with suspected HFpEF and validated in two independent cohorts. End-systolic LA was manually traced in echocardiographic apical four- and two-chamber views and indexed for both body surface area and height 2 , with height 2 -indexed values showing better diagnostic performance in patients with obesity. , with height -indexed values showing better diagnostic performance in patients with obesity. Researchers developed the simplified approach by determining abnormal values for each measure of LA based on the highest value in control individuals, stratified by sinus rhythm/atrial fibrillation, and using elevated natriuretic peptides based on the HFA-PEFF major criterion. TAKEAWAY: The LA/NP approach identified 60% of HFpEF patients with an 88% specificity and a 97% positive predictive value in the derivation cohort, with similar results in the validation cohorts (76%-80% specificity, 92%-97% positive predictive value). The validation cohorts confirmed the LA/NP approach, with a 21%-57% reduction in intermediate scores, demonstrating consistent diagnostic accuracy across different clinical HFpEF profiles. Replacing LAViH2 with LA reservoir strain showed comparable results, suggesting flexibility in the echocardiographic parameters that can be used in this simplified diagnostic approach. IN PRACTICE: 'Using the LA/NP approach as a first step in patients suspected for HfpEF before using the HFA-PEFF or H 2 FPEF algorithm as a second step may substantially reduce the need for additional diagnostics to diagnose HfpEF,' the researchers wrote. SOURCE: The study was led by Jerremy Weerts, MSc, MD, of Maastricht University Medical Center in Maastricht, the Netherlands. It was published online in European Journal of Heart Failure and presented at the Heart Failure Association of the European Society of Cardiology (HFA-ESC) 2025 meeting. LIMITATIONS: The analyses were performed retrospectively in three independent, prospective cohorts from university hospitals, each with a high prevalence of diagnosed HFpEF, which may affect the performance of the LA/NP approach in less selected populations. The use of different natriuretic peptide assays across cohorts limited the derivation of new cut-off values for the LA/NP approach. Right heart catheterization was not performed in all patients, although this reflects daily clinical practice and aligns with large clinical trials in HFpEF. DISCLOSURES: Weerts reported receiving grants from Corvia Medical, CSL Vifor, and Boehringer Ingelheim, unrelated to the submitted work. The study was supported by the Dutch Heart Foundation (grant numbers CVON2017-21-SHE PREDICTS HF and CVON2015-10-Early HFpEF) and the Health Foundation Limburg. Additional disclosures are noted in the original article.
