Correct
As multiple big bangs have occurred and will continue to occur infinitely.
As described much like the simple Mandelbrot pattern.
What was seeded and can be observed as part as the "pattern".
Is what we currently observe from our big bang.
All the laws of physics and elements we know, were just that seed
Everything will follow that equation.
In another universe the laws of physics and elements observed could be completely different.
But much like our universe the laws of physics and elements would be also be defined by the original seed/equations
Also as noted, what is not observed or not part of the equation/pattern is also infinite
Strange enough the amount of elements and the laws of physics that define them are also infinite.
And that will happen randomly and infinitely.
Hard to grasp. Much like a fractal you can seed millions of patterns.
Once a pattern is generated. It follows that pattern or follows the law/equation.
We are simply observing elements and laws defined by the initial seed or equation of our big bang
Everything we observe will follow those laws.
As multiple big bangs have occurred and will continue to occur infinitely.
As described much like the simple Mandelbrot pattern.
What was seeded and can be observed as part as the "pattern".
Is what we currently observe from our big bang.
All the laws of physics and elements we know, were just that seed
Everything will follow that equation.
In another universe the laws of physics and elements observed could be completely different.
But much like our universe the laws of physics and elements would be also be defined by the original seed/equations
Also as noted, what is not observed or not part of the equation/pattern is also infinite
Strange enough the amount of elements and the laws of physics that define them are also infinite.
And that will happen randomly and infinitely.
Hard to grasp. Much like a fractal you can seed millions of patterns.
Once a pattern is generated. It follows that pattern or follows the law/equation.
We are simply observing elements and laws defined by the initial seed or equation of our big bang
Everything we observe will follow those laws.
Last edited:
Perhaps we do... say, each 180 billion year... (Galu thinks... I knew it... 😉) or so. As I see it, a BB entails all existing energy so we wouldn't be around to observer one.
//
Last edited:
Of course, that happened in the first trillion trillionths of a second, or more accurately, instantaneously and simultaneously, as the correct combination occurred
Again the concept is easily confirmed by observation and generation of a fractal.
The pattern / equation itself is infinite but follows a set and the set follows the initial seed, And everything not included in the pattern is also rejected for being infinite.
Very easy explanation why you or us will never observe another big bang.
All the infinite big bangs happening are very much not observed for a reason.
The same reason infinite iterations in a fractal are rejected and not included for a reason.
Much like any other universe, or something we cant observe is also infinite.
The pattern / equation itself is infinite but follows a set and the set follows the initial seed, And everything not included in the pattern is also rejected for being infinite.
Very easy explanation why you or us will never observe another big bang.
All the infinite big bangs happening are very much not observed for a reason.
The same reason infinite iterations in a fractal are rejected and not included for a reason.
Much like any other universe, or something we cant observe is also infinite.
New studies of the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB) underlie Cox's hypothesis.
It is thought that anomalies in the CMB could be "imprints" of energetic structures that existed before the Big Bang.
The Big Bang may represent a transition, a point in time where our Universe emerged, but not the beginning of all things.
Read more about Cox's speculations here: https://blog.sciandnature.com/2024/10/brian-cox-something-massive-existed.html
It is thought that anomalies in the CMB could be "imprints" of energetic structures that existed before the Big Bang.
The Big Bang may represent a transition, a point in time where our Universe emerged, but not the beginning of all things.
Read more about Cox's speculations here: https://blog.sciandnature.com/2024/10/brian-cox-something-massive-existed.html
I knew that when it comes to the crunch we can rely on you to mention the Big Crunch!
The hypothesis is that the Universe undergoes never-ending cycles of expansion and contraction.
That is, a Big Bang is followed by a Big Crunch which is followed by a Big Bang and so on ad infinitum.
A couple of extra ideas to throw into the mix.. At the moment of the BB density was infinite, just as gravity is infinite at the centre of black holes. Those infinities can't be fitted into our laws, they represent the point where those laws break down and a singularity happens, so there's no point in thinking of the laws at these times or places. What happens at singularities is unknowable, at least at present.
There's also the multiverse hypothesis, perhaps an infinite number of universes were generated at the BB, each with different values of the so called cosmological constants giving rise to different laws in each universe. Some subset of these universes will permit life to evolve, probably most won't. The fact we're talking about this means we're in a universe where life is possible, although that line of thought rapidly gets into the Anthropic Principle.
Also, we seem to be at a time when we've realised our current concept of the laws cannot explain our observations. No one yet has identified dark matter or dark energy, so about 96% of the universe is unaccounted for. We also know that quantum mechanics and general relativity can't be reconciled, so perhaps we're at the threshold of a totally new physics. All we need is the next Einstein.
It's also not certain that what we consider the laws to be are actually universal and unchanging, our data is limited to a tiny fraction of 13.8 billion years and the observable universe may be only a tiny fraction of the whole.
There's also the multiverse hypothesis, perhaps an infinite number of universes were generated at the BB, each with different values of the so called cosmological constants giving rise to different laws in each universe. Some subset of these universes will permit life to evolve, probably most won't. The fact we're talking about this means we're in a universe where life is possible, although that line of thought rapidly gets into the Anthropic Principle.
Also, we seem to be at a time when we've realised our current concept of the laws cannot explain our observations. No one yet has identified dark matter or dark energy, so about 96% of the universe is unaccounted for. We also know that quantum mechanics and general relativity can't be reconciled, so perhaps we're at the threshold of a totally new physics. All we need is the next Einstein.
It's also not certain that what we consider the laws to be are actually universal and unchanging, our data is limited to a tiny fraction of 13.8 billion years and the observable universe may be only a tiny fraction of the whole.
Good point and I'll correct myself - at the centre of black holes there is thought to be a singularity where the curvature of space-time becomes infinite. Once you are beyond the event horizon, the gravity of a black hole appears to be the same as for any other spherical object of the same mass.
I'm not a physicist and don't pretend to understand how this works!
However, stellar mass black holes have small event horizons so you could get quite close to one.
If you were to approach a stellar mass black hole feet first, the differential force between your feet and your head could amount to hundreds of millions of times the force of Earth’s gravity.
I'm sure you've heard of spaghettification!
Spaghettification is definitely not a good way to go, but since the nearest black hole identified to date is over 1500 light years away, I wouldn't worry about it 😉
I thought this was recently found by observation as incorrect and it looks like the universe will never stop expanding and slowly cool down and thus contain no ebnergy apart from any absolute cold atoms
At the moment it looks like dark energy is accelerating the expansion of the universe, which would end in the Big Freeze scenario, also known as the heat death of the universe. Eventually even atoms would decay and there would just be fundamental particles left at close to absolute zero.
Seeing as no one has found out what dark energy is or how it works, other scenarios such as the Big Crunch are still on the table, 'we' just don't know which is correct yet.
Seeing as no one has found out what dark energy is or how it works, other scenarios such as the Big Crunch are still on the table, 'we' just don't know which is correct yet.