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.

 

The nature of the universe explained

page: 3
25
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jan, 20 2012 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Spacely
First post on the site, and it's this thread! Very thought-provoking!

I was thinking myself and came up with an interesting thought. When the fruit on the tree is ripe enough, it drops off the tree, degrades, and the seeds of which form a new tree. I can't say for sure how that would line up in the grand scheme of things, but I have heard theories that humans themselves won't be able to escape the destruction of the universe, but we may have the ability to send our DNA into a new universe. If the multiverse theory is correct, there will be at least one universe where our DNA is successfully able to produce new life. This brings many more questions into play, but it's a nice thought to toy with.

Just thought I'd give my thoughts, and thanks for your thread!


Welcome to ATS!
At night I'll just sit on my back porch and just watch the trees in my back yard. It was just a moment of clarity when I looked at the tree and saw the universe.


I just wanted to have people take a second look at the world around us.



ETA: you should create an introductions thread and let the rest of the ATS family know who you are.




posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 02:14 PM
link   
reply to post by Talltexxxan
 


Star and Flag. In fact, this is the first thread on ATS that I have ever flagged. Kudos to you.

You have created a wonderful analogy and idea that captured my imagination and attention for several days as I reviewed your "Information Seed" model.

First, I'd like to summarize your model of our current universe to make sure I understand it:

The Black Hole (a fruit) holds a singularity (or seed) that contains information used to form our universe. Our universe is formed from matter existing in a supercluster arrangement (a sprout from soil which eventually develops into a trunk). From these superclusters stars (flowers) and galaxies (the branches) form. Solar systems (leaves) extend from the galaxies, and finally the planets (or plant cells) end the extraterrestrial explanation.

Terrestrially, the animals and life forces on the planet are likened to bacteria and life processes with a plant cell.

Second, I'd like to summarize your model of our universe's current expansion for clarification:

Every part of the universe outside the black hole (the crown of the tree, the non-trunk part) is moving at approximately the same rate (as the limbs and the leaves of the tree would) but relative to our point in space (or on the tree) a planet (or leaf) in one location may appear to move faster away by merit of it's distance and direction of movement (growth).

Third, if I may summarize your model of observing the beginning of the universe:

The Information Seed model says it is impossible to view the beginning just as a cell in a plant can't see the seed it came from.

Fourth, I'd like to summarize your model of the end of the universe:

The universe (leaves and branches of the three) continues to expand until it reaches a point of stasis (the leaves and branches spread out from each other until maturity and stay at the same position from then on). When it's life cycle is over it then... [you don't draw an analogy between the death of the tree and the end of the universe so I'm unsure what to place here].

Fifth, you summarize a model for multiple universes:

Multiple universes (trees) exist as a collection within space (forest) and have different characteristics in their formation (as individual trees do).

Do inform me if anything is off with this summary.

These ideas require empirical support before an astronomy community would accept them as an alternative cosmological model, especially in place of the big bang model. A few questions to fill in the blank or reconcile differences between the Information Seed model and the big bang model for example:

1. With dozens of confirmed black holes existing in our visible universe and thousands upon thousands claimed to exist in our visible universe, and each one seeming to lie at the center of a galaxy, how do you seperate a model for multiple universes from one universe with multiple galaxies instead?

2. Does the Information Seed model claim an original seed from which all other seeds came?
2a. If so, where do the superclusters come from that the original seed used to start building the universe.

3. How does expansion in the Information Seed model reconcile with the prevailing view that the universe is constantly accelerating whereas a tree's growth after the expansion period is more linear and then reflective of a steady state?

4. The furthest look into the past that Astronomists 'look into the past' via cosmic microwave background, from around 380,000 years after (according to the big bang theory) the universe came into being. Does the Information Seed model offer an alternative explanation for the cosmic microwave background?

Also, I have a few questions about your refutation of the big bang model.


Originally posted by Talltexxxan
Modern science has told us that every minute piece of matter in our universe is compressed into this incredibly small space. But I challenge that notion in the way of thinking that every part of a tree that will ever be is compressed into a single tiny seed. To anyone with a brain between their ears this thought would be preposterous. Of course every part of what a tree could be is NOT crammed into a tiny seed. What I am purposing is that the singularity did not hold ALL the matter of the current universe inside it, rather it held the essential information/instructions for what and how our universe would grow.

What if, during the initial expansion, the universe existed in a massless state, as energy for example? How could it not fit in an incredibly small space if it doesn't take up space to begin with?

[Continued below. I apologize for the length of my response. I've been looking over this post for days analysing and such. It's rare to find people on ATS with valid/well-thought-out posts these days.]



posted on Jan, 21 2012 @ 02:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Talltexxxan
 



Originally posted by Talltexxxan
The part of our universe that has always dumbfounded scientist and astronomers are black holes. But I believe I have found out there purpose. Much energy and information is taken into a black hole never to return.

Steven Hawking recently found that black holes emit radiation, and one of the newer models of black holes says that black holes take in information then radiate it out until the black hole disappears. Are there any mathematical/observational challenges to that model that you may offer?

Those are a few of the many hurdles the scientific community may present. In the meanwhile, the most important weight behind this model may be in the work of fractal cosmologists such as Luciano Pietronero mentioned in this Wikipedia article on Fractal Cosmology.

According to the article, there are proponents of the idea of a fractal universe, but they are in a minority. Still, there are several mathmematical models they mention in which the universe appears to be fractal up to a certain distance at which the universe smooths out, which would cause some problems with the Informational Seed model after several 'generations of trees have sprouted fruit' if you know what I mean.

Regardless, I appreciate the legnth and depth of your analogy, the model you present, and may we see more into this. In fact, maybe you should look up other fractal cosmologists and present your idea to them first. They are more likely to publish an analysis you come up with than mainstream scientists.

Good luck in your modeling.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:16 AM
link   
reply to post by KingAceSuited
 


Thank you for taking the time to read though my thread and perfectly summerizing my ideas.


It make take me some time to figure out my own thoughts and idea of my model to answer your questions so please check back to see if I've answered them well enough.

On a seperate note I have an idea about the speed of the expansion of the universe.
According to Mr Hawking the further we look into space/time we observe that stars and galaxies are moving faster and faster the further we look. So he summizes that that the universe is expanding at an incredable rate.

But I think they are missing an important aspect of detirmining the speed of expansion. And that is the red shift and the time it takes for the light to get to us.

Hopefully I can put my thoughts down in a cognitive way.


Hypothetical Senario:
We look at a nearby galaxy and see it moving away at a speed of a mile a day
We look at a galaxy alittle further and see that it is moving away just alittle faster
So on and so forth until we are looking billions of years into the past via looking deep into space.
The redshift gets redder and redder they further we took.

So heres what Im thinking, the only reason the red shift looks so pronounced the further we look is that the stars and galaxies WERE moving that fast 10-14 billion years ago. We wont know how fast they are moving at this point in time for anouther few billion years.

I hope my thought was clear enough to understand.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 11:58 AM
link   
Very cabalistic.
You may also consider taking a look at fractals to see if thy can be intergrated in any way.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by BBalazs
Very cabalistic.
You may also consider taking a look at fractals to see if thy can be intergrated in any way.


I guess Im gonna have to take a look at the Kabbala. And yes fractals is what this idea is based off of. Just as a tree is its own universe that is unaware of us all around it, We may be in a universe within another universe that we just are not aware of. And so on and so on.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 03:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by Talltexxxan

Originally posted by BBalazs
Very cabalistic.
You may also consider taking a look at fractals to see if thy can be intergrated in any way.


I guess Im gonna have to take a look at the Kabbala. And yes fractals is what this idea is based off of. Just as a tree is its own universe that is unaware of us all around it, We may be in a universe within another universe that we just are not aware of. And so on and so on.


So where are your answers to my questions.? Everybody else is agreeing and you've only responded to those so far. You wanted feedback and you got it.



posted on Jan, 22 2012 @ 04:11 PM
link   

Originally posted by CaptainNemo

Originally posted by Talltexxxan

Originally posted by BBalazs
Very cabalistic.
You may also consider taking a look at fractals to see if thy can be intergrated in any way.


I guess Im gonna have to take a look at the Kabbala. And yes fractals is what this idea is based off of. Just as a tree is its own universe that is unaware of us all around it, We may be in a universe within another universe that we just are not aware of. And so on and so on.


So where are your answers to my questions.? Everybody else is agreeing and you've only responded to those so far. You wanted feedback and you got it.


My apologises for not reponding to your post in a timly manner.
Firstly I only saw two diresct questions in your entire post.



. And how do galaxies colliding and swallowing eachother relate to a branch, or a stable tree at that.?





How doest this fit with quatum theroy? Theroy of general relativity?


So seeing as those are the only "questions" that I saw, I guess I will address those, since the rest of your post were merely statements.

Galaxies colliding: hmmmm... not sure how that exact event would fit other than when you see 2 different branches of a tree that have seperated then at some point during their growth the have come back toward each other and started growing back togther again.




With regards to your other questions about quatum theroy and general relativity, I will kindly ask for you to be alittle more specific as both of those theroys are quite involved and I would like to answer your questions concisely.



new topics

top topics



 
25
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join