It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.


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


Why the Big Bang couldnt have ever happened

page: 3
<< 1  2   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 10:21 PM

Originally posted by instar

Heres my Logic.
If Every single spec of matter in the ENTIRE universe collapsed into a point of 'singularity' it wouldnt be a "Big Bang" it would be a "Big Black Hole".
There is currently NO EVIDENCE that black holes explode and all the matter inside of them expells into the surrounding space. I dont even think there is a theory regaurding such phenomena.

Perhaps it is indeed a big bang, but not in this universe, what enters a black hole here, becomes big bang within its own "bubble universe/dimension" in which our universe is one???

I will suggest that however; it is possible that the entire universe Is a black hole; and it expands inwards infinitly and we are inside of that massive black hole. But this is just a far fetched notion and i will not entertain it further.

"This" universe may well be, perhaps it expands inwardly to the eventual point of totality (big bang) within a new "bubble universe/dimension"
Thus all matter and energy is recycled???? Perhaps the question should be revised to "how old is THIS universe?"

Very intresting!

[edit on 093131p://19019 by instar]

What does anyone think of this recycled mass theory?

posted on Jan, 5 2005 @ 11:23 PM

Originally posted by masterp

But that was not the point of my discussion. The point was that since there is infinite past, light should come from all directions, filling the night sky.

No, My thesis was not wrong. What you are doing is ASSUMING that there are an infinte amount of stars to produce an infinite amount of light. This is pure nonsense. The numbers of stars are finite, though increasing all the time. With a finite light source, you have finite light.

About speed of light and time. Speed of light has everything to do with it because it takes time for the light to travel from its source to its destination. Therefor, by using your logic of infinite stars, the light would continually get brighter untill it eventually turned into energy and obliterated everything in its path due to the frequency shift in the light, due to its speed and due to the growing number of light waves added as time went on. According to your theory, the light would infinitly grow in intensity because of the infinit amount of stars, and the infinite placement of them. This doesnt work. Your model is flawed.

Finally, if the universe was infinite, then how God created it?

This is about the philosophy of physics, not the philosophy of religon. If you want to talk God, we can move to the religon forum.

Go back and read my synopsis on M-theory. If you are truly seeking a higher education on the subject, see what most physist agree with. My rehash of the M-theory was basic, but it gets the point across. If you discount other theories without even bothering to read them, you have done a disservice to yourself, and your level of intelectual intelligence. Open your mind a little and you might find a whole new awarness about the universe.

new topics
<< 1  2   >>

log in