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.

 

Big Bang Brain Boggler

page: 5
8
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Dec, 15 2007 @ 11:20 PM
link   

Originally posted by The Soothsayer
Haven't read the thread in its entirety yet,


It'd probably have saved you some time if you had.


Originally posted by The Soothsayer
"The Big Bang, an explosion of galactic proportions,"


The Big Bang was not an explosion.


[edit on 15-12-2007 by kegs]




posted on Dec, 16 2007 @ 01:29 AM
link   
I had a reply to this thread, but it was too long to fit in one post, so I made my own thread. you can find it here. www.abovetopsecret.com...
I don't remember if I am aloud to imediatly post a link to my thread, but I have no other way of saying my point, it is to big for post. It is not imediatly realted to the big bang, but my point for this thread is made in my own.



posted on Dec, 17 2007 @ 10:17 PM
link   
Hahaha. And to think, out of all we've learnt about how massive the universe is + the number of planets or galexies in the universe is amazing, still, some people believe earth is the only planet with life. Hilarious.



posted on Dec, 21 2007 @ 12:28 PM
link   
I'm having doubts about the big bang starting from nothing. Everything can only compress a certain amount and I find it hard to believe all matter compresses to a single point. That single point would be light-years across. The universe as we see it is the "visible universe", well what is beyond what is visible? The universe as we know it may go on forever, we just don't have the technology to see that far. We could also live in a cyclic universe that expands, contracts, expands, contracts, an infinite amount of times. There are just too many variables on what the universe actually is.



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 08:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by trw66
I'm having doubts about the big bang starting from nothing. Everything can only compress a certain amount and I find it hard to believe all matter compresses to a single point. That single point would be light-years across. The universe as we see it is the "visible universe", well what is beyond what is visible? The universe as we know it may go on forever, we just don't have the technology to see that far. We could also live in a cyclic universe that expands, contracts, expands, contracts, an infinite amount of times. There are just too many variables on what the universe actually is.


Yeah, well, welcome to reality. Where there's no easy answers and no one pretends to have the ultimate answer for everything.



posted on Dec, 23 2007 @ 08:14 PM
link   
There is another idea here on Space Exploration, that "gets around" the Big Bang" theory. Plasma Cosmology is not well accepted in the scientific community, but it may be gaining ground.

I just heard of this a short time ago, so I'm still sorting through the information, as I have the time. It is interesting, and I recommend anyone having questions to look into it.



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 05:36 AM
link   

For a black hole of one solar mass (about 2 × 10,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000kg), we get an evaporation time of 100,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000,000 years—much longer than the current age of the universe.


en.wikipedia.org...
(I filled in the actual zero's for effect_

Well well well... what do we have here???

What the heck am I doing looking up 'Hawking radiation' first thing in the morning you may well ask.. SAD!!!


But.. assuming Stephen Hawking to be cleverer than most and his theory of black holes to be correct.. then all we have to do is find a black hole larger than one solar mass to prove the big bang.. and the age of the universe wrong..

To simplify the point in question(simple enough for me so please don't shoot it down)

'virtual photons' are broken down on the event horizon into two particles.. one + which escapes and one - which gets sucked into the black hole DECREASING the mass of said black hole faster than the expansion due to matter it sucks in..

(This must be why they don't continue to expand and swallow everything locally.)

In calculating the 'shrink time' applied to this theory.. any black hole the size of our sun would be(as said in the above quote) OLDER than the universe(AND therefore the BIG BANG)..

Any one else's brain starting to hurt?

Hehe glad I could help to disturb anyone into this stuff


[edit on 11-1-2008 by AGENT_T]



posted on Jan, 11 2008 @ 07:23 PM
link   
we still do not know for sure what set off the big bang, or the moment that space/time emerged BUT it was very energetic none the less...

but we have thories of what happened right after the creation of our 4D space, one held highly by cosmologists is that it was started (at least what got the ball rolling) was like in the previous post with virtual particles... even the absolute absence of everything (particles radiation etc.), there are virtual particles that emerge ( one positive and another negative sucking energy from the surrounding space) then they almost instantaneously destroy each other, returning the energy back to the surrounding space... this makes a perfect balance and for now is undetectible.

but one key event happened somthing called inflation... after the first few virtual particle pairs appeared it set off a reaction causing tillions upon tillions of other pairs to emerge... the universe is governed by one unified SUPERFORCE (gravity, electromagnetic and both weak and stong atomic forces all mushed together), this was a time of super dense and super hot conditions that cannot be governed by conventional physics..

the cosmologist Alan Guth was the first to come up with inflation... but for some reason the pairs of virtual particles created a tremendous repulsive force(almost anti-gravity like but not) making the universe cool and expand exponentially...

during this time the universe is still FULL of virtual particles... much much more pairs to account for all the matter in the universe. during this time the cooling and expanding allowed the superforce to break down into the four governing forces of the universe (gravity, electromagnetic and strong and weak atomic)... the forces were able to govern the virtual particles and create an imbalance (causing some virtual particles NOT to annihilate etc.)

this caused another temendous increase in energy... (because of the separation of forces)... this is known as the "ultimate free lunch" this sudden boosting of energy allowed the virtual particles to apper and drift apart having no debt to repay... and the sudden and spontaneous creation of particles (e=mc2, or matter equals energy to put it simply)... so, a good amount of the matter in the universe came from the giant surge of energy that created a literal zoo of all kinds of particles








[edit on 11-1-2008 by tilly21]



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 12:22 AM
link   
Some physicists, especially proponents of the multi verse believe the big bang was created by a white hole.


In astrophysics, a white hole is the time reversal of a black hole. While a black hole acts as an absorber for any matter that crosses the event horizon, a white hole acts as a source that ejects matter from its event horizon.
en.wikipedia.org...


A white hole is possible according to Einsteins field equations and is basically the exact opposite of a black hole. So a black hole is formed that punches its way through to the vacuum of nothingness and begins to pour matter out, creating the universe.

Its something a scientist called Michio Kaku is always going on about, you can find videos on youtube or google video about his theories. According to Michio a new space telescope that is due to be launched by 2011 will apparently be able to see back to the actual creation of the universe. And Michio is hoping to see a type of umbilical cord from the other universe filtering into our white hole.

Here's a snippet from Michio Kakus website:


The Einstein-Rosen Bridge

But this also revives an ongoing controversy surrounding black holes. The best description of a spinning black hole was given in 1963 by the New Zealand mathematician Roy Kerr, using Einstein's equations of gravity. But there is a quirky feature to his solution. It predicts that if one fell into a black hole, one might be sucked down a tunnel (called the “Einstein-Rosen bridge”) and shot out a “white hole” in a parallel universe! Kerr showed that a spinning black hole would collapse not into a point, but to a “ring of fire.” Because the ring was spinning rapidly, centrifugal forces would keep it from collapsing. Remarkably, a space probe fired directly through the ring would not be crushed into oblivion, but might actually emerge unscratched on the other side of the Einstein-Rosen bridge, in a parallel universe. This “wormhole” may connect two parallel universes, or even distant parts of the same universe.
www.mkaku.org...


Is amazing to think that if this is true how many universes our universe has created already. All those black holes filtering matter from our universe into a new one. Incredible to think about.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 11:05 AM
link   
these are very vaild theories and make the most sense.



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 01:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by geek101
aren't the people over at CERN trying to make a mini universe?
Maybe thats what we are...the result of a previous CERN type group. And we will in turn create another universe, within which, in a few billion years time, another CERN group will try the same thing....ad infinitum



Good call. They're actually trying to make a black hole. But here's the fascinating part -- the universe may have been created in a black hole.

New Theory: Universe Was Born in a Black Hole

Edit: It seems Argos has beat me to the punch, heh.


[edit on 12-1-2008 by Beachcoma]



posted on Jan, 12 2008 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by geek101
aren't the people over at CERN trying to make a mini universe?




Originally posted by Beachcoma
Good call. They're actually trying to make a black hole.



No, they aren't.

They're trying to find out what the conditions were fractions of a second after the big bang. There's no black hole or mini universe involved.


From the CERN website:



public.web.cern.ch...

The Large Hadron Collider
Our understanding of the Universe is about to change...

The Large Hadron Collider (LHC) is a gigantic scientific instrument near Geneva, where it spans the border between Switzerland and France about 100 m underground. It is a particle accelerator used by physicists to study the smallest known particles – the fundamental building blocks of all things. It will revolutionise our understanding, from the miniscule world deep within atoms to the vastness of the Universe.

Two beams of subatomic particles called 'hadrons' – either protons or lead ions – will travel in opposite directions inside the circular accelerator, gaining energy with every lap. Physicists will use the LHC to recreate the conditions just after the Big Bang, by colliding the two beams head-on at very high energy. Teams of physicists from around the world will analyse the particles created in the collisions using special detectors in a number of experiments dedicated to the LHC.

There are many theories as to what will result from these collisions, but what's for sure is that a brave new world of physics will emerge from the new accelerator, as knowledge in particle physics goes on to describe the workings of the Universe. For decades, the Standard Model of particle physics has served physicists well as a means of understanding the fundamental laws of Nature, but it does not tell the whole story. Only experimental data using the higher energies reached by the LHC can push knowledge forward, challenging those who seek confirmation of established knowledge, and those who dare to dream beyond the paradigm.



The recent timeline has it starting up in May.


[edit on 12-1-2008 by kegs]



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 12:49 AM
link   
reply to post by kegs
 


Ah.. I stand corrected.



posted on Jan, 13 2008 @ 01:08 AM
link   
reply to post by kegs
 


Hi Kegs, you are right they are not specifically experimenting with trying to create a black hole or a mini universe. These consequences are though all theorised possible outcomes. They are actually fully expecting mini black holes to appear for a few micro seconds and then evaporate.



new topics

top topics



 
8
<< 2  3  4   >>

log in

join