Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The universal model we propose is cyclical in nature...We will begin with a super giant black hole. This black hole is at the point of the big bang we are familiar with, and all the matter of the universe is inside it..The black holes we see today have only been studied for about 13 billion years, and we have not seen their full life cycle.As they will be transitory in nature changes will occur over time,entropy will occur. I speculate in a time span of say a 100 billion years ,an explosion will happen, propelling all its contents out of its aperture. This explosion will make all the elements, hydrogen being most abundant... Inside the singularity bubbles will eventually form, these will be the beginning of galaxies in all their various shapes.. Doppler shift calculations are useless because of lensing distortion due to reflection of atoms in space and the Earths atmosphere...We propose the galaxies are clustered together closer than is presently proposed, and many collide already. They are stretching the fabric of space, which is dark matter/energy. The space of the fabric at the edge of the galaxy mass will be distorted as it will not make a fully round distortion. Where it not round the fabric will start to roll, this will concentrate the gravity... As well as the galaxies having a shell of exotic material the universe itself has a shell that is similar which makes its own gravity well. Kinetic energy around the galaxies will slow down and there will be rotational drift with galaxies. This in turn will tighten the clusters at the front.The galaxies behind will close in and add to the cluster.As this process continues galaxies will start to merge and collide.The black holes themselves at center will start consuming stars and planets, and they will meet and the bigger will consume the smaller. One will emerge as a new super giant eventually.It will rotate on its axis to face all the oncoming matter that comes from behind, and face the original point of the big bang. Eventually all matter will be consumed, and we will have the same super massive black hole but in a new region of the universe. Over a period of say 100 billion years it will explode again repeating the process.The remnants of the first big bang we mentioned will be consumed and no matter whatsoever will be lost. This cycle will continue forever.The universe has no beginning or end and is eternal.

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 minutes ago, 49th parralel group said:

I speculate in a ....

!

Moderator Note

Moved to Speculations. Please read the special rules for this section. You need to support your ideas with evidence, or have some maths to model what you're talking about. Please use mainstream science. Welcome to the forums.

 
Link to post
Share on other sites
5 minutes ago, 49th parralel group said:

This cycle will continue forever.The universe has no beginning or end and is eternal.

That's a beautiful story...brings a tear to my eye and a lump to my throat.

Sorry, just being a bit facetious! The thing is, scientific theories are based on observational and experimental evidence...eg; we observe the universe expanding which denotes a time in the past when it was much much smaller...we observe the CMBR as predicted by the BB as left over relic heat from that same BB...we see galaxies in the distant universe redshifted, never blueshifted...the abundance of lighter elements. All this supports the BB.

We don't see any remnant of any collapsing universe...BH's are not all purpose universal vacuum cleaners... nothing but nothing ever gets out of a BH by crossing the EH...gravitationally bound galaxies are always and always will merge at some time.

Like I said, nice story.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 49th parralel group said:

I speculate in a time span of say a 100 billion years ,an explosion will happen, propelling all its contents out of its aperture.

If you're speaking of a big bang, it's not right to think of it as an explosion. The BB was a rapid expansion of the entire universe.

If you're speaking of a black hole, there is no "aperture" or opening in a conventional sense. And nothing is going to be propelled out of a black hole. Nothing has the energy to escape the insanely curved path through spacetime that leads to the matter at the core.

1 hour ago, 49th parralel group said:

They are stretching the fabric of space, which is dark matter/energy

Another common misconception due to popular science writers trying to explain gravity using only two dimensions. There is no "fabric" of space, and it's another bad way to visualize what's going on, because it leads to misconceptions like yours. 

In our best current explanation, the three dimensions of space are inseparable from the time dimension, forming the spacetime continuum. Gravity is produced by objects with mass and energy, and curves spacetime in predictable ways. This model (LCDM) also shows that dark energy is causing space between non-gravitationally bound objects to expand. 

1 hour ago, 49th parralel group said:

The universe has no beginning or end and is eternal.

This has no support whatsoever, but the same would be true if you claimed it was finite. There is simply no way to know if the universe is infinite or finite, using any kind of trustworthy methodology. It's not even something you could answer philosophically, afaik.

 

Link to post
Share on other sites

I gotta ask ...
Who  is 'we' ?

Is there more than one of you, in this 49th parallel group, that has severe misconceptions about Cosmology ?

Link to post
Share on other sites
46 minutes ago, 49th parralel group said:

There are 6 young people  and 2 old people  with no training,we thought we would brain storm a theory after reading the present day big bang theory ,which is silly.

With a team like that you should knock out a far superior theory in no time... 

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 49th parralel group said:

There are 6 young people  and 2 old people  with no training,we thought we would brain storm a theory after reading the present day big bang theory ,which is silly.

That which you claim is silly, is what the evidence overwhelmingly supports. That's what constitutes a scientific theory, rather then story telling.

Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, 49th parralel group said:

A singularity by itself,incredibillly hot and dense exploded, not in a sphere but in one  direction is not possible,only a black hole explains why its in a trumpet shape. With a wrong premise like that ,the  'evidence' that follows is flawed.

There is no trumpet shape.  You were looking at a graphical representation of the evolution of the universe.  This level of understanding doesn't bode well for your new theory.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 49th parralel group said:

we thought we would brain storm a theory after reading the present day big bang theory ,which is silly.

No offense, but when presented with something that doesn't make sense to you (any of you), it's silly to call it silly. It's silly to just make something up BASED on your misunderstandings. You should ask specific questions about the specific things that you don't understand, and listen to the answers to strengthen your knowledge. 

The BBT follows the progression of the observable universe from an extremely hot and dense state through rapid expansion to its present structure. It's our BEST CURRENT EXPLANATION, and we know this because we can cross-check it with other things we know. If these things were wrong, we wouldn't be able to land craft on Mars, or even make our GPS system work.

Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 49th parralel group said:

A singularity by itself makes no sense,how did such a thing get there,how could such a thing exist?How did it explode.

None of your misunderstandings of the BBT are evidence your speculation is correct. You are going about this ass-backwards. Incredulity of one theory is not evidence of another.

Link to post
Share on other sites
3 hours ago, 49th parralel group said:

A singularity by itself makes no sense,

In this case, singularity simply means our math fails us at such incredible density and heat. We can only calculate back to a fraction of a second after expansion began.

 

3 hours ago, 49th parralel group said:

how did such a thing get there

It was the entirety of the universe, very dense and therefore very hot. So dense there were no electrons or neutrons. So hot it couldn't stay that dense.

 

3 hours ago, 49th parralel group said:

how could such a thing exist?

A neutron star is material that has overcome electron degeneracy to become incredibly dense. A black hole has gone further and the matter there has overcome neutron degeneracy as well. Your incredulousness is misplaced here. There is good science to study if you're not scoffing.

 

3 hours ago, 49th parralel group said:

How did it explode.

It didn't explode, it rapidly expanded everywhere all at once. No explosion into something else, no center of origin, no leading edge. The Big Bang theory doesn't say what you think it says. 

Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, 49th parralel group said:

A singularity by itself,incredibillly hot and dense exploded, not in a sphere but in one  direction is not possible,only a black hole explains why its in a trumpet shape. With a wrong premise like that ,the  'evidence' that follows is flawed.

It's your evidence [or lack thereof] which is flawed, as well as your obvious total lack of understanding. Firstly your ignorance in not realizing and understanding that the "trumpet shape" is a 2 dimensional representation of 3 dimensional spacetime with expansion. secondly the singularity as Phi for All has said, is simply where our theories and models break down at the quantum/Planck level. No one now accepts any singularity of infinite curvature and density. And again, it was not an explosion per se, simply an expansion/evolution of space and time as we know them.

 

4 hours ago, 49th parralel group said:

What proof is there its  a sphere.

Firstly the sphere of our observational universe from our point on Earth. Similar observational spheres would exist for any Alien in any other part of the universe.

And as Zapatos has said, your incredulity of the current accepted BB model, in no way gives your own baseless assumptions any credibility. One thing I have learnt over the years in forums such as this and reputable reading, before anyone attempts to comment negatively on current  scientific theories, or offer any so called alternatives, you should at least understand thoroughly the current model you are trying to over throw....or know what is inside the box, before attempting to think outside the box.

Edited by beecee
Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, 49th parralel group said:

I don't accept a singularity can exist by itself, you have no explanation how it got there, our theory does.. Also, I do not accept that as proof of a spherical universe, it's still a hypothesis. The trumpet, theory hypothesis was probably changed to fit your singularity expansion in a spherical shape. 

You have no theory. You have the musings of someone to whom science is a mystery.

Link to post
Share on other sites

The 'trumpet' is a pictograph in one space and one time dimension.
It is not a model for anything.

Who said singularities can exist ?

I suggest you do some reading, and get a clue as to the actual BigBang model.
Start with this          Big Bang - Wikipedia        then do some serious reading.
Not the misconceptions supported by your 'buddies'.

Maybe you guys should get a different hobby; you're failing miserably at this one.
( consider girls, sports, or, if you really wanna be nerds, video games )

Edited by MigL
Link to post
Share on other sites
On 2/21/2021 at 8:07 AM, 49th parralel group said:

I don't accept a singularity can exist by itself, you have no explanation how it got there, our theory does... 

Read what you have already been told. A singularity as defined by infinite spacetime curvature and density does not exist, only a singularity as defined by where our laws of physics do not apply. And of course you do not have a scientific theory.

On 2/21/2021 at 8:07 AM, 49th parralel group said:
28 minutes ago, 49th parralel group said:

We are visualizing the trumpet in the 3rd dimension.Its your theory of big bang now big expansion that is is failing. Its time to move on with a more coherent theory.

 Also, I do not accept that as proof of a spherical universe, it's still a hypothesis. The trumpet, theory hypothesis was probably changed to fit your singularity expansion in a spherical shape. 

What you accept is neither here nor there. The BB model of universal/space/time evolution, aligns with the four main observational pillars: [1] We observe expansion and cosmological redshift, which tells us that the universe was hotter and denser in the past...[2] We see the relic heat from the BB itself, the CMBR...[3] The observed abundance of the lighter elements...[4] and galactic formation and evolution.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 49th parralel group said:

We are visualizing the trumpet in the 3rd dimension.

That shows your ignorance of the concepts, again.
The length ( x axis ) of the 'trumpet' is the dimension of time.
By visualizing it in three dimensions, you have one time, and two spatial dimensions.
IOW, you are one dimension short of spacetime.

Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, 49th parralel group said:

Its your theory of big bang now big expansion that is is failing. Its time to move on with a more coherent theory.

Can your "theory" calculate the height of a geostationary orbit? If not, how is it more coherent than BB? Can you show where you think our current explanation is "failing"?

Link to post
Share on other sites

Just done a google search and we understand..."The period of a satellite is the time it takes it to make one full orbit around an object. The period of the Earth as it travels around the sun is one year. If you know the satellite's speed and the radius at which it orbits, you can figure out its period".....Our theory is just a beginning and the cycle that occurs...The problem I have with the present theory is that your mass or singularity,  comes from nowhere and  suggests God created it,if its expansion  How can the space fabric do that?If its explosion ,how did it explode?...We are working on coalescing the universe to a second super massive black hole.We wont have technical detail ,we are amature pure theorists.We are visualizing trumpet shape early on,turning into a sphere at the moment...We hope some expert will look at it in the future and come up with some technical details for it..We have searched for universal models on google and cant find any complete ones.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.