Shapeless; now it all makes universal sense.
* But how do you eliminate the jitter, or at least reduce it?
1- Was there really an explosion at the start of the universe? There's absolutely no proof for the "big bang". The assumption that "mass and energy" at any moment (big bang) jumped into existence out of nothing is absolutely ridiculous, unscientific and religious in nature. Besides the assumption is also in contradiction with proven physics.
2- 3D-model? That's a very limited way of perceiving this universe (or our part of the multiverse).
The universe is expanding. The rate of expansion is increasing. The farther away things are, the faster they are receding (and that is true no matter where you are standing). So wind back the clock... What do you get? At some point everything (matter, time, space) converges, either to a dimensionless point or something very small.
That still doesn't prove there was an explosion though. What if there was, though? Would there be any artifact of that explosion that we could detect? It's called the cosmic background radiation, and it is there, in every direction you look, and I haven't heard a better explanation for it's existence.
There are explosions all over "space" quite often (supernovae, etc.). If you consider the half-life of some of the more potent radioactive elements, it is possible that "cosmic background" radiation is simply the cumulative radiation of quadrillions (?) of supernovae (etc.) over billions of years.
Thorium-232, for example, has a half-life of 14.05 billion years, which is longer than the (supposed) age of the Universe.
Last edited:
Is that based on mathematical examination of the data, or just supposition? Because the actual physicists who research this stuff tend to support the big-bang hypothesis as the best fit to the data.
It's funny really, the more we seek answers to the universe we just seem to turn over more questions.
I will consult with the machine elves about this "universe" and maybe they can shed some light on the subject.
I will consult with the machine elves about this "universe" and maybe they can shed some light on the subject.
One of the most intriguing indices, you provided yourself:
The increasing expansion rate indicates that there is likely something else than an explosion of some kind, for gravity would at least slow expansion down to some degree, not accelerate.
There is much more motivating the big bang theory than empirical data.
The background radiation supports their theory, but it does not prove it.
Regardless of how much radiation data they collect, it is quite plausible that the source of the radiation is something entirely different than what they think it is.
"The increasing expansion rate indicates that there is likely something else than an explosion of some kind, for gravity would at least slow expansion down to some degree, not accelerate. "
Dark energy is the reason the universe is rapidly expanding, it makes up 74% of the universe.
Dark energy is the reason the universe is rapidly expanding, it makes up 74% of the universe.
"Dark energy" and "Dark matter" are other words for "we have a problem and are currently out-off explanations, but this is what might fit the bill"... 🙄
Yeah....... most of our understanding of the universe is limited by our knowledge and/or human intelligence.
However, there is one truth that can not be denied....... if something does not exist and never has, it can't possibly have a beginning or end.
However, there is one truth that can not be denied....... if something does not exist and never has, it can't possibly have a beginning or end.
Last edited:
The question to which I sought an answer was whether any data support the hypothesis that you put forward, or whether you synthesized it from mere air.
Yes of course.
Better? ...Most probably; at least in the context you are stipulating it.
Yeah, there's calculations for that.
The universe will either
- Expand forever.
- Slow down, stop, then start falling inwards.
- Slow down and stop forever.
The third I listed I think is called "zero expansion rate" and relies on a very precise total mass in the universe.
The chances of zero expansion happening are something like 1 in a trillion, however the mathematics for it are apparently there, just like a satellite of the earth neither moving away nor hurtling down.
Edit: I predict in a few years we will have super-computers trying to calculate this fate of the universe in "real time". At the moment they can't even 'solve' board games so it'll take a while though. They still lose to humans at Chess, Go, Shogi et cetera.
Last edited:
- Status
- Not open for further replies.