Jump to content

The origin of our universe


Suhail Jalbout
 Share

Recommended Posts

THE ORIGIN OF OUR UNIVERSE

BY SUHAIL JALBOUT

 

The greatest mystery that provokes thought in mankind is the origin of our universe. For thousands of years, philosophers and scientists have tried to find an answer to this conundrum, but without unanimity of opinions.

 

I believe that the initial step to understanding the origin of our universe commences by answering this question: Does void exist? The answer is mandatory to figure out what existed in space before the universe was there. If space was empty, then where did matter and energy come from? How can nothingness produce a universe? On the other hand, if matter and energy existed in space, then it is possible for a universe to be created.

 

Man created vacuum. This was performed in laboratories, in the production of equipment used in industrial applications, and in manufactured consumable items such as incandescent light bulbs. He was able to perform these tasks only because matter (material) existed. However, he is unable to reverse the process and create matter from void. Thus, we conclude that the application of matter can produce void but void cannot produce matter.

 

Since void is the absence of matter and energy, we cannot study void but we can study matter and energy. There is no available method by which we can measure how much void is in a certain space, while we can perform all the possible calculations on matter and energy. Consequently, void is only a term coined by man to describe what happens when there is no matter and energy present in space. Since void does not exist without the presence of matter, this implies that matter and energy always existed in the infinite space; it exists at the present time, and will continue to exist for ever.

 

From this line of logic, it is possible to understand how our universe or any other universe was formed. Interaction between the elements of matter can create galaxies, stars, and planets simply by application of the laws of physics, chemistry, thermodynamics, electromagnetism, etc. They are the “universe DNA” which performs the process of creating a universe.

 

It seems that everything that exists in our universe has a life span. It ranges from few seconds to billions of years. Man experiences the birth and death of living forms on Earth every day. He also has evidence from satellites revealing the death of stars and galaxies and the birth of new stars and galaxies. This is taking place while our universe is still in existence. The first thinking man appeared on planet Earth after the solar system was in existence for 4.6 billion years. When our Sun dies and disintegrates, modern man will no longer exist on planet Earth. It is quite possible that a new star will be born with intelligent life on one of its planets who will wonder where this universe came from. This may happen while our universe is still in existence.

 

If we assume that whatever applies at the micro level also applies at the macro, then our universe itself has a limited life span. As matter and energy always existed in the infinite space, that space contains billions of universes. Some are disintegrating. Others are born. As energy connects everything that exists in our universe (stars to stars, stars to galactic cores, galaxies to galaxies, and black holes to black holes), logic dictates that all exiting universes are also interconnected by energy. If a universe supplies more energy to neighboring universes than it receives, this universe will expand and ultimately it will join other universes overloading them with energy. I believe this is what is happening to our present universe because it is expanding. However, if a universe receives more energy from neighboring universes than it transmits, this universe will be overloaded beyond its physical limits and it will close on itself. Black holes will start the process of consuming their respective galaxy and then consuming each other until all the matter of the universe will end up in either one or many unstable huge black holes with gigantic amounts of energy and matter. These black holes, the “Big Bang” black holes, will explode in a chain reaction, because they are interconnected and cannot maintain their equilibrium and stability, releasing matter and energy back into pace. The released elements will recombine to form a new universe and the cycle goes on (a complete closed loop). I think the echo that exists in our present universe is the remains of the explosion of a previous universe.

 

In conclusion, I believe that our universe was created from the matter and energy that always existed in space. It is possible that this hypothesis may unify different opinions with regards to the origin of our universe because the origin of matter is no more debatable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The answer is mandatory to figure out what existed in space before the universe was there.
There was no space before there was any space. See big bang etcetera. (unless by space your talking about the multiverse space - but that's quite another thing)

 

Thus, we conclude that the application of matter can produce void but void cannot produce matter.
Except that vacuum fluctuations happen all the time.

 

The answer is mandatory to figure out what existed in space before the universe was there.
There was no space before there was any space. See big bang etcetera.

 

It seems that everything that exists in our universe has a life span.
Meh, entropy increases but there are still the conservation laws.

 

If we assume that whatever applies at the micro level also applies at the macro...
...then we would be crazy.

 

our universe itself has a limited life span.
Well yeah, How Will It End is a pretty well studied question. I think heat death is generally considered to be the most plausible.

 

Then... oh screw it... too much to go through. tl; wish I dr.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

a void in space is not created by converting matter into a vaccum. It is created by removing matter.

 

Matter seems to me as not one of the primary elements, contrary to your thesis. There seems only one constant that could be onserved across differing "universe frames", and that is energy. Matter aka mass is merely one form of energy.

 

a pure vacuum still has a spacetime interval even if it doesnt contain matter.

 

I can put energy into a vacuum via heat for example, which changes its energy state without affecting matter in that spacetime interval. It seems to me you are ignoring such energy boundary effects.

 

is there some body of evidence which you are drawing from that suggests different universes exist and if so, that they are simultaneously relating to each other, specifically to ours?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Gerry wrote:

 

“A void in space is not created by converting matter into a vacuum. It is created by removing matter.”

 

You are absolutely correct. Matter cannot be converted into vacuum. That is why I wrote: the application of matter can produce vacuum. Equipment made from matter is used to manufacture incandescent light bulbs.

 

“Is there some evidence which you are drawing from that suggests different universes exist and if so, that they are simultaneously relating to each other, specifically to ours?”

 

No there is no evidence. However, this theory explains the origin of the “Big Bang” black hole and the origin of the echo that exists in our present universe. In addition, if our universe is not supplying more energy to neighboring universe than it receives, the background cosmic radiation should be at higher energy levels.

 

I believe that our present universe is finite while the space in which it exists is infinite. If matter and energy in our space produced our universe, logic dictates that the matter and energy, which always existed in the infinite space, will also produce multi-universes. Why our universe should be a special case?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First off, if you're already bothering to put up a quote, the least you can do is give us its source.

 

Second, that quote is quite ridiculous. There are definitely things we can -- and do -- know about our universe. There are things that are empirically and objectively testable. Going on your so-called scientific hypothesis with a thought that you can't really know anything is not helping you devise a method for actually finding something.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share

×
×
  • 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.