Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

The Big Bang

bigbag no copy my theory

  • Please log in to reply
8 replies to this topic

#1    Patrick Jacobus

Patrick Jacobus

    Alien Embryo

  • Member
  • Pip
  • 1 posts
  • Joined:17 Jul 2014

Posted 17 July 2014 - 06:34 AM

For me, the theory is right. The explosion for my theory exploded because of too much heat and density so it can't have more. And it exploded! It produce too much, since a little rock that weights 1kgs in earh, can weight as much as 4 to 7 elephants combined weights. And then, the crack of the dot or that circle had been minimized by heat, so, just like balloon when have to much air. It explodes, and because of nothing could hold the power, and plus the power is super huge. It would never stop, until the cold and doomsday!


#2    bubblykiss

bubblykiss

    Last Among Equals

  • Member
  • 4,263 posts
  • Joined:06 Feb 2014
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:PHX, AZ

Posted 17 July 2014 - 06:37 AM

The key questions about the Big Bang are that if it happened;

1. why has it not happened again
2. why did it happen
3. what happens to this cosmos if it does occur again

Her singing always cheered him up. Life seemed so much brighter when she stopped.

T. Pratchett.

#3    shrooma

shrooma

    Government Agent

  • Banned
  • 3,985 posts
  • Joined:14 Feb 2013
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:leeds, UK.

  • Live.
    Sin.
    Die.

Posted 17 July 2014 - 07:11 AM

i'm guessing English isn't your first language Patrick, so i'll make allowances.
firstly, i also think there's something wrong with the big bang theory.
if the singularity our universe was formed from was infinitely dense, how could it expand?
you don't see black holes expanding do you?
....now there's a quandary.
secondary- if the singularity was all that there is, it coildn't have been infinitely hot.
heat is radiation, and, the clue being in the name, it needs to radiate for it to be considered radiation.
but, as you find in a singularity, there's nowhere for the heat to radiate in to, how could 'temperature' register?
unfortunately, the big bang theory is the best model we have for the creation of our universe, and despite its shortcomings, until someone comes up with a better model, it's the one i'll be sticking with....
.

Edited by shrooma, 17 July 2014 - 07:12 AM.

"Get off your knees, the party's over."
.
-How do you sleep-
The Stone Roses.

#4    taniwha

taniwha

    Hi. If im an idiot, then im an idiot for truth.

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,910 posts
  • Joined:25 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 17 July 2014 - 09:00 AM

Its biggest disaster theory ever told yet somehow here we are, squeezed out of the darkness 15 billion years ago.



" Where does yesterday go to? Where does tomorrow come from? Is not the universe the proginetor of space and time? "
                                                                        **Time-machine Universe**
                                                            http://www.unexplain...howtopic=286269

#5    StarMountainKid

StarMountainKid

    Cheese

  • Member
  • 5,501 posts
  • Joined:17 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Star Mountain, Corporate States of America

  • We have problems because we stray from what is innocent and pure.

Posted 17 July 2014 - 02:20 PM

My question is, where was the BB singularity located and why was it there instead of somewhere else? What I really mean is, was there another BB singularity nearby? Were there lots of BB singularities in the neighborhood? Was the whole area singular, and one small place BB'd?

I know it may not be correct to speak of all this in this manner, but you get the idea.

The acceptance of authority does not lead to intelligence.
A mind untouched by thought...the end of knowledge.
To see reality loose your opinions.

#6    sepulchrave

sepulchrave

    Psychic Spy

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,904 posts
  • Joined:19 Apr 2009
  • Gender:Not Selected

Posted 18 July 2014 - 11:42 PM

There are definitely problems with the BBT that still need to be resolved, and it is possible that the BBT will be eventually discarded in favour of a different theory.

(The BBT is no different than any other scientific theory in this regard. They are all incomplete.)

View Postshrooma, on 17 July 2014 - 07:11 AM, said:

if the singularity our universe was formed from was infinitely dense, how could it expand?
It is not necessary for the Universe to expand. (There might be variants of the BBT that allow for this, but it is not necessary.)

In other words, the expansion of space is an internal parameter, within the Universe. This is confusing, because we are used to the concept that ``empty space'' is something we expand into.

However we are objects inside the Universe. The Universe itself is not expanding into anything.

If it is meaningful (and it might not be...) to talk about the ``size'' of the Universe that an external observer would see, then the Universe could still be the same external size that it has ``always'' been (of course this is problematic since time is probably also an internal parameter).

View Postshrooma, on 17 July 2014 - 07:11 AM, said:

you don't see black holes expanding do you?
Just like the Universe, black holes could be expanding internally.

View Postshrooma, on 17 July 2014 - 07:11 AM, said:

secondary- if the singularity was all that there is, it coildn't have been infinitely hot.
heat is radiation, and, the clue being in the name, it needs to radiate for it to be considered radiation.
but, as you find in a singularity, there's nowhere for the heat to radiate in to, how could 'temperature' register?
Heat is not radiation. Heat and temperature are internal parameters and are intimately related to the entropy of the system.

View PostStarMountainKid, on 17 July 2014 - 02:20 PM, said:

My question is, where was the BB singularity located and why was it there instead of somewhere else? What I really mean is, was there another BB singularity nearby? Were there lots of BB singularities in the neighborhood? Was the whole area singular, and one small place BB'd?
Your question is meaningful if and only if space is not ``internal'' to the Universe.

It is reasonably clear (from Hubble flow) that our local space is expanding, and during the inflationary period seems to have expanded faster than light. Therefore there could be infinite BBs ``next'' to ours (and doing the same thing ours was), but we will never be able to observe them.

In a sense, our observable Universe seems to have expanded from a singularity (or a near-singularity), but the initial total Universe need not have been singular (although it probably was homogeneous, which makes the concept of distance problematic).


#7    StarMountainKid

StarMountainKid

    Cheese

  • Member
  • 5,501 posts
  • Joined:17 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Star Mountain, Corporate States of America

  • We have problems because we stray from what is innocent and pure.

Posted 19 July 2014 - 01:25 AM

sepulchrave said:

In other words, the expansion of space is an internal parameter, within the Universe. This is confusing, because we are used to the concept that ``empty space'' is something we expand into.

However we are objects inside the Universe. The Universe itself is not expanding into anything.

If it is meaningful (and it might not be...) to talk about the ``size'' of the Universe that an external observer would see, then the Universe could still be the same external size that it has ``always'' been (of course this is problematic since time is probably also an internal parameter).

I was thinking about this the other day. Since the expansion of space is an internal parameter, from the perspective of an external observer (located in 'elsewhere', outside the universe's 'light cone', so to say), the universe would have no size at all, since it is not expanding into the 'elsewhere' in which the observer is located.

In this sense, the universe occupies no external volume, since it is not expanding into anything. Since the universe only exists internally and not externally, does the universe really exist? Fundamentally it's just a quantum soup at the sub-Planck scale, just probabilities for virtual particles to exist. At this scale, is it possible to define reality?

The acceptance of authority does not lead to intelligence.
A mind untouched by thought...the end of knowledge.
To see reality loose your opinions.

#8    taniwha

taniwha

    Hi. If im an idiot, then im an idiot for truth.

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,910 posts
  • Joined:25 Sep 2012
  • Gender:Male

Posted 20 July 2014 - 12:32 AM

View PostStarMountainKid, on 17 July 2014 - 02:20 PM, said:

My question is, where was the BB singularity located and why was it there instead of somewhere else? What I really mean is, was there another BB singularity nearby? Were there lots of BB singularities in the neighborhood? Was the whole area singular, and one small place BB'd?

I know it may not be correct to speak of all this in this manner, but you get the idea.

Is there a possibility the universe will change into something else entirely?  As well as the laws of physics its obvious intelligence was also a product the singularity concieved.

Would we recognize our universe 15 billion years from now?  Or is it simply that we are headed towards another singular event, the end perhaps?  And so on?



" Where does yesterday go to? Where does tomorrow come from? Is not the universe the proginetor of space and time? "
                                                                        **Time-machine Universe**
                                                            http://www.unexplain...howtopic=286269

#9    StarMountainKid

StarMountainKid

    Cheese

  • Member
  • 5,501 posts
  • Joined:17 Feb 2007
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Star Mountain, Corporate States of America

  • We have problems because we stray from what is innocent and pure.

Posted 20 July 2014 - 01:24 AM

taniwha said:

Is there a possibility the universe will change into something else entirely?  As well as the laws of physics its obvious intelligence was also a product the singularity concieved.

Would we recognize our universe 15 billion years from now?  Or is it simply that we are headed towards another singular event, the end perhaps?  And so on?

If our universe exists in a false vacuum state that is unstable, it may topple into a true vacuum state (lower energy level) and destroy the universe as we know it! It's possible.
http://en.wikipedia....ki/False_vacuum

The acceptance of authority does not lead to intelligence.
A mind untouched by thought...the end of knowledge.
To see reality loose your opinions.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users