posted on Aug, 21 2010 @ 08:54 AM
reply to post by airspoon
Perhaps you are incapable of understanding the universe.
I, however, am capable of understanding it, given the proper observations about the universe.
It is my specialty. Everything has rules, cycles, principles and underlying mechanics. My mind is often capable of understanding something's
function at merely a glance.
Arrogance? Perhaps. But you never learn anything by presuming you can't learn something. That includes when you think you have already learned all
there is to know, and presume there is nothing more to learn.
But don't take my word for it. I'll continue to learn and create. You continue to... whatever you'd claim.
As per the topic - I think the problem comes from our model of the lifetime of a star, and our concepts of how stars and galaxies came to exist.
I see no reason why large clumps of gas should spontaneously form into gravitationally dense bodies - electrical and physical properties would keep
gravity at bay well enough to prevent any sort of cohesive unit (look at nebulas - supposedly new stars are all over the place in there, but we're
missing something with how fusion-capable densities are reached within a system that seeks to disperse equally through the universe).
And, of course, this brings into question the idea of a 'black hole' and even neutron stars. If star formation is completely different than we
model - then star death is likely to be even more quirky - if they really 'die.'
I developed an ad-hoc theory at one time that stars are actually evaporating singularities and will go through multiple cycles of 'death' and
rebirth. There are plenty of holes in it - but it essentially states that all stars (or, most of them, at least) start as 'black holes' and
eventually decay into neutron stars or nothing at all - after going through several nova/super-nova stages (which would develop the heavier elements
that make up inner planets in our solar system - something the existing model doesn't really address).
Granted - it's not intended to stand up to scrutiny - it's just a sort of 'idea on the table' sort of theory.