Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 115 (8795 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-19-2017 1:23 AM
338 online now:
Coyote, PaulK (2 members, 336 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Upcoming Birthdays: Astrophile, Flyer75
Post Volume:
Total: 820,826 Year: 25,432/21,208 Month: 1,059/2,338 Week: 180/450 Day: 0/52 Hour: 0/0

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
1
234Next
Author Topic:   Alpha-Omega universes in free fall
sunshaker
Member (Idle past 7 days)
Posts: 49
From: England
Joined: 10-25-2012


Message 1 of 47 (676954)
10-25-2012 7:58 AM


black holes drive expansion of universe
There are black holes through out our local universe at the centre of galaxies, galaxies merge as do black holes becoming ever larger, if we was to step outside our universe you would see we are surrounded by countless universes and universe size black holes all pulling on each other, being pulled (falling) to Omega a "black hole" which as feasted on many universes until it becomes to "heavy" for its current dimension and drops into a lower dimension and "pops" this is Alpha "white hole" which spews all it as fed on, matter-energies-space-time which then rapidly expand in this "lower dimension", forming many universes in there own space-time bubbles all expanding all falling.

We are within one of these "expanding bubbles" still falling that is why the stars and planets are weightless just like astronauts practicing weightlessness in a falling plane.

We are once again falling towards the Omega. (There are no white holes in any single universe as there is not enough mass to make the Alpha-omega).

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Coming back to our "local universe" i was wondering if the "gravity wells" around galaxies stars and planets are there because of them or are the galaxies and stars etc there because of the "gravity wells", imperfections of the expanding "universe bubble in this lower dimension" that attract the heavier elements from the higher dimension into pockets forming stars and galaxies. Perhaps something like gold on a sluice table where the heavier gold sinks into the troughs of the sluice table and lighter materials wash over.

So as our universe expands in this lower dimension it draws in lower "dimensional space", acting like the water pouring into our universe causing "troughs in space" where the heavy old dimensional materials collect creating what we see (planets stars galaxies). And the old dimensional space (dark energies) creating a lattice, while the lower dimensional space fills the lattice. The old is the "skeleton web" of the new.

With this, i would expect there to be vortexs all over our universe where the lower dimensional space is rushing in or out.

There are super massive black holes filling the galaxy bubble, There are also atom size black holes filling our solar bubble, the larger the vortex the more lower dimensional space rushes in depositing larger amounts of higher dimensional particles causing star to form, but as we continue to expand the higher dimensioal materials become more dispersed, stars and galaxies form further apart , the rushing lower dimensional space causes the materials to swirl in these pockets,

The larger the "galaxy" or cluster of stars would mean there is a larger vortex or multiple vortexs (black holes) nearby. I also expect as our universe bubble expands the galaxy bubbles will start to shrink as dimensional space is evened out, "black holes" then reverse drawing "space -energies" to other areas of our universe bubble.

Voyager 1 should be reaching the edge of our solar bubble, i expect it to encounter higher amounts of incoming higher dimensional energies. Recently hubble as done some more deep field imageing and i was thinking we might start seeing the edges of other "expanding universes" beginning to merge with our own.

Once you realise our universe is expanding in lower dimensional space, you realise the edges of our universe must have vortexs(black holes) letting the lower dimensional space rush in, You realise galaxies formed when there was a higher concentration of higher dimensional materials, now we have expanded somewhat, there is less concentrate of higher dimensional materials, so less to deposit in troughs, This depositing is still going on, They are known as gamma ray bursts.

And being as we are expanding these Gamma bursts would mostly be towards the edges of our universe, so would be happening mainly around the the very first stars and galaxies http://www.nasa.gov/...es/spitzer/news/spitzer-20071025.html

Black holes are the process to even the expanding universe, sometimes expelling sometimes consuming,

This is why after a super nova the space is expanded and a black hole is formed to even out this bubble caused by the super nova explosion, would then mean that neaby (connected) black holes may eject some of these excess energies.

Which also then got me to thinking if all "matter and energies" came from a higher dimension we must then be higher dimensional beings living in this lower dimension which inturn means life came from the higher dimension and must then permeate dimensional space time and collect in the right "gravity wells" not to hot not to cold (earth). As it is said "what is above is below" http://www.themystica.com/...ica/articles/a/below_above.html.

Sometimes you first have to step outside to see the bigger picture.
This is a tiny part of that bigger picture.

Edited by sunshaker, : first edit spelling etc

Edited by sunshaker, : No reason given.

Edited by sunshaker, : No reason given.

Edited by sunshaker, : added subtitle

Edited by sunshaker, : added a link

Edited by sunshaker, : added super nova.


Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by AdminPhat, posted 10-25-2012 8:01 AM sunshaker has not yet responded
 Message 6 by NoNukes, posted 10-26-2012 7:42 AM sunshaker has not yet responded
 Message 14 by DWIII, posted 10-26-2012 5:37 PM sunshaker has responded

    
AdminPhat
Administrator
Posts: 1815
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-03-2004


Message 2 of 47 (676955)
10-25-2012 8:01 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by sunshaker
10-25-2012 7:58 AM


Meet me in chat. Lets discuss promoting this topic

Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.

Edited by AdminPhat, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by sunshaker, posted 10-25-2012 7:58 AM sunshaker has not yet responded

    
AdminPhat
Administrator
Posts: 1815
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-03-2004


Message 3 of 47 (676957)
10-26-2012 2:43 AM


Thread Copied from Proposed New Topics Forum
Thread copied here from the Alpha-Omega universes in free fall thread in the Proposed New Topics forum.
    
Larni
Member
Posts: 3951
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 4 of 47 (676968)
10-26-2012 5:37 AM


Sometimes you first have to step outside to see the bigger picture.
This is a tiny part of that bigger picture.

What is your point?


The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53

The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286

Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134


Replies to this message:
 Message 5 by sunshaker, posted 10-26-2012 6:06 AM Larni has responded
 Message 8 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-26-2012 8:07 AM Larni has responded

    
sunshaker
Member (Idle past 7 days)
Posts: 49
From: England
Joined: 10-25-2012


Message 5 of 47 (676970)
10-26-2012 6:06 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Larni
10-26-2012 5:37 AM


The "point" is at the moment i am sticking to what will and can be proved, but i see a bigger picture of a more complete "system", which this is just a small part of.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Larni, posted 10-26-2012 5:37 AM Larni has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 7 by Larni, posted 10-26-2012 7:44 AM sunshaker has not yet responded

    
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9993
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 6 of 47 (676989)
10-26-2012 7:42 AM
Reply to: Message 1 by sunshaker
10-25-2012 7:58 AM


Are you kidding me?
We are within one of these "expanding bubbles" still falling that is why the stars and planets are weightless just like astronauts practicing weightlessness in a falling plane.

It is easy to understand why astronauts experience 'weightlessness' without resorting to any of this alpha-omega stuff.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by sunshaker, posted 10-25-2012 7:58 AM sunshaker has not yet responded

    
Larni
Member
Posts: 3951
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 7 of 47 (676990)
10-26-2012 7:44 AM
Reply to: Message 5 by sunshaker
10-26-2012 6:06 AM


When you say you see the bigger picture how do you know what you see is not just your imagination?

Do you you have any evidence this?


The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53

The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286

Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134


This message is a reply to:
 Message 5 by sunshaker, posted 10-26-2012 6:06 AM sunshaker has not yet responded

    
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 1524 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 8 of 47 (676997)
10-26-2012 8:07 AM
Reply to: Message 4 by Larni
10-26-2012 5:37 AM


The point is that ancient cosmogonies make much more pleasant read and better sense. Give me Zeus, Pandora's box, Pluto and Neptune any day and keep your black holes if you love them so much.
Human fantasy degenerated a lot, if you ask the feline.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 4 by Larni, posted 10-26-2012 5:37 AM Larni has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 9 by Larni, posted 10-26-2012 9:50 AM Alfred Maddenstein has responded
 Message 16 by sunshaker, posted 10-26-2012 8:48 PM Alfred Maddenstein has not yet responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3951
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


(1)
Message 9 of 47 (677007)
10-26-2012 9:50 AM
Reply to: Message 8 by Alfred Maddenstein
10-26-2012 8:07 AM


So, you base your conclusions about reality on what you personally prefer to believe: I wish I could.

There would be dragons.


The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53

The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286

Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134


This message is a reply to:
 Message 8 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-26-2012 8:07 AM Alfred Maddenstein has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 10 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-26-2012 2:15 PM Larni has responded

    
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 1524 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 10 of 47 (677054)
10-26-2012 2:15 PM
Reply to: Message 9 by Larni
10-26-2012 9:50 AM


How do you mean? You'd prefer to believe in dragons but duty calls you to be loyal to black holes? Don't worry. It's all literature anyway. Go ahead. Indulge yourself in some dragons too.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Larni, posted 10-26-2012 9:50 AM Larni has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by Larni, posted 10-26-2012 2:21 PM Alfred Maddenstein has responded

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3951
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 11 of 47 (677055)
10-26-2012 2:21 PM
Reply to: Message 10 by Alfred Maddenstein
10-26-2012 2:15 PM


How do you mean? You'd prefer to believe in dragons but duty calls you to be loyal to black holes? Don't worry. It's all literature anyway. Go ahead. Indulge yourself in some dragons too.

No. Of course not.

I would love the Universe to make sense in an intuitive way where every phenomena boiled down to common sense rules of cause and effect: where anything that just did not make sense to me could not be true.

But I know there are things that don't conform to my personal take on how things should work.

To get around this I use the scientific method to base my conclusions on.

I would love to beleive that there are dragons: but there is no evidence of them so I don't.

Do you understand?


The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53

The explain to them any scientific investigation that explains the existence of things qualifies as science and as an explanation
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 286

Does a query (thats a question Stile) that uses this physical reality, to look for an answer to its existence and properties become theoretical, considering its deductive conclusions are based against objective verifiable realities.
-Attributed to Dawn Bertot Message 134


This message is a reply to:
 Message 10 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-26-2012 2:15 PM Alfred Maddenstein has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 12 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-26-2012 4:14 PM Larni has acknowledged this reply

    
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 1524 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 12 of 47 (677079)
10-26-2012 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 11 by Larni
10-26-2012 2:21 PM


Ok, but I don't quite get what you mean, Larn, about causality. Do you reckon causality is selective or what? Some effects have causes but other don't? And you'd love them all to have causes? Don't like the situation but have to put up with it because your scientific method tells you to grin and bear?
What kind of scientific method you've got, Larn, to infer all that?
This message is a reply to:
 Message 11 by Larni, posted 10-26-2012 2:21 PM Larni has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 13 by NoNukes, posted 10-26-2012 4:23 PM Alfred Maddenstein has not yet responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9993
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 13 of 47 (677080)
10-26-2012 4:23 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Alfred Maddenstein
10-26-2012 4:14 PM


Please.
Would you guys mind continuing this discussion via private message. The topic is the Alpha-Omega universe in free fall.

Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison.

If there is no struggle, there is no progress. Those who profess to favor freedom, and deprecate agitation, are men who want crops without plowing up the ground, they want rain without thunder and lightning. Frederick Douglass


This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-26-2012 4:14 PM Alfred Maddenstein has not yet responded

    
DWIII
Member (Idle past 760 days)
Posts: 72
From: United States
Joined: 06-30-2011


Message 14 of 47 (677094)
10-26-2012 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by sunshaker
10-25-2012 7:58 AM


Re: black holes drive expansion of universe
sunshaker writes:


So as our universe expands in this lower dimension it draws in lower "dimensional space", acting like the water pouring into our universe causing "troughs in space" where the heavy old dimensional materials collect creating what we see (planets stars galaxies). And the old dimensional space (dark energies) creating a lattice, while the lower dimensional space fills the lattice. The old is the "skeleton web" of the new.

With this, i would expect there to be vortexs all over our universe where the lower dimensional space is rushing in or out.

There are super massive black holes filling the galaxy bubble, There are also atom size black holes filling our solar bubble, the larger the vortex the more lower dimensional space rushes in depositing larger amounts of higher dimensional particles causing star to form, but as we continue to expand the higher dimensioal materials become more dispersed, stars and galaxies form further apart , the rushing lower dimensional space causes the materials to swirl in these pockets,

The larger the "galaxy" or cluster of stars would mean there is a larger vortex or multiple vortexs (black holes) nearby. I also expect as our universe bubble expands the galaxy bubbles will start to shrink as dimensional space is evened out, "black holes" then reverse drawing "space -energies" to other areas of our universe bubble.

Voyager 1 should be reaching the edge of our solar bubble, i expect it to encounter higher amounts of incoming higher dimensional energies.

The technical term is "heliopause". And it has nothing to do with "incoming higher dimensional energies".


Recently hubble as done some more deep field imageing and i was thinking we might start seeing the edges of other "expanding universes" beginning to merge with our own.

Once you realise our universe is expanding in lower dimensional space, you realise the edges of our universe

Therein lies a significant problem. Modern cosmology simply doesn't recognize such a concept as "the edge of the universe". Until you are clear as to how the laws of physics as we know them applies to an "edge", no modern cosmologist would even bother with this.


must have vortexs(black holes) letting the lower dimensional space rush in, You realise galaxies formed when there was a higher concentration of higher dimensional materials, now we have expanded somewhat, there is less concentrate of higher dimensional materials, so less to deposit in troughs, This depositing is still going on, They are known as gamma ray bursts.

And being as we are expanding these Gamma bursts would mostly be towards the edges of our universe, so would be happening mainly around the the very first stars and galaxies http://www.nasa.gov/...es/spitzer/news/spitzer-20071025.html

Black holes are the process to even the expanding universe, sometimes expelling sometimes consuming,

There is only one known way (more accurately one known theoretical way) that any black hole could be seen as expelling anything from inside its own event horizon. Care to hazard a guess as to what process that is?


This is why after a super nova the space is expanded and a black hole is formed to even out this bubble caused by the super nova explosion, would then mean that neaby (connected) black holes may eject some of these excess energies.

Which also then got me to thinking if all "matter and energies" came from a higher dimension we must then be higher dimensional beings living in this lower dimension which inturn means life came from the higher dimension and must then permeate dimensional space time and collect in the right "gravity wells" not to hot not to cold (earth). As it is said "what is above is below" http://www.themystica.com/...ica/articles/a/below_above.html.

Sometimes you first have to step outside to see the bigger picture.
This is a tiny part of that bigger picture.

So, is any of this science? Or just a bunch of what appears to be pseudoscientific babbling?


DWIII

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by sunshaker, posted 10-25-2012 7:58 AM sunshaker has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by sunshaker, posted 10-26-2012 8:35 PM DWIII has not yet responded

    
sunshaker
Member (Idle past 7 days)
Posts: 49
From: England
Joined: 10-25-2012


Message 15 of 47 (677115)
10-26-2012 8:35 PM
Reply to: Message 14 by DWIII
10-26-2012 5:37 PM


Re: black holes drive expansion of universe
Heliopause is the "name" give to our solar bubble, the suns energies keep this bubble inflated.
when voyager leaves this bubble it will enter denser space and higher energies, when voyager stops transmitting we will know it as left our solar bubble (heliopause).

Modern cosmology may not recognize an "edge" but nasa says "galatic city at edge of universe" http://www.nasa.gov/...spitzer/multimedia/pia13782-L_prt.htm and the further we see the younger the stars.

As you said only one "theoretical way" but not my way, i am unsure if you mean an accretion disc or a quaser.
Maybe after a super nova we should check nearby black holes or look for gamma ray bursts.
http://newswatch.nationalgeographic.com/...ht-sky-news-new-s it is only energies being evened out throughout the different "systems".


This message is a reply to:
 Message 14 by DWIII, posted 10-26-2012 5:37 PM DWIII has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 17 by NoNukes, posted 10-26-2012 9:15 PM sunshaker has responded
 Message 19 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 10-27-2012 12:29 AM sunshaker has not yet responded
 Message 26 by Phat, posted 10-28-2012 7:22 AM sunshaker has responded

    
1
234Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017