It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

# Is the universe a black hole.

page: 1
3
share:

posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 04:30 PM
Before i start i would like to say that i've searched the site and couldnt find anything on this, so if anyone knows different please post the link as i would love to read it.

Anyway.....

I was watching a program that i recorded from the discovery channel tonight about black holes.

During the program they said that if you could get the earths radius down to about one-third of an inch then gravity would turn the earth into a black hole. This got me thinking, could it be possible for the entire universe to actually be a black hole, so i did a bit of searching on the web.

It turns out that there is something called the Schwarzchild Radii and it allows you to calculate how small something would have to get in order for gravity to take over and produce a black hole

in one article i found the following text

For a mass of 2.5 x 1053 kg, i.e. a 2 and a 5 followed by 52 zeroes kg,
the Schwarzschild radius is about 17 billion light years. This huge mass is an estimate for the total mass of the universe. Also, given that the age of the universe is 15 billion years or so, 17 billion light years is awfully close
to the size of the universe. Does this mean that the universe itself is a black hole?

Even Prof Hawking says that at the point before the big bang the known laws of physics break down and you are essentially looking at a ingularity. Also we know of Gamma Ray Bursts, could these also be related to the black holes; some physicists think so. So i have a some of questions :-

1. Could the Universe actually be a black hole; i.e. are we living in a black hole.

2. If the universe came from a singularity, then could we suppose that there could have been more than one singularity, maybe something like a binary singlularity where one orbits the other.

3. If singularities (in there purest form, maybe orbiting each other) collided, could this be the source of a gamma ray burst, but not one like we are detecting now, one that would be like nothing anyone has ever seen, could this have created the universe that we now know.

4. If question 3 is true, when the singularities collided i presume that they would wipe each other out in a huge pulse of super heated plasma (maybe !) which may account for the CMB that we see today

If question 3 and 4 could be true, could the plasma have collapsed on itself to form a super super super massive black hole and could we then be inside the event horizon of that black hole.

I'm not a physicist so be gental, these are just some things that got me thinking and i just wanted to see what others have to say ......

[edit on 24-4-2008 by scepticsRus]

[edit on 24-4-2008 by scepticsRus]

posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 05:10 PM
Actually all Universes are in Single black hole, the worm hole, of life. You can be acted on by it and acted upon it.

posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 05:43 PM
Abaddon is from the Hebrew word pronounced aw-bawd-don. It means destruction, or to perish. The Greek version of the Hebrew word is Apollyon.
www.keyway.ca... >>>>>>Also note we are merging slowly to the Milkyway :-(

[edit on 24-4-2008 by BlackMagicianofEloheem]

posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 07:00 PM
Stephen Hawking figured that Black Holes bled into different dimensions - creating 'parallel universes'.

String theory and quantum physics speak of dimensions intersecting eachother like bubbles. When two bubbles meet, they can combine or even tunnel into one another.

If two universes or quantum realities meet, they could be producing black holes.

Therefore, black holes may be a connection between this universe and others.

So no, the universe itself is not a black hole, but the big bang did not come from 'nowhere'

posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 07:06 PM
I like it. I am getting the visual of the universe being the collapsed matter of a black hole, just up REALLY close :-)
Assuming the calculation of the size of a singularity per it's mass is correct, I think you necessarily would be correct and the issue of how we perceive the universe (as Large vs. infinitesimally small) would be a matter of scale; with a given universe containing numerous other universes (appearing in that scale as black holes); as well, the parent universe would just be one of many that exist in another universe, where our universe would appear as a black hole, though existence at that next scale would be perceived by the infinite consciousness no differently than we perceive ours at this scale. The same would go within black holes in our universe.
Nice idea man. Very intellectually inspiring.
Cheers,
-v

posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 08:36 PM
"""""""""""""""""""""""""A team of astronomers is reporting new evidence that a super-massive black hole lives at the center of the Earth's galaxy, the Milky Way.""""""""""""""

You better prepare cause the government already knows.......

Anyone ready for a real mass panic of truth?

www.npr.org...

[edit on 24-4-2008 by BlackMagicianofEloheem]

posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 09:28 PM

Originally posted by NewWorldOver
Stephen Hawking figured that Black Holes bled into different dimensions - creating 'parallel universes'.

String theory and quantum physics speak of dimensions intersecting eachother like bubbles. When two bubbles meet, they can combine or even tunnel into one another.

If two universes or quantum realities meet, they could be producing black holes.

Therefore, black holes may be a connection between this universe and others.

So no, the universe itself is not a black hole, but the big bang did not come from 'nowhere'

Im sorry but Stephen Hawking has been wrong for the past 30 years. He even admits being wrong about black holes.

[edit on 24-4-2008 by BlackMagicianofEloheem]

posted on Apr, 24 2008 @ 11:47 PM

Originally posted by BlackMagicianofEloheem
Im sorry but Stephen Hawking has been wrong for the past 30 years. He even admits being wrong about black holes.

I'm not going to take lessons from a guy who makes threads Like This, thanks...

I am aware that Stephen Hawkings has abandoned his previous research. The fact remains that quantum physics and string theory accept his vision of colliding universal bodies in different dimensions. Gravity itself is an extra dimensional force.

Check-mate.

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 01:32 AM

Gravity is only an Extra-dimensional force if you abandon GR for Newtonian physics. The extra-dimensional nature of the gravitron is alleged to account for the relative weakness of gravity to other forces. HOWEVER, discovering the gravitron would mean abandoning GR and finding new Newtonian or Brane Cosmology models. All the work is purely speculative, but most people actively studying the field are still stuck on GR (rightly or wrongly). I'm still quite fascinated by the idea of branes and the multiverse, so don't think I"m rejecting it out of hand. In fact it has the advantage of potentially being much "cleaner" for the lack of a better word.
To answer the OP's question, I would think that universe, were it contained in some kind of super-massive blackhole, would be contracting not expanding. Something very similar to this train of thought is still recognizable in brane cosmology though, so perhaps you would be interested to study and explore that direction.

posted on Apr, 25 2008 @ 05:43 PM
(you will have to excuse me, i have a tendancy to brain dump everything im thinking of so i dont forget it ... it sometimes comes out as garbled nonsense so please bare with me
)

Since posting this thread i have been searching the net for articles that may help answer this question and i have found a few.

Article
The link above tries to describe what we think the 'model' of the universe is. In short it talks about an open or closed universe. An open universe would be one that expands forever and eventually all the stars around us would accelerate away from us leaving us in total darkness. A closed universe would fall back on itself in a big crunch.

Current models suggest that a closed universe isnt possible since obervations indicate that galaxies are in fact speeding up not slowing down (which a closed universe would predict)

But all of this is meaningless until we can identify exactly what dark matter or dark energy is and where it comes from.

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

This now leads me to another question. If the universe is open meaning that we are indeed accelerating into infinity, could it be possible that we are actually being pulled and not pushed.

I had better explain my thinking....

if the big bang created the universe out of a singularity, and a naked singularity cant exist in nature without existing at the core of a black hole, then could we say that our universe is on the accretion disc of a rotating black hole being spun around at crazy speeds and that the acceleration we are seeing is actually us moving further away from the event horizon (point of no return). Natually if the other galaxies are moving faster then they could be further up on the accretion disc. And it may also explain why we cant see past a certain distance. If we are being 'flung' off the disc or being pulled off of it by another black hole then everything at the edge of the universe would be un-observable. It would also mean that the case for dark matter / dark energy could be put to one side.

If this is true then our fate is to be cast of the disc into nothing-ness, possibly to be captured by another black hole (could whatever is beyond the universe actually be swarms of monster singularities ready to capture whats thrown off). Could the black hole evaporate, could it simply collapse.

One thing has always puzzeled me. If we can prediect that the universe is a big bang, why has no one attempted to find 'ground zero' so to speak!
surely the trajectory of the galaxies triangulated could give us a damn good idea where to look !!!!

Thats enough brain dumping for now lol !!!

Thanks for reading (and having the patience)

posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 03:26 PM

I dont think its possible to abandon General Relativity as it explains so much of the things we observe in the universe.

Seems like prof Hawking also thinks a balck hole could be the answer.

Hawking realised that the Universe was, in effect, a black hole in reverse; instead of matter being crushed into a singularity, the Universe began when a singularity expanded to form everything we see around us today - from stars to planets to people.

Black holes and the Hawking paradox

posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 03:43 PM

Originally posted by scepticsRus
...our universe is on the accretion disc of a rotating black hole being spun around at crazy speeds and that the acceleration we are seeing is actually us moving further away from the event horizon (point of no return).

Think 'in a polar jet' instead of 'on an accretion disk', and you've got it.

[edit on 27-4-2008 by Chakotay]

posted on Apr, 26 2008 @ 03:51 PM

Hi, I thought about writing that but had second thoughs ... but you are right that would also account for it.

posted on May, 3 2008 @ 03:36 PM
Browsing the web, it looks like im not the first to think of this, here are some articles that i found for anyone whos interested to read

Article

Article

Article

Article

posted on May, 4 2008 @ 11:37 AM
No, but the Bush administration is. There I said it.

posted on May, 7 2008 @ 04:48 PM
wow !

well done qxlb52 .... i've never seen a post soooooo off topic anywhere on ATS. A one liner too ....

please stick to the thread topic i hate it when threads get polluted with crap like that.

edit for type-o

[edit on 7-5-2008 by scepticsRus]

top topics

3