Big bangs are happening all the time (split from The Logic Of The Big Bang)

[Ghideon]

1 hour ago, László Hajós said:

No, I am not saying that we are in the centre. This astronomer you mention would think from any point inside the universe that he is in the centre from his point of view (if he wouldnt know better).

Ok.

1 hour ago, László Hajós said:

But if he would observe the whole universe (with our observable universe in it) from outside of it - and lets say that the speed of light is infinite - than he would see the universe as a sphere, with our observable universe in it, also a sphere.

Please clarify, does your hypothesis state that the universe exists in an empty void? Something like the attached image? This void, yellow in the image, may contain other universes (green area). In the future one or many green universes will have expanded enough to overlap?

[László Hajós]

34 minutes ago, Strange said:

The current Big Bang model is a prediction of GR. You are suggesting an alternative explanation and are, therefore, that the current explanation is wrong

Probably I just don't understand what you mean. In my model general relativity is not changed, it would be the same

[Strange]

12 minutes ago, László Hajós said:

Probably I just don't understand what you mean. In my model general relativity is not changed, it would be the same

OK. But GR predicts the current big bang model. If you are saying that prediction is wrong then you need to explain why it is wrong (even if everything else in GR is the same). 

[László Hajós]

1 hour ago, Ghideon said:

Please clarify, does your hypothesis state that the universe exists in an empty void? Something like the attached image? This void, yellow in the image, may contain other universes (green area). In the future one or many green universes will have expanded enough to overlap?

Yes, exactly like that picture. The empty void is also space, with almost nothing, or nothing in it. You may call it overlap, but the expansion stops after a long time, and only the black holes  remain from that universe. Than you can't even really call it universe any more. Then an other universe edge could "overlap" these black holes and feed them with more mass or merge one universe black hole with a black hole from a different universe.

 

I made a simple drawing, please don't laugh

[László Hajós]

The space time 2D cross-section is an infinitly long line, and it exists everyvhere(this lenght would be an area in 2D). It is infinite, but in global scale it does't get longer or shorter (x-axis) if you count the whole line with all the peaks (big bang and the force caused by the big bang) and dips (mass) (y-axis). It is an exact infinite. In local scale the lenght of the x axis, or space can get longer (expansion, big bang) or shorter (supermassive black hole). This means that the lenght of the space in global scale is always the same infinite. We could imagine it as waves on water. After the big bang there was 1 big wave and now there are a lot of small waves between the dips of the masses. These waves have negative mass and gravity, and push away space, causing the expansion of our universe.

Could these peaks be the dark matter (negative mass) and dark energy (negative gravity)?

So in global scale in an exact infinite space which can not be created nor destroyed an exact infinite energy exist which can not be created nor destroyed.

Edited October 1, 2018 by László Hajós

[Ghideon]

There are several issues raised, for now I focus on one I posted. 

4 hours ago, László Hajós said:

Yes, exactly like that picture. The empty void is also space, with almost nothing, or nothing in it. You may call it overlap, but the expansion stops after a long time, and only the black holes  remain from that universe. Than you can't even really call it universe any more. Then an other universe edge could "overlap" these black holes and feed them with more mass or merge one universe black hole with a black hole from a different universe.

 

8 hours ago, László Hajós said:

This astronomer you mention would think from any point inside the universe that he is in the centre from his point of view (if he wouldnt know better)

The two explainations above seems to contradict each other. How can an observer near the edge of the expanding sphere believe that he is in the centre from his point of view? 

[Strange]

3 hours ago, László Hajós said:

Could these peaks be the dark matter (negative mass) and dark energy (negative gravity)?

Dark matter does not have negative mass. (And dark energy is not negative gravity)

[László Hajós]

1 hour ago, Ghideon said:

The two explainations above seems to contradict each other. How can an observer near the edge of the expanding sphere believe that he is in the centre from his point of view? 

The astronomer can only start in the universe, first as particles, or pure energy in the singularity. Like forus on the earth, if would start right on the edge of the expansion, one edge of the observable universe would be almost always maximum on the edge of the whole universe and not further because all the mass is pushed away from eachother with about the same amount of force

1 hour ago, Strange said:

Dark matter does not have negative mass. (And dark energy is not negative gravity)

As the "normal" matter and gravity I wouldnt call positive mass or positive gravity only mass and gravity, I would rather call "negative" mass and gravity antimatter and antigravity. For me, espacially antigravity would behave very much like we experience in the observable universe as dark energy

Edited October 1, 2018 by László Hajós

[Strange]

1 hour ago, László Hajós said:

As the "normal" matter and gravity I wouldnt call positive mass or positive gravity only mass and gravity, I would rather call "negative" mass and gravity antimatter and antigravity.

Antimatter exists and has normal mass and gravity (as does dark matter). And there is no such thing as negative or anti-gravity.

[László Hajós]

1 hour ago, Strange said:

Antimatter exists and has normal mass and gravity (as does dark matter). And there is no such thing as negative or anti-gravity.

Then why would it cause expansion in the universe?

[Ghideon]

1 hour ago, László Hajós said:

The astronomer can only start in the universe, first as particles, or pure energy in the singularity. Like forus on the earth, if would start right on the edge of the expansion, one edge of the observable universe would be almost always maximum on the edge of the whole universe and not further because all the mass is pushed away from eachother with about the same amount of force

Ok! But I still do not understand why an observer close to the edge does not observe the empty void on one side and "lots of starts and galaxies" on the other side. What prevents the observer from being at a location that is closer to the edge than half the size of the observable universe? 
 

 

24 minutes ago, László Hajós said:

Then why would it cause expansion in the universe?

Probably just my english, but what is "it" in this context. None of the things mentioned by @Strange is supposed to cause expansion as far as I can tell. (bold by me)

[beecee]

48 minutes ago, László Hajós said:

Then why would it cause expansion in the universe?

The expansion of the universe/space/time is a property of spacetime and appears to be determined by the energy density of the universe itself.eg: as the universe/space/time gets less dense due to more spacetime, [as it is expanding]  the effect on the expansion of spacetime is evident in an apparent acceleration of that expansion. Other then saying that the expansion is a property of spacetime, we at this time are simply ignorant as to the exact nature of this property...

Edited October 1, 2018 by beecee

[László Hajós]

1 hour ago, Ghideon said:

Ok! But I still do not understand why an observer close to the edge does not observe the empty void on one side and "lots of starts and galaxies" on the other side. What prevents the observer from being at a location that is closer to the edge than half the size of the observable universe? 

Maybe from some galaxies right at the edge you could see a void. But because the expansion which is faster than speed of light, it would be almost if not totally impossible to find any starting point of the early universe which would end up so close to the edge that you can see almost nothing on one side and our universe on the other side

 

1 hour ago, Ghideon said:

Probably just my english, but what is "it" in this context. None of the things mentioned by @Strange is supposed to cause expansion as far as I can tell. (bold by me)

I was thinking of dark energy by "it" (or these imagined invisible peaks what I have discribed on my drawings)

 

1 hour ago, beecee said:

The expansion of the universe/space/time is a property of spacetime and appears to be determined by the energy density of the universe itself.eg: as the universe/space/time gets less dense due to more spacetime, [as it is expanding]  the effect on the expansion of spacetime is evident in an apparent acceleration of that expansion. Other then saying that the expansion is a property of spacetime, we at this time are simply ignorant as to the exact nature of this property...

Yes, this was clear to me as well. But this is exactly what we should try to explain, or make sense of it and not just be ignorant about it. This is what I am trying to do. I know that this is almost impossible to do as we can not physicly (seeing, touching, experimenting) proove or disproove, but we can try to imagine and make sense of it. And probably this is one of the most important mechanism which exists. The same is true for the non observable universe. Probably we, as humans will never be able to examine it directly, but that doesn't mean that we shoudn't try to understend it.

I would like to ask a question from everyone: can it be calculated that how far would a gravitational force strech (counting even the weakest gravitational pull imeginable) from a hypermassive black hole with an event horizon diameter of 10^10 light years?

Edited October 1, 2018 by László Hajós

[beecee]

8 minutes ago, László Hajós said:

Yes, this was clear to me as well. But this is exactly what we should try to explain, or make sense of it and not just be ignorant about it. This is what I am trying to do. I know that this is almost impossible to do as we can not physicly (seeing, touching, experimenting) proove or disproove, but we can try to imagine and make sense of it. And probably this is one of the most important mechanism which exists. The same is true for the non observable universe. Probably we, as humans will never be able to examine it directly, but that doesn't mean that we shoudn't try to understend it.

Nothing wrong in reasonable speculative scenarios with some basis in science. But they remain speculative and hypothetical until some observational and/or experimental evidence comes to light that supports it. Could BH's lead via wormholes and ERB's to other universes/space/times? Are other BB's arising from the same quantum foam that our own recognised BB arose from? I don't know with any degree of certainty, and neither does anyone else yet. 

Quote

I would like to ask a question from everyone: can it be calculated that how far would a gravitational force strech (counting even the weakest gravitational pull imeginable) from a hypermassive black hole with an event horizon diameter of 10^10 light years?

Until at least it is overcome by the inherent property of spacetime to want to expand. eg: The gravity from our own local group of galaxies is strong enough to overcome the overall expansion of spacetime.

[Strange]

2 hours ago, László Hajós said:

Then why would it cause expansion in the universe?

It's complicated. And I don't fully understand it myself. It is related to the equation of state of matter vs energy and what this means in the LFRW equation. 

But one way of describing it is that dark energy corresponds to negative pressure. Pressure can be defined as the increase in energy as volume decreases (like when you compress a gas and it gets hot). But in the case of dark energy, the energy increases with increasing volume and so it is equivalent to negative pressure. Hence it "pushes" things apart.

 

24 minutes ago, László Hajós said:

I would like to ask a question from everyone: can it be calculated that how far would a gravitational force strech (counting even the weakest gravitational pull imeginable) from a hypermassive black hole with an event horizon diameter of 10^10 light years?

Gravity follows an inverse square law and so it extends to infinity (but obviously with smaller and smaller effect). You can use Newton's equation to calculate the force at any distance: [math]F = G\frac{m_1 m_2}{r^2}[/math] (r is the distance from the centre of the mass, the black hole in this case). Or, if you want the acceleration due to gravity: [math]g = G\frac{m}{r^2}[/math]

 

[László Hajós]

2 hours ago, Strange said:

Gravity follows an inverse square law and so it extends to infinity (but obviously with smaller and smaller effect). You can use Newton's equation to calculate the force at any distance: F=Gm1m2r2 (r is the distance from the centre of the mass, the black hole in this case). Or, if you want the acceleration due to gravity: g=Gmr2

So this would mean that if for example two supermassive black holes ( with example the mass of our local galaxy cluster which is gravity bound) from a huge distance (lets say 10^12 light years) from eachother in a space time which is not expanding between them will pull eachother until they collide an merge?

Edited October 2, 2018 by László Hajós

[zapatos]

23 minutes ago, László Hajós said:

So this would mean that if for example two supermassive black holes ( with example the mass of our local galaxy cluster which is gravity bound) from a huge distance (lets say 10^12 light years) from eachother in a space time which is not expanding between them will pull eachother until they collide an merge?

Yes. But you don't need two super massive black holes. Two marshmallows separated by that distance would eventually collide (assuming no other interactions).

[Strange]

6 hours ago, László Hajós said:

So this would mean that if for example two supermassive black holes ( with example the mass of our local galaxy cluster which is gravity bound) from a huge distance (lets say 10^12 light years) from eachother in a space time which is not expanding between them will pull eachother until they collide an merge?

Depends on their relative motion. They could end up moving apart or orbiting one another. 

[Ghideon]

9 hours ago, László Hajós said:

it would be almost if not totally impossible to find any starting point of the early universe which would end up so close to the edge that you can see almost nothing on one side and our universe on the other side

Thanks for the clarification! That was the thing I was looking for.

Lets move on, I have some trouble with some references to "expansion" and "force"; examples: 

20 hours ago, László Hajós said:

but the expansion stops after a long time

and

13 hours ago, László Hajós said:

because all the mass is pushed away from eachother with about the same amount of force

Is some movement in your model is caused by expansion of space and other movement caused by pushing forces? 

[László Hajós]

6 hours ago, Ghideon said:

Is some movement in your model is caused by expansion of space and other movement caused by pushing forces?

Expansion could be an external force (if there is one) + the "pushing" force inside the universe. The force pushing is only expansion in large scale  (+ could be other phenomena in small scale)

Edited October 2, 2018 by László Hajós

[Strange]

34 minutes ago, László Hajós said:

Expansion could be an external force (if there is one) + the "pushing" force inside the universe. The force pushing is only expansion in large scale  (+ could be other phenomena in small scale)

You seem to be just inventing all sorts of ad-hoc forces to make your model work. 

[László Hajós]

49 minutes ago, Strange said:

You seem to be just inventing all sorts of ad-hoc forces to make your model work. 

What do you mean I am inventing them? These forces exist in the real world, we can see the results of the force of the expansion and we can see the results of the force of the dark matter. All these forces exist I dont have to invent anything. And maybe in the future we will be able to measure that one end of the observable universe expands with a different speed than the other end. In my prediction that will happen.

Edited October 2, 2018 by László Hajós

[Ghideon]

1 hour ago, László Hajós said:

Expansion could be an external force (if there is one) + the "pushing" force inside the universe. The force pushing is only expansion in large scale  (+ could be other phenomena in small scale)

Follow up to make sure I understand; space is not expanding in your model? Expansion is instead always the result from various speculative forces that acts on matter? Matter is dragged and/or pushed into empty space surrounding "a universe"? 

With all these forces like negative* gravity etc acting on matter, wouldn't a large number of galaxies be deformed? 

 

*) non-existing in mainstream models but part of previous posts.

Edited October 2, 2018 by Ghideon
clarity about negative gravity

[László Hajós]

27 minutes ago, Ghideon said:

Follow up to make sure I understand; space is not expanding in your model? Expansion is instead always the result from various speculative forces that acts on matter? Matter is dragged and/or pushed into empty space surrounding "a universe"? 

With all these forces like negative* gravity etc acting on matter, wouldn't a large number of galaxies be deformed? 

I don't know why you think that in my model space is not expanding. I have even made some simple drawing explaining it above. Space is expanding, that is the force I called "pushing", that is the expansion. If there is no other force from outside of our universe, than that is the only force causing it. But in my prediction or hyphotesis there are other universes outside of ours and if there are, they will add to the expansion. The area closer to the edge of our universe would expand slightly faster than the area inside the universe. But these external forces dont cause any space time expansion, it would be only like a gravitational pulling force. Space time expansion is caused only by the internal "pushing" force.

 

No, the galaxies would not be deformed. Where there is more ordinary matter (like inside of our galaxy), there is less of these dark energy and more separated (more numbers of lower peaks but these are "canceled" by the gravitational force which is bigger).  Where there is less ordinary matter like next to and between the galaxies, there is more dark energy (pushing) and less seperated (less number of higher peaks)

Edited October 2, 2018 by László Hajós

[Strange]

38 minutes ago, László Hajós said:

What do you mean I am inventing them?

So which of the known forces are you talking about? It can’t be the strong or weak nuclear force (too short range). It can’t be electromagnetic (matter is neutral). So that leaves gravity. 

What can be pulling from outside? (And how is that compatible with Newton’s shell theorem?)

And there is no such thing as pushing gravity.

So these forces don’t seem to be any of the known forces. So I have to assume you have made them up. 

42 minutes ago, László Hajós said:

And maybe in the future we will be able to measure that one end of the observable universe expands with a different speed than the other end.

At what distance will this be measurable? And how large is the difference? (In other words, why haven’t we seen it yet?)