Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,812 Year: 3,069/9,624 Month: 914/1,588 Week: 97/223 Day: 8/17 Hour: 4/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The infinite space of the Universe
onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 61 of 380 (467571)
05-22-2008 1:52 PM
Reply to: Message 59 by New Cat's Eye
05-21-2008 5:27 PM


But how is the expansion rate, which itself is increasing, going to slow down and reverse?
Well, as I understand it, if there is enough matter in the Universe eventually the Universe will collapse into a super dense state, and ultimatly into a super massive blackhole.
When I said it seemed most plausable, I should specify that it seemed most plausable conceptually, and mostly just the cyclical part about it. The Big Crunch, as I understand it, would ultimatly end as a blackhole singularity, the Big Bang is a singularity...it just seemed to fit the cyclical model I was imagining.
You can type 'fuck'
Well fuck, I didn't know that.
You're welcome. Pay it forward.
I'll try but im very humbled by the level of education on this site so I may just sit on the bench for a while and learn some more.

All great truths begin as blasphemies

This message is a reply to:
 Message 59 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-21-2008 5:27 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 62 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-22-2008 2:41 PM onifre has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 62 of 380 (467575)
05-22-2008 2:41 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by onifre
05-22-2008 1:52 PM


Well, as I understand it, if there is enough matter in the Universe eventually the Universe will collapse into a super dense state, and ultimatly into a super massive blackhole.
Sure, given enough mass, the expansion could slow and reverse. But what we see is that the expansion is actually accelerating. It seems we're already past the point of no return.
When I said it seemed most plausable, I should specify that it seemed most plausable conceptually, and mostly just the cyclical part about it. The Big Crunch, as I understand it, would ultimatly end as a blackhole singularity, the Big Bang is a singularity...it just seemed to fit the cyclical model I was imagining.
/nod
Also, a lot of other things exhibit cyclical patters.
I haven't read up on why a cyclical universe has been rejected, I just heard that it was. Maybe cavediver can help.
I'll try but im very humbled by the level of education on this site so I may just sit on the bench for a while and learn some more.
You shouldn't hesitate to ask questions though.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by onifre, posted 05-22-2008 1:52 PM onifre has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Perdition, posted 05-22-2008 5:37 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 63 of 380 (467592)
05-22-2008 5:37 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by New Cat's Eye
05-22-2008 2:41 PM


You've actually already stated why the cyclical theory has been "put on the back burner" for the time being:
But what we see is that the expansion is actually accelerating.
If the universe were going to reach a point and start collapsing again, the expansion would have to be slowing down, ultimately to come to a zero point before it starts accelerating back the other way.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-22-2008 2:41 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 64 by onifre, posted 05-22-2008 10:30 PM Perdition has replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2950 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 64 of 380 (467620)
05-22-2008 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Perdition
05-22-2008 5:37 PM


If the universe were going to reach a point and start collapsing again, the expansion would have to be slowing down, ultimately to come to a zero point before it starts accelerating back the other way.
But isn't that to premature to say that it won't do that since dark energy is not fully known yet?

All great truths begin as blasphemies

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Perdition, posted 05-22-2008 5:37 PM Perdition has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 65 by Perdition, posted 05-22-2008 11:55 PM onifre has not replied

Perdition
Member (Idle past 3237 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 65 of 380 (467636)
05-22-2008 11:55 PM
Reply to: Message 64 by onifre
05-22-2008 10:30 PM


But isn't that to premature to say that it won't do that since dark energy is not fully known yet?
Yes, it is. That's why the theory is sort of put on the back burner, as it were. It's not gone, and there are still proponents of it, but it requires more complexity to explain, and Occam's Razor would indicate that it's not the case.
For one thing, Dark Energy would have to have the property of pushing things apart, faster and faster, until something makes it change and begins pulling things together again. This would seem to indicate two flavors of Dark Energy, one that pushes things apart and one that pushes things together. OR that gravity, which seems to be losing against Dark Energy now, will wipe the sweat from it's brow, get back in the fight and deliver an unexpected knock-out blow.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by onifre, posted 05-22-2008 10:30 PM onifre has not replied

Marcosll
Junior Member (Idle past 5778 days)
Posts: 25
From: Estepona, Spain
Joined: 02-14-2008


Message 66 of 380 (467678)
05-23-2008 10:14 AM


Big Bang
Something's just occurred to me. If you know the answer, please by all means do tell!
At a back hole, the mass is so large that even light cannot escape. The mass of the big bang would be far far superior to that of a black hole. How then could the mass be expelled? Wouldn't the gravitational field be so massive there's no way the universe could expand from it?
Edited by Marcosll, : No reason given.
Edited by Marcosll, : Spelling

Estepona Apartments - Apartments for sale and rent in Estepona, Spain

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Agobot, posted 05-23-2008 10:29 AM Marcosll has not replied
 Message 69 by New Cat's Eye, posted 05-23-2008 10:40 AM Marcosll has not replied
 Message 70 by Straggler, posted 05-23-2008 4:30 PM Marcosll has not replied
 Message 72 by IamJoseph, posted 05-23-2008 10:55 PM Marcosll has not replied
 Message 149 by Libmr2bs, posted 05-29-2008 10:36 PM Marcosll has not replied

Agobot
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 67 of 380 (467680)
05-23-2008 10:26 AM


I think we shouln't be looking for purpose and logic in the universe at all costs. Colossal events like the Big Bang, the emergence and existence of life, the size of the universe, etc, don't make sense. So why should the universe as a whole make any sense?
I think I am with Einstein on this... "the universe is not stranger than we imagine, it's stranger than WE CAN imagine".

Agobot
Member (Idle past 5529 days)
Posts: 786
Joined: 12-16-2007


Message 68 of 380 (467681)
05-23-2008 10:29 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by Marcosll
05-23-2008 10:14 AM


Re: Big Bang
quote:
At a back hole, the mass is so large that even light cannot escape. The mass of the big bang would be far far superior to that of a black hole. How then could the mass be expelled? Wouldn't the gravitational field be so massive there's no way the universe could expand from it?
Our laws of physics don't work in such scenarios. Good luck finding the answer.
PS. Has any research confirmed the long held belief that black holes can actually explode at some point of their life?
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.
Edited by Agobot, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Marcosll, posted 05-23-2008 10:14 AM Marcosll has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 69 of 380 (467683)
05-23-2008 10:40 AM
Reply to: Message 66 by Marcosll
05-23-2008 10:14 AM


Re: Big Bang
At a back hole, the mass is so large that even light cannot escape. The mass of the big bang would be far far superior to that of a black hole. How then could the mass be expelled? Wouldn't the gravitational field be so massive there's no way the universe could expand from it?
The wiki page on inflation might help.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Marcosll, posted 05-23-2008 10:14 AM Marcosll has not replied

Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 70 of 380 (467733)
05-23-2008 4:30 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Marcosll
05-23-2008 10:14 AM


Re: Big Bang
Matter is not "expelled". It is not an explosion of matter. It is an "explosion" of space (and time).
In other words the space between the matter expands thus the matter seperates. According to inflation theory this occurs incredibly rapidly in the very early universe. Much much much faster than the speed of light.
Edited by Straggler, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Marcosll, posted 05-23-2008 10:14 AM Marcosll has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by IamJoseph, posted 05-23-2008 10:36 PM Straggler has replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 71 of 380 (467751)
05-23-2008 10:36 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Straggler
05-23-2008 4:30 PM


SPACE IS NOT INFINITE NOR WAS IT ALWAYS PRESENT.
quote:
Matter is not "expelled". It is not an explosion of matter. It is an "explosion" of space (and time).
Space is matter, and matter comes from a gas [gasous state], which is resultant from pre-sun light essence [aka dark matter - which appeared before matter]. It is exactly like what happens with the reverse proceedure of states: matter turns to gas. [in 1990 the Cosmic Background Explorer (COBE) provided the evidence for this special spectrum. COBE confirmed beyond reasonable doubt that everything, all the matter that galaxies are now made of, was once a compressed gas, hotter than the Sun's core.]
From above, we see that there is pre-sun heat waves [a form of radiation], which is in fact a pre-sun light, aka 'afterglow'. [The expansion has cooled and diluted the radiation, and stretched its wavelength. But this primordial heat, the afterglow of creation is still around.]
We see from this, that two factors in Genesis, the first cosmological view of the universe origins, does make scientific vindication, because it says LIGHT was the first primodial force [meaning this predates stars/Gen 1/3], and acted as a triggering effect which caused matter and its inflation [expansion]; and that of entropy [formless becoming formed/Gen 1/2].
It is primodial light, which produced matter and thereby space and the galaxies by cooling and clumping actions. [The primeval light then shifted into the infrared part of the spectrum, and the Universe literally became dark, until the first stars formed, lighting it again/ BBC - 404: Not Found ]
The other process which appears vindicated in Genesis appears how different kinds of galaxies are formed, eg. spiral, elliptical, different colors and ingredients, etc. This is the same process as occurs with the seed factor bearing its offspring [A seed follows its own kind, bearing in it all the ingredients for speciation and multiplication/Gen]. Why should it be any different, considering the earth and life are part of a larger process repeating its process from up to down, and from first to last?
Dark matter acted as gravitational "seeds" for the density variations to grow. [THE GENESIS SEED FACTOR?]
'One of the biggest breakthroughs came in the early 1980s, when cosmologists theorized the so-called inflationary universe. During the first instants after the Big Bang, says the theory, the newborn universe underwent an episode of extremely rapid expansion, called inflation. Astronomers believe inflation radically changed the landscape of the infant cosmos. Before inflation, the density of the universe was uniform, like the surface of a lake on a windless day. [AN EXTERNAL IMPACT IS INFERRED HERE W/O ALTERNATIVES]. After inflation, the density was uneven, with ripples and waves like a sea in a storm.
Another ingredient in the early universe, dark matter, helped amplify these ripples into more pronounced lumps and clumps. Those density variations are still visible today as fluctuations in the Cosmic Microwave Background (CMB), the "echo" of the Big Bang that is the earliest radiation astronomers can see. [THIS IS A FORM OF PRE-SUN LIGHT ESSENCE]
Dark matter, a mysterious form of matter unlike familiar atoms and subatomic particles, came into being almost immediately after the Big Bang, long before ordinary matter formed. Dark matter acted as gravitational "seeds" for the density variations to grow. [THE GENESIS SEED FACTOR]
Because these areas of higher density had stronger gravity than their surroundings [THIS IS THE SEPERATION FACTORS STATED IN GENESIS - NAMELY THE CRITICAL SEPERATION OF LIGHT AND DARKNESS], they attracted more matter, and eventually, grew to become became the seeds of galaxies. Today, galaxies are surrounded by dark matter halos, which are thought to be ten times larger and more massive than the galaxies' visible portions. [THE 'HALOS' SIGNIFY THE PRE-STAR LIGHT, AKA COSMIC RADIATION/DARK MATTER, WHICH LATER BECAME VISION FRIENDLY WITH THE ADDITIVE OF PHOTONS; THUS AT ONE TIME, THE EARTH EXISTED BUT THE SUN'S LUMINOSITY HAD NOT YET OCCURED/GEN].
While the BBT is the most accepted, there are factors in genesis which can add and expand to it, and also shed light on factors which cannot be otherwise determined. Basically, IMO, the light represents a carrier instrument; the seed represents a program. This process can be seen everywhere one looks within this planet, and it emulates a larger scenario. There is ultimate science in Genesis, which is missed by the uninitiated who lump all such writings as theology - they forget that no theology aside from the OT has anything whatsoever to say on these matters!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Straggler, posted 05-23-2008 4:30 PM Straggler has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 75 by Straggler, posted 05-24-2008 7:51 AM IamJoseph has not replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 72 of 380 (467752)
05-23-2008 10:55 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by Marcosll
05-23-2008 10:14 AM


Re: Big Bang
quote:
How then could the mass be expelled? Wouldn't the gravitational field be so massive there's no way the universe could expand from it?
Light predates matter, thereby mass and energy. Matter is a cooling and heating variation result triggered by a program [seed] within light waves. The gravitational fields are later occurences, dependent upon mass. Mass expulsion is similar or same as omega particles escaping the electron belts, which forms new particles with different attributes. IOW, light predates mass, space, matter, gravitation and all electrons and sub-atomic entities. The emitting of these new particles cannot be random, because of the varied results - namely, these appear a purposeful result, as opposed random, each result being represented by specific and critical variations of light effects.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by Marcosll, posted 05-23-2008 10:14 AM Marcosll has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by bluescat48, posted 05-24-2008 12:46 AM IamJoseph has replied

bluescat48
Member (Idle past 4189 days)
Posts: 2347
From: United States
Joined: 10-06-2007


Message 73 of 380 (467758)
05-24-2008 12:46 AM
Reply to: Message 72 by IamJoseph
05-23-2008 10:55 PM


Re: Big Bang
Light predates matter, thereby mass and energy.
Light is energy.

There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002
Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969

This message is a reply to:
 Message 72 by IamJoseph, posted 05-23-2008 10:55 PM IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by IamJoseph, posted 05-24-2008 5:43 AM bluescat48 has replied

IamJoseph
Member (Idle past 3668 days)
Posts: 2822
Joined: 06-30-2007


Message 74 of 380 (467764)
05-24-2008 5:43 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by bluescat48
05-24-2008 12:46 AM


Re: Big Bang
Energy is mass, which emerged later. Light essence is devoid of photons.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by bluescat48, posted 05-24-2008 12:46 AM bluescat48 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by bluescat48, posted 05-24-2008 9:12 AM IamJoseph has replied

Straggler
Member
Posts: 10333
From: London England
Joined: 09-30-2006


Message 75 of 380 (467771)
05-24-2008 7:51 AM
Reply to: Message 71 by IamJoseph
05-23-2008 10:36 PM


Re: SPACE IS NOT INFINITE NOR WAS IT ALWAYS PRESENT.
Space is matter, and matter comes from a gas [gasous state], which is resultant from pre-sun light essence [aka dark matter - which appeared before matter].
Space is matter?
How so?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 71 by IamJoseph, posted 05-23-2008 10:36 PM IamJoseph has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Agobot, posted 05-24-2008 8:48 AM Straggler has replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024