markcgreer

Eventually, the universe will fade out. What is the process for fading out? Is it a slowing of particle activity? If it is, can we determine if there was slower particle activity in the early universe? If so, this would support. The universe is accelerating, but I understand not too long ago it was decelerating. Perhaps there are clue in here. What errors are you suggesting?

This is could be a huge realization. Earth sits in orbit around the sun within a goldilocks zone. Life on this planet thrives best in it's goldilocks zone depending on the species. Earth sits in the outer portion of the galaxy, also a goldilocks zone. Numerically, we can count infinitely high, and we can also get infinitely small. Why is our world the size it is? Why aren't humans smaller? Because relative to all other things in physics like atoms, this is the size that fits. It's relative. Just as the earth orbits the sun in the goldilocks zone, our size is a goldilocks zone of physics. Small animals are quick and jerky, large dinosaurs are slow and lethargic. Now apply that to time. The universe's existence itself, is in a goldilocks zone for time. Time does not exist outside the goldilocks zone.

Spontaneous creation by accident is absurd. There must be processes in place that enable energy to organize into more complex forms over time. I have watched every documentary ever made and never saw anyone propose a theory that did not involve a theory that we started with the big bang. In fact, they all talk about it as if it were a settled fact. But recently I had a realization that our universe requires more of a cause and effect explanation. So this is my 3rd Topic post within 1 week suggesting the universe evolved in some way. I just discovered tonight that I am not the first person to suggest that the Universe Evolved. 33 top scientists signed an open letter to the science community in 2004 claiming the Big Bang Theory had some major flaws and that "Plasma cosmology and the steady-state model both hypothesize an evolving universe without beginning or end." The letter goes on to say "Whereas Richard Feynman could say that "science is the culture of doubt," in cosmology today doubt and dissent are not tolerated, and young scientists learn to remain silent if they have something negative to say about the standard big bang model. Those who doubt the big bang fear that saying so will cost them their funding." Consider this: Dark Energy is causing the universe to expand faster and faster. Its rate is exponential. So if we go backward in time, the expansion rate should get exponentially slower. I haven't done the math, but I assume it gets extremely slow. Too slow to account for the rapid expansion rate of the big bang. See the full article here: http://rense.com/general53/bbng.htm

I love science, but I am getting the feeling that scientist culture is one that punishes you for thinking outside the box. I come from the entrepreneurial world where the life and death of a business is based on several non-obvious forces. Get your head out of your highly detailed experiment and stop and look at the universe as a whole - the big picture. Its too perfect for it to be a spontaneous accident!!! We should absolutely be speculating more! We should absolutely be dreaming up ideas from the top and seeing if the world fits the idea. Scientists are always working backward from the evidence. We could get a lot further if we imagined scenarios from the top and then tested to see if they could've worked. Why does the standard model only have 20 particles?? Why isn't there an infinite array?? Because they had to pass some sort of test to exist. They had to go through a weeding out process. Let's run a simulation of particles with varying gravity and see if this weeds out the imperfect levels. Here's another clue the universe evolved: Why is there far more dark energy than dark matter? Answer: Because our 5% of visible matter is dark matter than has evolved. Dark matter is a primitive form of matter. Dark energy will never evolve into anything because it repels instead of attracts. Someone needs to bitch slap the science world. Wake up and make some bold predictions!!!!

Justin, Yes, they repel of course in varying degrees. You should also see complexity in the way they repel such as a particle being able to both attract with the strong nuclear force and repel gravitationally. Any combination that is possible would likely exist at some point. You are definitely correct that much of the matter that does not fit the perfect balance scenario would get stuck with it. Sounds like Dark Matter, yes? And for those that repel: Dark Energy? They should collapse back into the center of the explosion. If our big bang occurred with a mix of varying gravity, these high gravity particles would get absorbed right back into the center. You can't think of mass the same way anymore. Everything in the universe is made of energy. And energy in its most simple and primitive form is an imbalance. So how many different ways can you mold the force of imbalance? Regarding black holes: Stars radiate but they end in explosion as well. There is no evidence that black holes do not explode. This theory needs a massive explosion that repeats and the most logical culprit seems to be the black hole. I have no idea what would cause it to explode, but we should look there.

Because in the field of PR, that's how it works, the company or entity writes up the press release and then submits it to a business wire service and then the actual press has the option to "pick it up". If they pick it up, they either publish the release as is, or they customize the article, or contact the placer for a further interview. The company either has their own PR employee, or they hire a PR firm to submit it for the press.

Its just a general concept that has plenty of potential to be wrong - like a lot of other speculations in science news. The purpose of it is to help us generate new ideas and look at the universe from another perspective.

That's just standard press release format so that it can be published on various news sites. The big bang was 99.9999999999% energy leaving the universe represented as a matter-antimatter cancelling out..

As a start, we would need to computer simulate a large number of particles at varying levels of attraction and repulsion including those that have the perfect level of gravity, then put the through simulated explosions and other events to see how they interact and if this draws out the particles of perfect level of gravity. Try to simulate cycles. Dark matter should both seem unresponsive and highly attractive. I only came up with this general idea Monday, so it needs a bit of work, but I wanted to put it out there.

Revolutionary New Theory Suggests the Laws of Physics Evolved GRAND HAVEN, Mich. Mar 07, 2012 Mark Greer, astrophysics ponderer, suggests a revolutionary new theory that the laws of physics may have evolved over time. Assuming the earliest universe was completely dark and void of everything, and that mathematically represented a perfect zero, Greer asks, “how did we go from zero to where we are today?” Greer believes the reason there is something, instead of nothing, is because of imperfection. “This is not a new concept”, he says. “Fluctuations from 0 into +1 and -1 or any other set of balanced equations make it perfectly plausible for something to come from nothing. This is what is happening constantly in the quantum world. According to Greer’s theory, if the law of imperfection that brought them into the universe applies as they collide and exit the universe, they cancel each other back out to zero, but not perfectly. What’s left is a minute trace of unresolved force. This remaining imbalance may be the simplest form of “pre-energy” and the basic building block of the universe. It may be the “string” of string theory. Unresolved imbalances are intangible and invisible, yet could plausibly make up everything in our universe. We think of the universe as being made up of particles or substance. But what if, in reality, everything is made up of this invisible, intangible, unresolved force? Imagine instead that it is a will or intent, and not a thing,” says Greer. This new theory suggests that while the quantum world void of the laws of physics, the newly created unresolved forces are also void of physical laws. They are the bit before they organize into a byte. Physicists have been trying to find a connection between the world of the large and the world of the small without success, and this may be why. According to the theory, this raw form of energy enters the world without having any uniform laws of physics. As the quantum world produces these leftover forces, they randomly combine into a vast variety of configurations. “Think of this as the primordial soup before the rise of our cosmos,” adds Greer. “Some combinations attract, some repel, some explode, some cancel back out into nothing to name a few of the possibilities. Those that attract, they do so in varying degrees. If we simulate an explosion among particles of varying gravity, you should see the particles that attract too strongly collapse back into the center; Particles that attract too lightly fly off into space; Only the ones with just the right level of attraction successfully remain, orbiting each other in balance. Repeat this cycle over and over and the amount of particles that attract precisely grows as sort of a natural selection process. This is how gravity as we know it might have evolved. “Astrophysicists have always struggled to connect Gravity to the other three fundamental forces of our universe: the strong and weak nuclear force, and magnetic force,” says Greer. “But if this theory is correct, we shouldn’t expect them to connect. Let’s assume gravity was one of nearly infinite forces that appeared, but only one of four that successfully survived the evolutionary process. If this is the case, the complexity of the different types of perfectly balanced particles and energy, that survived to this point is amazing. Today, the laws of physics are still free to spawn new forces. Though given the amount of time it took to evolve to this point, I’d say we may already be in a state of near perfection. Could the theory explain why we see dark energy and dark matter effects on our universe today? Quantum activity is constantly creating new building blocks of which combine and repel at varying levels causing the effect of dark energy. In the same way, quantum building blocks are creating combinations that attract at varying levels to create the extra gravity that prevents galaxies from flying apart. Just as bacteria still exists as evidence of some of the first life on Earth, quantum activity is evidence of the first primitive energy in the universe. The fact that we have not found the elusive Higgs bosons and gravitons could also be explained by the new theory. This is because the laws of physics are innate in the matter and energy around us. Greer explains, “Imagine we are living among particles that all pull at the same strength giving the illusion that these forces exist outside of matter, when in reality they are all coming from within the matter and energy around us. That would mean all of the highly evolved matter and energy of our universe today represents the survival of the fittest - the extreme cream of the crop of all possible mathematical configurations that could be created from these building blocks. If this is true, perhaps one day we can harness these building blocks and configure them in a way that enables us to do things like travel faster than the speed of light.” What’s more, the theory predicts the universe should forever grow larger and larger. In other words, from the edge of our universe, we would see more stars, galaxies and big bangs. “I believe big bangs may be tied to the explosion/inflation of a black hole. Inflation could be triggered by a tipping point, as stars have”, Greer speculates. “Black hole big bangs could be as common in the multiverse as exploding stars are in our universe.” “We may be living in an open universe with no boundaries dating back well beyond the 13.7 billion years we know of,” says Greer. “I believe that just as an exploding star creates the materials for a new star to be born, our big bang is creating opportunities for more black hole big bangs. The universe may not fade away into nothing after all. It may continue to grow like a living virus.”