Black Hole Theory: The New "Big Bang Theory"?

page: 1
6

log in

join

posted on Sep, 18 2013 @ 10:00 AM
link   
Yes. You read correctly. As of the 13th of September, 2013, scientists are beginning to seriously consider an alternative theory that throws the Big Bang right out the window and replaces it with...a fourth dimensional star producing a hyper black hole. Huh?


In a paper posted last week on the arXiv preprint server1, Afshordi and his colleagues turn their attention to a proposal2 made in 2000 by a team including Gia Dvali, a physicist now at the Ludwig Maximilians University in Munich, Germany. In that model, our three-dimensional (3D) Universe is a membrane, or brane, that floats through a ‘bulk universe’ that has four spatial dimensions.

Ashfordi's team realized that if the bulk universe contained its own four-dimensional (4D) stars, some of them could collapse, forming 4D black holes in the same way that massive stars in our Universe do: they explode as supernovae, violently ejecting their outer layers, while their inner layers collapse into a black hole.


Source

Okay, let's pause there and add some context. Gia Dvali is part of a team that officially established the "Large extra dimension" theory, which suggests that:


"In particle physics, the ADD model, also known as the model with large extra dimensions, is an alternative scenario to explain the weakness of gravity relative to the other forces. This theory requires that the fields of the Standard Model are confined to a four-dimensional membrane, while gravity propagates in several additional spatial dimensions that are large compared to the Planck scale."


Interesting. Please understand that I am not endorsing this theory as fact or as a likely or suitable replacement for the Big Bang theory. I am presenting it as a potential puzzle worth exploring. After all...


The picture has some problems, however. Earlier this year, the European Space Agency's Planck space observatory released data that mapped the slight temperature fluctuations in the cosmic microwave background — the relic radiation that carries imprints of the Universe’s early moments. The observed patterns matched predictions made by the standard Big Bang model and inflation, but the black-hole model deviates from Planck's observations by about 4%. Hoping to resolve the discrepancy, Afshordi says that his is now refining its model.

Despite the mismatch, Dvali praises the ingenious way in which the team threw out the Big Bang model. “The singularity is the most fundamental problem in cosmology and they have rewritten history so that we never encountered it,” he says. Whereas the Planck results “prove that inflation is correct”, they leave open the question of how inflation happened, Dvali adds. The study could help to show how inflation is triggered by the motion of the Universe through a higher-dimensional reality, he says.


What do you guys think? Sound off!


edit on 18-9-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)




posted on Sep, 18 2013 @ 10:04 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


S&F Ive been keeping an eye on this theory for some time now. Links are always nice



posted on Sep, 18 2013 @ 10:06 AM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


Very interesting.. wonder what Sheldon Cooper will have to say about this


S + F. Interesting read OP, thanks!

Respects,

-AA



posted on Sep, 18 2013 @ 10:08 AM
link   
This "new" theory seems oddly similar to M theory and multiple universes theory as cause of "big bang".



posted on Sep, 18 2013 @ 10:10 AM
link   
reply to post by Chamberf=6
 


This theory was established around 1998-2000, so there's a very good chance that it was based on or connected to precursors to the modern M-verse theory and affiliated notions. My question is how the fourth dimensional aspect of the star's nature, and the subsequent black hole, affects the time-space relationship it has with the rest of the universe.
edit on 18-9-2013 by AfterInfinity because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 18 2013 @ 10:14 AM
link   
reply to post by Chamberf=6
 


Exactly. A handfull of scientists changed the name of M theory and are passing it off as a new idea.

Looks like it worked for them, got their names in the paper and everything.



posted on Sep, 18 2013 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by Wertdagf
 


Could you explain how the M theory and LED theory qualify as being identical?



posted on Sep, 19 2013 @ 04:03 PM
link   
reply to post by AfterInfinity
 


Your right they are not as similar as I had thought.

Although this theory mentions membranes several times the overall method for LED universe is vastly different from M theory.

*slaps self on wrist.
edit on 19-9-2013 by Wertdagf because: (no reason given)





new topics
 
6

log in

join