A flaw with the Big Crunch/Bounce theory

I just hate the universe so much these days.

Before gravity would take effect and essentially pull all matter back to the center for that proverbial 'Big Crunch,' wouldn't the expansion have to at least slow down first? As I understand, the universe isn't slowing down but speeding up! We're still accelerating. On top of that, there's no friction in space and thus nothing to slow down the expansion of the universe. So how could it possibly be the big crunch theory, if gravity can never even take effect in the first place?

So this would mean that since the big crunch theory is bunk, then the big rip (?) would be the right one. The universe just keeps expanding outward and outward until eventually, every bit of matter flies apart and the universe is a cold, dead and empty space. Even thought I won't be around to see it, what a sad thought. I don't know how it's more sad than a massive crunch and ensuing explosion, maybe just more quiet and... pathetic.

Just because it's pathetic doesn't mean it's right, though. The universe may continue to expand infinitely, but even as mass moves outward, it is staying together. They're not noticing galaxies getting larger and larger the further out they look, are they? Galaxies are colliding all the time, creating new life as they destroy.

I personally cannot comprehend the idea that the universe would rip apart OR return to a point of singularity and follow with another big bang. As odd as this will sound, maybe it's not quite so simple.

I actually believe we are all one consciousness experiencing itself subjectively, that the physical reality around me isn't the true reality in which we exist. I don't know the true reality or anything like that, I just don't think the world around us is really inside.

Originally posted by redled
No one really has the faintest clue if the universe expands infinitely, expands indefinitely but within a finite space, or if it contracts. They guess at matter they have not directly in any way observed, and maybe this new accelerator will get us closer, and maybe it won't.

I would like to wade in now and ponder,

Are you really sure the universe is expanding?
What if it is just one set 'size' and it only seems to expand when looked upon
so that all the 'information' could be displayed at one time, granted over a long distance,
Im trying to describe something like the starting-credits in the 'star wars' film so im told by a friend of mine,
Either way, its not a question of whether this is happening, I just figured i'd throw the dog a bone :-)

Physicists often use the centre point of mass of an object for calculations, there is a simple logical flaw to this assumption.
Think of it like this, even the atoms on the other side of the Earth are exerting a force on you, the atoms of the Earth to the left, right, front and back are also exerting a force on you. Logically the centre point of the earth should be a point of equilibrium, as there is equal mass in every direction canceling out the force. So all calculations based on a centre point are immediately off.

The biggest flaw with the big crunch theory is at the basis, the big bang theory which is filled with flaws. The expanding universe theory an integral part of the big bang theory is also flawed. Red shift = distance was proven false over 30 years ago, and several dozen times since. The astrophysicists turn a blind eye to the glaring evidence in favour of obscure mathematics that have no basis in reality.

The reason for the debarcle that modern cosmology has become is because real science was replaced with unfounded mathematics, along with the reliance on but one force to explain absolutely everything, gravity. A force that remains mysterious and yet mainstream cosmology invokes it for absolutely everything while not even understanding it. At the same time they exclude the obviously more apparent and more powerful force of electromagnetism even though magnetic fields permeate space.

You don't have to be a brainiac to see the commonsense logic that is clearly missing or see through the outlandish claims based on nothing but number crunching of hypothetical on hypothetical.

[edit on 30-12-2008 by squiz]