How the heck did the universe begin?

[jackson33]

TBH over your personal opinion and the professional opinions of two amazing astrophysicists, one of which lead the first team to ever analyse a hubble deep field image, who is the UK representative for one of the detectors built by the ESA for the james webb, you know I think he may now an ickle bit about this... That's just my opinion of course...

 

I wouldn't like to cast aspersions on your deep mathematical arguments against red shifting "go to an airport" who could possibly consider that to be incomplete?

 

yes, the post is personal opinion. however it is not original, just the one i agree with. there are a good many such professionals (people with letters after their names) dating from the 30's that have offered evidence to repute the findings. they are ongoing and i suspect are having more influence than you would like to admit.

 

if you want mathematical formula, google Fred Walker and a 1999 essay. think he is now with U of Berkley, Cal....and working on earth quakes. distortions was a prime effect in his findings. as to the air port, this was a personal observation and the observance is compounded on film, where first noticed.

 

i have also seen a few science discussions (on BBT and expansions) when the final thought was- a theory in progress and others should be considered.

[aguy2]

Well the current belief I was told by my tutor (who is the lockyier professor of astrophysics, that's not some fool US professorship the term means something in the uk) is that the universe is for all intense and purposes, infinite, looping (under alot of debate) and closed.

 

Have you heard anything about a cosmological oscillation model that posits that the visible, all matter universe is the result of an angular momentum generated jet/pulse from a still extant BB event/body?

aguy2

[bob000555]

When people say the universe is infinite they mean it is expanding at the speed of light and this makes it THERORETICLY infinite.

 

If by “one atom” you mean the point of singularity...read it over.

 

Remember in debates like this that the theories of physics come in and out of style, remember string theory or even superstring theory? The Big Bang theory is what’s currently considered to be right by most people (including me) but it may be next years “flat Earth”

[Spyman]

spyman; you might check "radius"

 

your version is close for "big bang" and this is accepted theory by many people in or out of science. this expanding part, likewise is connected to BBT and also generally accepted. however there are other viewpoints that should be considered. even those that have a different view from your, have some understanding what BBT is, needed to give argument opposed.

 

my feeling on expansion, as stated are not necessarily in opposing to BBT. it may even be a possibility but in my opinion highly unlikely, without cause or need.

Yes, I gave Ragib the by mainstream science accepted answer in BBT.

(Doesn't necessarily reflect my personal opinion thereof.)

 

When people say the universe is infinite they mean it is expanding at the speed of light and this makes it THERORETICLY infinite.

Actually recession speed can be several times faster than the speed of light, it has no speed limit, and I don't think the expansion speed is determing the actual size/shape of Universe, (in theory).

[bascule]

Maybe it evolved from another universe...

[Spyman]

Maybe it evolved from another universe...

In this view, a collapsing black hole causes the emergence of a new universe on the "other side", whose fundamental constant parameters (speed of light, Planck length and so forth) may differ slightly from those of the universe where the black hole collapsed. Each universe therefore gives rise to as many new universes as it has black holes.

 

So where does the energy for every sub-universe come from in this theory ?

 

Will these baby universes contain less and less energy since the black holes will become smaller and smaller or is there an outside universal energy source ?

[Ragib]

aha ha this is hilarious, students fighting over whose teachers are more prominent in their respective fields. Kids will be doing that about me someday, except I'll be the clear winner . ha ha jk jk. Seriously opinion matters very little in science, and most opinions are crap. Thats why i like science. It doesn't matter whose professor is smarter. They may have dumbed things down for you to understand, and made it purposely incorrect, which may be why you are fighting. I even saw Stephan Hawking make mistakes on Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle in his book, the universe in a nutshell. Now obviously he knows What they principle is and its implications, he just had to dumb it down, and that involved changing it completely..

[Spyman]

aha ha this is hilarious, students fighting over whose teachers are more prominent in their respective fields. Kids will be doing that about me someday, except I'll be the clear winner . ha ha jk jk. Seriously opinion matters very little in science, and most opinions are crap. Thats why i like science. It doesn't matter whose professor is smarter. They may have dumbed things down for you to understand, and made it purposely incorrect, which may be why you are fighting. I even saw Stephan Hawking make mistakes on Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle in his book, the universe in a nutshell. Now obviously he knows What they principle is and its implications, he just had to dumb it down, and that involved changing it completely..

So does your post contain science or your opinions ?

[doG]

So does your post contain science or your opinions ?

 

Me thinks you could have simply asked if this thread contains science or just opinions. The answers look the same to me...

[Spyman]

Me thinks you could have simply asked if this thread contains science or just opinions. The answers look the same to me...

Well, that's your opinion.

[jackson33]

the black hole is the near final process in the death of giant star. evaporation the final. there is no wormhole into some thing out side our universe. the matter from the BH original star, the system it hosted or the near by matter that somehow became involved would not be enough to generate itself again, much less to form another universe.

 

there may be other universe. if there are its probable there are as many others as there are galaxy in ours. unlike galaxy its not likely little ones would combine with bigger ones or that any one would collide with another.

 

since we can see all the events in the deaths and creations of what we know of, primarily stars and galaxy and seem to have some consistency (no one star is over 25 times another or large well formed spiral galaxy are not astronomically different in size), the total universal size should not be growing.

i am aware of red/blue shifts, how used and by whom for explanations but will hold that argument for another day.