My "Refreshing Universe" Theory

[MattReardon]

Before I get started, let me say that I am not a scientist (that much I’m sure will be clear soon) but I am college educated in Aviation Science and I do like solving puzzles. About a year ago, I randomly started thinking about why the universe has perplexing issues with accelerating expansion and had what felt like an epiphany. It has been in the back of my mind since and I’ve been too short on time/and or courage to ask knowledgeable people their thoughts, but here I am now. My “epiphany” was that if the universe were sphere shaped and the Big Bang happened at the “North Pole” of the sphere and everything traveled south, then it would appear that different sectors of the universe had accelerating expansion of different rates. As matter traveled south across the Space-Sphere, it would generally spread out (as the lines of longitude got further apart) until the matter reached the equator and then generally start condensing again in the “Southern Hemisphere”. This spreading-out on the way to the “Equator” would cause greater expansion in some areas than others. There would, of course, be velocity due to the Big Bang but also apparent accelerating expansion due to travel across the sphere. If the Big Bang was strong enough to push enough matter past the equator of the Space-Sphere, then all matter would continue moving (due to gravitational pull of increasing mass in the Southern Hemisphere) until eventually reaching the next point of singularity near the “South Pole”. Matter that is behind us and still closer to the location of the Big Bang would appear to be accelerating away from us but that is only because we are accelerating at an exponential rate towards the “Equator” because we are closer to it and drawn more by the gravitation pull of matter that has started to condense in the “Southern Hemisphere”. If we can’t observe any galaxies getting systematically closer to each other in any sectors of the universe (beyond the rationale of gravity), then this could just mean that we are still in the Northern Hemisphere and the Southern Hemisphere isn’t yet within our observable range. I know that background radiation has been triangulated to show the universe is flat in some studies, but my question is: If we can’t see the fabric of space then why would the fabric of space affect measurements made with equipment that mimics functionalities of human vision? Unless that equipment can see the fabric of space, why would the fabric of space alter its measurements in any way?

Obviously gravity would play into the movements of matter and galaxies. And gravity is the next topic that came to mind after my thoughts on space as a sphere shape. Unlike space we are able to indirectly observe gravity-induced travel all the time. We can watch an object drop to the ground. Likewise, we can indirectly observe gravity in the formations of black holes. Like I said, space could be sphere shaped, and matter travels in one direction towards the next point of singularity located at the pole opposite to the Big Bang. Is it possible that gravity is a dimension also and that matter is traveling towards the core of the sphere, in a way, to get to the next point of singularity as well. Imagine a gopher, on Earth, left the North Pole to walk to the South Pole. But, he decided he liked digging too much to just travel across the surface of the Earth. Every bit further he traveled south, he also dug deeper into the Earth (vector along Z-axis) as he kept traveling. Imagine he dug at such a rate that when had ultimately traveled about 8,000 miles (diameter of Earth) in a Y-axis vector he also had dug enough in the Z-axis that he ended up popping out of the ground at the North Pole where he started. Is it possible that space and gravity interact in such a way that matter loops back around to the previous point of the Big Bang? Galaxies that started out with more matter would “dig” more with all their mass and may initially travel more in the digging direction than across latitude lines but eventually they would traverse the same amount of both space and the gravity-dimension. Their excess mass would create a greater pull between them and the matter in the Southern Hemisphere would accelerate more in the Southerly direction.  Perhaps this is why we can't observe black holes directly.  Perhaps it’s not the gravitational impact on light, but rather, things within the black hole are just farther away than we realize and the objects are beyond the range of our instruments.

The gravity due to local masses and the gravity due to condensing matter in the Southern Hemisphere could compete in such a way as to maintain a balance where any bit of matter reaches the end of the space axis and the end of the gravity axis at the same time.

It’s kind of mind-bending to think about and difficult to explain in a perfect way. But I suppose that is the nature of dimensions that we can’t see. Two very different things that both work in concert to produce the end result of all matter ending up back where it started. (I also think that when you’re in a black hole it just looks like a normal part of the universe, whereas, viewed from a black hole, the Milky Way may appear to be nothing but gas clouds, due to relativity.) Is it possible this convergence of matter happens (through both the space and gravity dimension) and then there is another Big Bang which means we have a “Refreshing Universe” on a loop?

Thinking on these ideas led me down a rabbit hole of other concepts that all seemed to connect. From the working of black holes, to the rise and collapse of societies, spirituality, human health, and even to why we yawn. It seems to connect to the concept of information and energy being the same thing (I’m aware this has been proposed by many others). It made me think there could truly be a mirror universe running in reverse so that “everything”, “the opposite of everything” and “nothing” could all exist simultaneously. Sort of like “-1+1=0”. One and its opposite, together, are the same as nothing. “Zero” and the “Negative One plus Positive One” are seemingly very different but also very much the same. They both have their own truth even though they contradict each other in a way. Similarly, I think it’s possible that reality creates perception and perception creates reality. They are seemingly opposite ideas but both true. And perhaps, like the measurable “refresh rate” of human visual perception, the universe may have a measurable “refresh rate”. Perhaps the refresh rate of structures is inversely related to the amount of information that is being perceived and/or the complexity of the structure. Human visual perception has a quick refresh rate. The universe may refresh at an unfathomably slow rate.

I don’t want to get too verbose on these extraneous ideas and their connections to my core ideas of both space and gravity being a dimension. I believe that there could be multiple seemingly opposite ways to understand and perceive space and gravity, but can you help and tell me if my proposed way to understand space and gravity is reasonable? I appreciate your gentle commentary. I do hope there is truth to this. If there was a scientific way to prove that the universe is a giant act of perception, then that would mean that we humans have purpose. It would mean that our rise to consciousness and resulting perception (which we have some control over) is a manifestation of the universe’s ultimate purpose: Perception. Perhaps the universe is simultaneously creating itself and perceiving itself much like we humans do. It could mean that our human perception ultimately affects the destiny of the entirety of the universe. It would mean that spirituality and science could co-exist… Your thoughts?

Edited January 10, 2021 by MattReardon

[Markus Hanke]

!

Moderator Note

I’m moving this to Speculations for now, as that is the correct forum section for personal theories.

 

22 minutes ago, MattReardon said:

perplexing issues with accelerating expansion

Why would accelerated expansion be an issue? It’s a natural geometric property of this type of spacetime, and thus fully consistent with the gravitational field equations.

24 minutes ago, MattReardon said:

Is it possible that gravity is a dimension also

Gravity is a geometric property of spacetime; to be more exact, it is geodesic deviation, i.e. the failure of initially parallel geodesics to remain parallel.

26 minutes ago, MattReardon said:

Is it possible this convergence of matter happens (through both the space and gravity dimension) and then there is another Big Bang which means we have a “Refreshing Universe” on a loop?

Using the mathematical tools of cosmology, it is possible to construct a universe that - starting from a Big Bang - first expands, then slows, stops, and re-contracts to end up in a Big Crunch again, only for the cycle to repeat over and over again. The problem is that this is not consistent with what we actually observe in the real world.

30 minutes ago, MattReardon said:

but can you help and tell me if my proposed way to understand space and gravity is reasonable?

We already have a very detailed model of (classical) gravity, being General Relativity, which works extremely well - what you seem to propose is not very consistent with what we already know about gravity.

Edited January 10, 2021 by Markus Hanke

[Phi for All]

9 hours ago, MattReardon said:

Thinking on these ideas led me down a rabbit hole of other concepts that all seemed to connect.

We've noticed this phenomenon over the years, and we're very glad you came here for help. You had SOME science knowledge, you read more, and something in the mainstream explanation doesn't make sense to you. What you should have done was study the mainstream science and ask questions until the light bulb came on.

What you did instead was use that marvelous brain of yours to make stuff up. When you do that, you're connecting concepts using limited knowledge, only the stuff you know, so of course it MAKES PERFECT SENSE -- but only to you.

As I said, very glad you came here. Thinking about the shape of the universe is extremely non-intuitive, and many folks make the mistake of thinking it's expanding INTO something else. Science is NOT interested in the truth, actually, since people tend to make up their own truths. Science is interested in the best current explanations, something we can add to as new information becomes available. 

[MattReardon]

9 hours ago, Markus Hanke said:

!

Why would accelerated expansion be an issue? It’s a natural geometric property of this type of spacetime, and thus fully consistent with the gravitational field equations.

I'm speaking to the fact that some are finding different rates of expansion in different parts of the universe.

[joigus]

9 hours ago, MattReardon said:

My “epiphany” was that if the universe were sphere shaped and the Big Bang happened at the “North Pole” of the sphere and everything traveled south, then it would appear that different sectors of the universe had accelerating expansion of different rates.

A sphere has no poles. A chart does (a system of coordinates). You can map the sphere in many ways. They all have different poles. So spheres have no special points. Neither does the universe, as far as we know. But it is a mathematical theorem that no matter what the system of coordinates you choose, you must always leave a point out, which would be your pole. But which point it is is up to you.

Expanding universes have their problems when cosmology meets quantum mechanics. But that's outside of the scope of what you are proposing here. You seem to be thinking of a classical universe, and we do know already that it's quantum.

[Mad For Science]

10 hours ago, MattReardon said:

Before I get started, let me say that I am not a scientist

You're off to a great start.

[Markus Hanke]

13 hours ago, MattReardon said:

I'm speaking to the fact that some are finding different rates of expansion in different parts of the universe.

Can you provide a reference to look at?