It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Creations - from Big Bang to Big Crunch, and beyond (before and after)

page: 1
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Post 1 of 2:

Leonard Susskind explains how black holes may retain information:

www.youtube.com...

We know that time slows down in the proximity of great masses that have extreme curving effects on space-time. Effectively, from the point of view of someone falling into a black hole, looking outward, the events of the "external" world will speed up, more and more as we fall closer to the singularity. Basically we witness the rest of the lifetime of the universe, while we fall towards the singularity at normal speed in our own reference system. Visually this means more and more light "arriving in" per second, eventually peaking in all the existing light in the universe hitting our retina in a unit of planck time, that is, if there is any light at all, because with time more and more matter falls into black holes and in the end there is no visible matter left.

Add to this the possibility that black holes "bounce back" to form white holes as soon as they're formed. You may ask, where are these white holes then? Remember time dilation? You'll see them at the end of time. More on this in this Nature article:

www.nature.com...


Let's look at the possibility of all the black holes uniting into a single black hole. This would work perfectly in a universe that oscillates between Big Bangs and Big Crunches. But even if you argue a cosmological constant that allows for infinite expansion of the universe, due to quantum fluctuations all the remaining matter (mainly a bunch of black holes of varying sizes) could end up in one point. The following quote will illustrate how:

"In another article entitled, "Disturbing Implications of a Cosmological Constant" 8 researchers from Stanford and MIT examined some of the "problems" associated with a cosmological constant. In their paper, they stated that the implications of a cosmological constant "lead to very deep paradoxes, which seem to require major revisions of our usual assumptions." They admit that "there is no universally accepted explanation of how the universe got into such a special state" and that their study, "Far from providing a solution to the problem, we will be led to a disturbing crisis." They also admit, "Some unknown agent initially started the inflation high up on its potential, and the rest is history."

In examining problems with the cosmological constant, the authors are concerned that ultimate fate of the universe is complete entropy with all the matter and energy distributed over maximally expanded space-time. They cite the ability of the universe to undergo "Poincare recurrences" as a possible "solution" to one of the "problems." There is a certain theoretical possibility that after the universe is maximally expanded that it would come back together again into one point. Think of it like this. Let's say you are in a room with air molecules randomly moving around in the room. There is a certain probability that the random motion of the molecules could cause all of them to travel to one corner of the room, leaving you in a complete vacuum. Obviously, this would not be a good thing to happen, but it is possible, with an interval on the order of once every 10^60 years. Since we only live 10^2 years in a universe that has been around for only 10^10 years, it is practically impossible. So, what is the time it would take for a fully expanded universe to come back into a single point? The authors calculate the value as e10^120 years."

( www.godandscience.org... )

So, in summary, what we're looking at is all information being saved in black holes, or never even getting lost but bouncing back straight away. Imagine the time when the expansion of the universe turns around into contraction and all the stuff of the universe ends up in black holes, eventually uniting as the "Big Crunch Black Hole", for which have no external world to look out into, and which will not last forever to any external observer. The only existing reference point for this one black hole will be itself, which, as it is about to be formed, sucks in the rest of the universe (all other black holes "ready" to bounce back), and, all information (experience) saved, itself bounces back into a white hole (another universe), which will, in structure, build upon what has been "learned" in the previous universe. Basically the oscillating universes theory.

This sounds exactly what is described in the Ra Material, except there these universes are called "Creations", or "Octaves", and the expansion and contraction is the Creator (the Universe itself) breathing in and out. A few quotes to illustrate:

"In the understanding which we have of the universe or creation as one infinite being, its heart beating as alive in its own intelligent energy, it merely is one beat of the heart of this intelligence from creation to creation."

"Seventh density is the Density of Foreverness. In that density all of the souls that are there, who have been on the King’s Highway for many densities, finally release all of the past and turn their heads to the completion of the journey. That density ends in timelessness. Then there is a pause while the great heart of the Creator beats one more time. And when it comes out of that beat we’re in another first density, starting the whole octave of densities once again, being sent out once again to gather information so the Creator can find out who He is."

"When the infinite Creator wished to know Itself, Its great heart beat out the next creation with all of its densities and sub-densities and all of the patterns of those densities and creations. Time and space were invoked and that which before was immeasurable and unknowable became a series of illusions that, paradoxically, were to some degree knowable, and these shadows of knowing were much desired by the Creator."

Quotes from llresearch.org

The unveiledsecretsandmessagesoflight website also provides the same philosophy in this regard:

"Interlocutor: What is the purpose of the Big Bangs and Big Crunches if within the entity called Eon everything is an Eternal Present?
ABBA: The eternal present, precisely permits the various Big Bang /Big Crunch cycles so that each new universe will be in a higher octave, along with all the Creation and all the beings that Eon creates again. In turn, Eon also evolves accompanying the evolution of his Creation. And the goal is evolution. That is the answer."

( unveiledsecretsandmessagesoflight.blogspot.co.uk... )

The Conversations with God books have the same view:

"Universes breathe in and breathe out."

And the list is probably endless.

If I were to use physics to support the idea that the Universe is intelligent, the Creator itself, or at least a part of it, its physical manifestation, like the vessel that your body is for the soul that you are, I would use the question of physical laws:




posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 04:30 PM
link   
Post 2 of 2:

It's hard to see why a universe should be born with laws that describe phenomena that will ONLY EXIST IN THE FUTURE, as if the universe "knew" these laws will be necessary. So first after the Big Bang you have the hot soup of energy bursting apart, but you need it to slow down otherwise it gets scattered and fall apart. As if it "knew" that in order for it to remain stable, gravity is needed, exactly the value it needs to be, so the universe doesn't collapse, nor does it fall apart. So we need the cosmological constant to be zero to within one part in roughly 10 to the power of 120, otherwise the universe would've dispersed too fast for stars and galaxies to form, or would've re-collapsed upon itself long ago.

Everything looks fine, until you have charge appearing for the first time. (Was it known in advance? Must've been, because, lo and behold, there are laws describing how charged particles should interact - attraction, repulsion.) Damn, we better have a law for this, they better interact with each other in a consistent and predictable manner, keeping in mind that the stability of the universe cannot be jeopardized, so we better add some more fine-tuned constants again. As we know, the ratio of the strengths of gravity to that of electromagnetism, is 1,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000. If it were smaller, only a small and short-lived universe could exist.

Then once we have particles... I must stop here. We know what happens next. They will bond and form nuclei, (keep in mind, "the strength of the force binding nucleons into nuclei, is 0.07. If it were 0.06, only hydrogen could exist, and complex chemistry would be impossible. If it were 0.08, no hydrogen would exist, as all the hydrogen would have been fused shortly after the big bang" - wikipedia), then atoms form, which will form molecules because (guess what) there are laws in place already describing how those atoms will need to bond, and from that point on the emergence of life is only a few more unlikely accidents away. At this point, where only particles exist, my question is, why can't they just fly apart? Why were there laws to make them form atoms, and more laws for molecules, as if there were a big plan. Almost sounds like intelligent planning. Is the emergence of consciousness, the phenomenon of self-aware life, also an accident? Something these laws "happened to" allow for?

Where did the "knowledge" come from? The harvest of the previous universe? Doesn't sound implausible. Indeed, as Ra says:

Questioner: "These early Logoi that formed in the center of the galaxy wished, I assume, to create a system of experience for the one Creator. Did they then start with no previous experience or information about how to do this? This is difficult to ask.

Ra: I am Ra. At the beginning of this creation or, as you may call it, octave there were those things known which were the harvest of the preceding octave. About the preceding creation, we know as little as we do of the octave to come. However, we are aware of those pieces of gathered concept which were the tools which the Creator had in the knowing of the self. These tools were of three kinds. Firstly, there was an awareness of the efficiency for experience of mind, body, and spirit. Secondly, there was an awareness of the most efficacious nature or, if you will, significator of mind, body, and spirit. Thirdly, there was the awareness of two aspects of mind, of body, and of spirit that the significator could use to balance all catalyst. You may call these two the matrix and the potentiator."

I have been always fascinated with the properties of the octaves. There are those that move between them. They impart a very limited amount of information about them. An example of what we know:

"Questioner: Then we have, at the beginning of this galactic evolution, an archetypical mind that is the product of the previous octave which this galaxy then used as and acts upon under the first distortion so as to allow for what we experience as polarity. Was there any concept of polarity carried through from the previous octave in the sense of service-to-others or service-to-self polarity?

Ra: I am Ra. There was polarity in the sense of the mover and the moved. There was no polarity in the sense of service-to-self and service-to-others.

Questioner: Then the first experiences, as you say, were in monochrome. Was the concept of the seven densities of vibration with the evolutionary process taking place in discrete densities carried through from the previous octave?

Ra: I am Ra. To the limits of our knowledge, which are narrow, the ways of the octave are without time; that is, there are seven densities in each creation infinitely."

Does any or all of this make sense to anybody?



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 05:07 PM
link   
a reply to: Rolci

if there are infinite universes, then perhaps there is one with a god. i do not think it is this one.



posted on Sep, 22 2014 @ 06:55 PM
link   
a reply to: Rolci

I think I understand your post.
So basically black holes eventually all collide making one ball of matter in space and when everything forms into one mass it explodes?

The points you make about black holes have memory, is that based on the mathematical perfection of everything that will spew forth once the last black hole turns white and explodes essentially giving birth to a new universe?

So basically for everything to form as it should repetitively e.g. universe born from universe. The mathematics involved would have to be remembered otherwise everything will go to pot and nothing would form as it should?

Am I understanding this properly?

Would that make god a series of perfectly formed mathematical equations?

S + F



posted on Sep, 23 2014 @ 05:32 AM
link   
1. Please check Big Crunch in wikipedia,or anywhere

2. Black holes having memory is based on the lecture Leonard Susskind, Stanford University professor gives in the video my first link takes you to. Check his credentials if you didn't know who he is.

3. If you're looking for the ability of mathematics to unify all of then I suggest you check this news for example:

www.simonsfoundation.org...

4. What I propose above is not new, it's simply the oscillating universe model:

www.universetoday.com...

except I suggest that instead of all black holes forming one final black hole which created the next Big Bang, you have white holes, which are not observable to the external world due to time dilation, but instead, at the moment of the Big Crunch, when there are no external observers left, you get one large white hole, as described here:

www.nature.com...

with none of the information lost, as Susskind suggests happens in black holes, but if they turn into white holes instantly then even his explanation is not necessary, but good for backup.

So essentially you get a new universe which contains everything this one has "learned", including life, consciousness, us, and whatever we will evolve into, and all alien races, their interactions, spiritual values, everything. This will form the base of the next creation.



posted on Sep, 23 2014 @ 12:28 PM
link   
Where are the white holes?



posted on Sep, 23 2014 @ 12:30 PM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
Where are the white holes?


on the other end of the black holes.



posted on Sep, 23 2014 @ 12:48 PM
link   
a reply to: TzarChasm

No, I mean, where are they in the sky?

They should be pretty easy to spot. Only they aren't.



posted on Sep, 23 2014 @ 01:09 PM
link   
I enjoyed reading this hypothesis on how our universe works. I understood just about all of the science and kind of got the religious bit. It is an interesting idea and something that has got me truly pondering. I think I get what you are saying about white holes too. I believe you are saying that white holes only appear once a black hole has reached maximum capacity, but that only happens once it contains all matter and information in the universe. So, eventually all matter has been compressed into singularities throughout the universe. These singularities are still attracted by the forces of gravity and are all attracting each other. Eventually those singularities will run into each other, with at some point in the far distant future, they all combine into one. Once combined into one singularity, it pops and out pops a new universe with all the remembered constants and mathematical algorithms that were allowed to evolve in the previous incarnation of the universe.

Very deep stuff here. Not sure if I buy the religious aspect, but I like the science. I also enjoyed that you put links to your sources. So many ideas are pushed on this website and not properly sourced or sourced to a questionable location.

Question, is it possible that a black hole could become so massive that it pulls space into itself? The reason I ask is that, if this where possible then this would complete the idea of an expanding and contracting universe.

ETA: In any case this thread is a refreshing read compared to the normal crappy threads that we get in this forum that strawman science; then go on for 50 thousand pages where the op sticks his fingers in his ears and disregards the whole world telling and showing him he is wrong.
edit on 23-9-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2014 @ 01:10 PM
link   

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: TzarChasm

No, I mean, where are they in the sky?

They should be pretty easy to spot. Only they aren't.


According to the op, they only appear at the end of time. So in essence, only when all matter is compressed into one black hole. So if I understand the OP correctly, there aren't white holeS, plural, but just one white hole, the big bang version x.0.
edit on 23-9-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2014 @ 02:05 PM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

Have you read the Nature article? Or even without reading. have you not been aware of gravitational time dilation??

en.wikipedia.org...

It effectively means that very close to singularity, time flows almost infinitely slow, meaning that the light from the white hole will appear to the outside observer in the infinite future, except when the observer gets very very near to the black hole, possibly within the schwarzschield radius, or even the event horizon.

Krazysh0t, I understand your reluctance to incorporate channeled material into this. But may I invite you to challenge your own belief system? why don't you check out my topic "The Great Paradigm-Challenging Thread"?

www.abovetopsecret.com...

It's got references for everything I write about. I've had the displeasure of having it discussed to shreds in an ultra-hostile (skeptic) environment, which distilled the main provable truths in it, with peer-reviewed articles etc. and I have come to the conclusion that... It's all correct. If, after reading it, if you read it at all, you have questions/doubts or are curious about the final conclusions of the distillation process, let me know. I wouldn't pose crazy ideas without references, just for the sake of it. We have enough that do that.



posted on Sep, 23 2014 @ 02:12 PM
link   
a reply to: Rolci

I'll give it a gander, but know this, I am a skeptic and most religious claims are largely unproven because there is no evidence to support it. Without evidence, the best you'll get from me (provided that it doesn't violate the laws of physics) is that it's possible. I liked this thread because it took known ideas that have been established by the scientific evidence we currently have and postulated a probable estimate of what may happen in the future. I also enjoyed it because it presented ideas that I hadn't considered before. I also enjoy talking about black holes



posted on Sep, 23 2014 @ 02:34 PM
link   
So I read your other thread and I wanted to ask you a question about this thread based on what was in the other thread. In the other thread you said that you believe in reincarnation. In this thread you suggest that the universe is constantly expanding and contracting (oscillating). So my question is, did you ever consider that people aren't reincarnated across lifetimes or eras, but across universal periods (a period being the length or one oscillation)? So when you die, your time during this universe is done, but you are (or rather your essence since it won't end up in the same exact bodily makeup) born again once the universe recycles.

I'm an agnostic so I'm not entirely sure that reincarnation is real. I just saw that connection between the two threads and thought I'd see if you had seen it as well.
edit on 23-9-2014 by Krazysh0t because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 23 2014 @ 06:57 PM
link   
a reply to: Krazysh0t

It is my understanding that you, as a soul, re-incarnate a few hundred times while human (or an equivalent 3rd density creature), maybe 1-2 thousand. Of course there is scattering, this would be the case with about 99.9% of souls I guess, with some requiring a few dozen or less, some many thousands. Anyway, a 3rd density master cycle is roughly 75.000 years.

Then there is the next density, 30 million years, and the next, (?), and the next, 75 million years. Then there is 7th and 8th, which are funny, let's not get into it. Keep in mind, lifespans in different densities vary. 3rd D is the shortest, the whole cycle the flash of an eye, not to mention a lifetime.

It is also my understanding that souls are cast out in the next octave again. I have a certain lack of understanding of this issue due to some paradoxical knowledge I hold true and haven't been able to reconcile, but I won't get into that either.

I must ask you though, have you watched any of the vids on reincarnation in the sources section? Pretty much evidence as I see it. Here, my favourite:

www.youtube.com...

Less than 10 minutes. Not the best evidence, but my fav. What do you make of it?



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 08:01 AM
link   

originally posted by: Rolci

I must ask you though, have you watched any of the vids on reincarnation in the sources section? Pretty much evidence as I see it. Here, my favourite:

www.youtube.com...

Less than 10 minutes. Not the best evidence, but my fav. What do you make of it?


A Sci-Fi channel documentary?




posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 09:34 AM
link   
a reply to: Rolci

Yes, I'm aware of it, but I don't really understand why it should defer the appearance of white holes until the end of the universe (or this cycle of it). What's so significant about the end of the universe?

(I've always wanted to ask that question.)



posted on Sep, 24 2014 @ 05:35 PM
link   
a reply to: Prezbo369

A documentary is a documentary, whichever channel they eventually decide to air on. However, this one isn't on Sci-fi:

www.youtube.com...

But if you had paid attention you would've realized that all you need to do is get a damn past life regression, note down the checkable facts, and check 'em! It's what people that believe no one do for personal conviction. Not THAT'S undeniable proof for anyone.

a reply to: Astyanax

it doesn't defer it to the end, just very far into the future. Have you still not read the article? It says:

"because gravity dilates time, outside observers would see the black hole lasting billions or trillions of years or more, depending on its size."

So if it's a tiny one, it could be as "little" as a few billion years, but then it would only be a very faint one, not one that you would spot in the sky, or even if you did with a very strong telescope, you would simply think it's a star.

I don't understand your last question. The only significance I can think of is MAYBE this:

"the blackness of the black hole, metaphysically speaking, is a concentration of white light being systematically absorbed once again into the one Creator. Finally, this absorption into the one Creator continues until all the infinity of creations have attained sufficient spiritual mass in order that all form once again the great central sun, if you would so imagine it, of the intelligent infinity awaiting potentiation by free will. Thus the transition of the octave is a process which may be seen to enter into timelessness of unimaginable nature. To attempt to measure it by your time measures would be useless.
Therefore, the concept of moving through the black hole of the ultimate spiritual gravity well and coming immediately into the next octave misses the subconcept or corollary of the portion of this process which is timeless."

Quote from the Law of One material.

It is also my understanding that, rather than the singularity bursting into the next universe straight away, the Creator is "at rest" for "a moment" between creations. I couldn't find the source for this but I remember it clearly, and it's similar to the above quote anyway. I'm not sure of the physics of it, if there is even a physics of it, or what the rest is for. Maybe just a nanosecond to plan the next universe and its laws. But that it is also my understanding that time is an illusory construct, especially outside space-time it's pretty meaningless. I hope you can work something out from all this.
edit on 24-9-2014 by Rolci because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 25 2014 @ 03:31 AM
link   
a reply to: Rolci


it doesn't defer it to the end, just very far into the future. Have you still not read the article?

I read the article earlier. It's a speculative attempt to resolve the Hawking paradox, not a scientific discovery.

If the deferral is only billions of years and not the entire lifetime of the universe, then my earlier question stands. Where are all the white holes? GRBs and supernovas? Implausible to say the least, due to the strict time limitation. Quasars? I thought quasars surrounded black holes?

My question about the significance of the end of the universe had to do with why we (as Krazysh0t and I misunderstood you)
would have to wait until the end of the universe to see a white hole. I will forbear to express an opinon on your attempted answer.



posted on Sep, 25 2014 @ 04:11 AM
link   
a reply to: Astyanax

Without understanding the physics that drives the inner workings of a white hole, why would you assume an ability to guess how it would behave or what it would look like?

And besides, like I pointed out already,

"outside observers would see the black hole lasting billions or trillions of years or more, depending on its size."

The billions and tens of billions is for the tiny ones. The ones you can't detect from far away. The sufficiently large ones need hundreds of billions and trillions of years to become visible. The universe is not that old.

And in case you didn't understand my "attempted answer", I would remind you that matter is merely condensed energy, identical in nature to electromagnetic waves. Which is why particles are capable of showing an interference pattern, same as photons.) In my quote, the term "white light" refers to the "energy" nature of the material that gets sucked into the black hole. Essentially black holes are not made of particles as they all break down, just like atoms break down in a neutron star where electrons and protons fuse to form neutrons. Apart from reading articles online, I would invite you to spend time reflecting on the nature of black holes. Then maybe you'll come to a deeper, intuitive understanding, and would begin understanding some of what the quote says. The authors of it have a little more experience and thus understanding about the nature of the universe than you and I. But I respect your free will to choose your own belief system, so feel free to discard any and all ideology that don't suit your present direction of seeking knowledge.

Only here to offer what I have to offer.



posted on Sep, 25 2014 @ 07:03 AM
link   
a reply to: Rolci

Why does it have to be humans? What makes humans so special that they get reincarnated into a bunch of times? What about other organisms on the planet? What about other organisms on other planets? What about other intelligent and rational organisms on other planets? My beef with reincarnation is that it always seems to be within people.

P.S. I don't watch youtube videos and don't consider them to be evidence of anything. A video can be made to say and show anything. Though if you link me to a peer reviewed study, I'd review that.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<<   2  3 >>

log in

join