What is the Universe expanding into..

Do you think there was anything before the big bang?

  • I don't think there was anything before the Big Bang

    Votes: 56 12.5%

  • I think something existed before the Big Bang

    Votes: 200 44.7%

  • I don't think the big bang happened

    Votes: 54 12.1%

  • I think the universe is part of a mutiverse

    Votes: 201 45.0%
  • Total voters
    447
Status
Not open for further replies.
Jump to Latest
#1,741
I was just thinking about the wording of the link,

"Black holes do not exist where space and time do not exist, says new theory"

Just a stupid idea..😀

Perhaps there is a cliché..if you can't measure T=0 then could it be that after the event horizon nothing exists inside the black hole? ie matter that crosses the event horizon just ceases to exist? or becomes something else that is no longer part of this universe.

The idea of rainbow gravity:
http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/rainbow-gravity-universe-beginning/

Regards
M. Gregg
 
#1,743
wahab said:
So relatively speaking there s about nothing, that is very few information, in the universe and that s surely the reason why it still exist as we know it...
Click to expand...

I'm just curious..what thoughts do you have about "where is the universe".

Ie if you condensed the whole universe into Neutron star matter where would the ball of matter be..what does it mean to exist?
(I assume to exist something would have to be somewhere?)

Regards
M. Gregg
 
#1,744
kenpeter said:
No clue why or where a rainbow is supposed in that theory?
Yet oddly consistant with my own donut theory of blkholery.

And of course, the donut spiel goes something like this:

a)When something reaches the event horizon, its already
going fast as light, and time (from our outside perspective)
has stopped.
Click to expand...

Here there still seems the problem fast as light and time stops..if time stops how can there be any movement? The event horizon would be the outside of what? is there something inside like Neutron Star matter...a sea of strings?

Then there is still the question does something exist if T=0?

Unless this is relative ie time has appeared to have stopped but for the object falling in time is still running..and the event horizon is a time barrier not a light barrier.

Regards
M. Gregg
 
Last edited:
#1,746
M Gregg said:
Here there still seems the problem fast as light and time stops..if time stops how can there be any movement? The event horizon would be the outside of what? is there something inside like Neutron Star matter...a sea of strings?

Then there is still the question does something exist if T=0?

Unless this is relative ie time has appeared to have stopped but for the object falling in time is still running..and the event horizon is a time barrier not a light barrier.

Regards
M. Gregg
Click to expand...

Already toljoo: Horizon is the hole, nothing significant inside, jelly...

You can't get ever there from here just by falling in. But the horizon
can grow outward to envelop food stuck to its exterior. Whatever old
material may be injested by such growth is explosively redistributed
to become timestuck again in the newly expanded horizon.

Gravity cancellation inside means time inside flows like normal. But
just outside that horizon, time is very slow. The horizon is a concept,
not an actual thing, though a shell of real mass also occupies it. So
the horizon can grow outward to envelop new mass despite time
slowing toward a stop for timed things that won't otherwise fall in.

The shell exterior is very much like a neutron star, except denser.
Since it isn't a singularity, isn't quite infinitely dense or any other
rule breaking absurdity. The horizon is a growable yet otherwise
unapproachable limit (not barrier though may be effectively so)
for both time and lightspeed with a shell containing the hole's
entire mass waiting eternally just outside.
 
Last edited:
#1,748
Last edited:
#1,749
The flipside to all this is what happens after there is no more fuel for growth.
Eventually: Some of that bounced or exploded matter will work its way out
the time trap. The horizon will shrink accordingly, and further relax its grasp.
Could cause the entirety to rip apart in a mini-bang. White hole, whatever...

The big bang could have been a bunch of mini-bangs that happened to occur
around the same time (what synchronized those occurances I don't yet have
a good hypothesis, maybe entanglement) But might explain why matter is
now found to be distributed in planes on otherwise unexplained large scale.

http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v493/n7430/full/nature11717.html

So, ever since our snowglobe shook all the jelly out of the donuts and filled
the universe. The matter that now makes us: Looked big, and the universe
looked equally small. Its been snowing back toward donut state ever since.

As matter snowballs into galaxies and stars and holes, trying to get back to
that ground state of mother donuts, we get smaller as the universe appears
to expand. Reality, our infinite snowglobe is the same infinite size it always
ever was.

Its all human perception and ego that can't accept shrinkage. Would rather
pretend the infinite should absurdly expand to let him keep his station. No
different than when was believed the sun once revolved around the earth.
With relativity, we might now conclude that both answers were true. But
which way of thinking was less absurd / more useful. Each has advantage.
 
Last edited:
#1,750
In our bodies blood travels from arteries to veins through the capillaries. There is a localization of an exchange of substances so one thing can become another in a perpetual recycling. What do we know of the energies that compose the universe? Hardly a little. There has to be a reconciling of that second law so a new equilibrium is reached for a new process to start again. What we do not know, which is mostly all, is how those devices really work, the black holes, dark matter, the 73% we do not see. What if they are only components, on the body of the whole, making sure the juice gets to all corners and then starts again, replenished.
 
#1,751
What shape is an electron's orbit that allows it not to radiate? Anapole/Donut.
How might dark matter be constructed that does not interact? Anapole/Donut
What shape of black hole is likely constructed by an accretion disk? Donut.

What shape is the universe? If truly infinite, it might never loop back to itself,
thus making topology irrelevant. Bad universe, no Donut!!! Can't win them all...

Was just reading some set theory. Trying to grasp if one infinite can be bigger
than another infinite, thus allowing for expansion of something infinite. But in
reading I discovered set Voo that is the set of all sets containing all infinities.
And they call this set "The Universe" I think very appropriately.

Any lesser infinity could possibly expand into the universe. But by definition,
the universe of all lesser infinities already contains every possible set of any
size and respects no greater infinity.

The question is weather the universe we perceive is actually a lesser infinity,
one of many, with room to grow. Or the true universe of all that is possible?

Anything divided by zero is probably not infinite. Just a divide by zero error.
 
Last edited:
#1,752
M Gregg said:
I'm just curious..what thoughts do you have about "where is the universe".

Ie if you condensed the whole universe into Neutron star matter where would the ball of matter be..what does it mean to exist?
(I assume to exist something would have to be somewhere?)

Regards
M. Gregg
Click to expand...

That was just to give an idea of the apparent quasi vaccum that is the universe.

Now if matter was that condensed the whole universe would be contained in this sphere (let say before it collapse in a definitive black hole) and there would be almost no "outside", that is, almost no other space that this sphere.

Vaccum is the counterpart of density, the less the density the more the space, and as all particles are getting closer what is called space will be "contracted" by the gravitation force, that is, space exist as a degeneration of the gravitation, when particles get far apart gravitation decrease and is converted as space.

So the total amount of potential gravity in the universe is just another measure of the potential quantity of space, one parameter increase when the other decrease with the total amount being constant.
 
#1,753
wahab said:
That was just to give an idea of the apparent quasi vaccum that is the universe.

Now if matter was that condensed the whole universe would be contained in this sphere (let say before it collapse in a definitive black hole) and there would be almost no "outside", that is, almost no other space that this sphere.

Vaccum is the counterpart of density, the less the density the more the space, and as all particles are getting closer what is called space will be "contracted" by the gravitation force, that is, space exist as a degeneration of the gravitation, when particles get far apart gravitation decrease and is converted as space.

So the total amount of potential gravity in the universe is just another measure of the potential quantity of space, one parameter increase when the other decrease with the total amount being constant.
Click to expand...

That's an interesting concept, I had never thought about the density and vacuum being a duality possibly maintaining a constant..🙂

How do you see this constant in relation to infinity? ie the total matter of the universe. Do you see it as finite or infinite?

The idea of no outside..that puzzles me.

Looking at a scenario, if all matter was condensed into this super black hole where would the black hole exist are we looking at a multiverse or do you see a possibility that something can exist nowhere and in nothing?

Obviously the questions/answers are theoretical.

One theory suggests that matter has an minimum size after which nothing can exist, and also in the reverse a maximum size consisting of everything there is (all matter). However both these ideas seem to be linked to the finite rather than infinite. ie everything there is seems to be the opposite to infinity.

Regards
M. Gregg
 
Last edited:
#1,754
Of course even the idea of a multiverse has its problems because the same applies where is the multiverse..😀..quite a problem really whats outside the multiverse and so it goes on..it would seem something has to be infinite..or does it? Is everything we think we understand wrong?

I'm beginning to think we live in a self made reality..we believe what we think is true..its proven by experiments...
However something just isn't right..I feel its like at the movies, we are the characters on the big screen, but reality is in the audience and beyond.

Lets assume something just for a laugh...the universe exists in nothing and that nothing is infinite...(whats the point?)..no one ever said there was a point but you see what I mean...sounds like a bad joke doesn't it! If there are interstellar wars they might as well be in a computer game because it means about the same and just as isolated.

Regards
M. Gregg
 
Last edited:
#1,755
After post 1741#

The ideas of is there anything inside a black hole I found this..
Researcher shows that black holes do not exist

And this..
No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning

The big bang idea feels like an attempt to not accept infinity and contain the universe in a finite "Box"..ie we can't accept infinity so it must have a start..
However what does that say about the background radiation? Theory and discovery..

http://sci.esa.int/planck/

I find this interesting:
http://sci.esa.int/science-e-media/img/02/Planck_LegacyArchive_FrequencyMaps_1280.jpg

The line across the CMB I find fascinating :
http://www.bigbangcentral.com/microwave_page.html


Regards
M. Gregg
 
Last edited:
#1,756
I call BS on the whole inflation era. Deflategate whatever...

Nonsensical that an infinte is expanding in the first place.
But then to suggest it did so faster than light and give no
plausible theory of how that might have been possible.
Lightspeed is the rule or not? Make up you damn mind...

Now suppose our universe began at that limit instead.
The universe before had either crunched to that size,
or everything inside a fix sized universe had shrunk
yet entangled to such extent indistinguishable from
completely filling that universe and restarting a cycle.

I think quiet final holes are near enough identical
they ought to be entangled at any distance, and that
would be necessary as they have shrunk from each
other's sight completely in the illusion of expansion.

When one goes white, they all go white together,
and we see all these simultaneous mini-bangs that
empty and reset the internal state of the snowglobe.
Now everything as largely as possible fills a universe
small as possible, the size we now say "inflation ends"

Entanglement is true on this end of the cycle as well.
Nothing actually changed at all.
 
#1,757
Distant and tiny dense holes to an everywhere filling snowstorm of fluff.
Nothing much changed, the state of universal entanglement is preserved.
Only our point of view has rotated to see it relatively differently, perhaps
rotation of perspective about the size of all things is what time really is?

Fractal reality, donut holes, snowglobe universe, kaliedoscope time.
You can't make this stuff up! Now all I have to do is write a book and
declare myself an expert, and the rest of the nuts will fall into line.
 
Last edited:
#1,759
It might be that all that we perceive springs from the dark energy. Our perceptible universe is the entry point of that energy into this universe. It manifests in the whole of creation, the great engines, the stars and all. Then it goes back through the black holes, enriched by the passage through our dimensions... the perpetual reciprocal maintenance is guaranteed.
 
#1,760
Black holes. Are they not just collapsed stars or group of stars. Don't they sit like a thing in space? i mean, could you go around it and observe it from all directions? So just a very dense gathering of materia, nothing more "special" than that... No conduit to other dimensions etc... And they do disappear eventually due/thanks to Hawking radiation...

or 🙂

I think they are gatherings similar to hair whirls on the body. As hair don't grow 90 deg from the body, eventually there will be a spot where growth directions will meet and that is an interesting spot. Black holes might be these <something> direction collision/equalizer twirl points in space...

//
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom