The Black Hole at The Center of The Universe

[Royston]

And?...And what else? We have to consider everything the Cosmos is doing.

 

Well yes, I think you missed my point. I could provide an entire list of observations that have been made, and stick them next to each other...but what precisely would that achieve. The 'universe expanding' was just an example that you need to take it further than just stating something that's been observed. A simple example, gravity attracts, dark energy repels so by your reasoning they must be intrinsically tied, but just placing these two observations next to each other, doesn't explain the relationship between the two. How does one behave with respect to the other?

[astrocat]

Well yes, I think you missed my point. I could provide an entire list of observations that have been made, and stick them next to each other...but what precisely would that achieve.

 

Well, if you were to provide all the main 'observations', and keep in mind the Laws that govern these 'observations', and arrange them in a way that clearly demonstrated how they inter-relate, yes - that's precisely what I'm looking for - real effects that are generally accepted by mainstream Science. Merely to say, 'the Cosmos is expanding' is leaving out everything else. How can one see any picture in this light?

 

'The Universe is expanding' was just an example that you need to take it further than just stating something that's been observed.

 

Can we at least reach a concensus on what has been observed? I've told you what I know, now you tell me what you see the Cosmos doing?

 

A simple example, gravity attracts, dark energy repels...

 

Please... I don't mean to sound rude, and I hope you don't take offence if I tell you, I don't have any 'repulsive' forces, as they are called, in my theory. Gravitational Forces did it all.

 

...so by your reasoning they must be intrinsically tied, but just placing these two observations next to each other, doesn't explain the relationship between the two. How does one behave with respect to the other?

 

Ouch! you see, we have to be grown up about it... I find I always have to warn people, I'm not trying to hurt anyone, or take away anyone's job - but there is no such thing - I'm sorry - as Dark Energy.

[astrocat]

i've never seen a ball expand when its falling.

 

It's only a tendency to expand. That's why, when it lands, this ball will tend to Compact (opposite of Expand) and Compress.

 

...if anything, it would shrink and increase in internal pressure because of the increasing external pressure.

 

Bernoulli said if a fluid Speeds Up, it will Lose Pressure. Now, if a Ball Speeds Up, you can be pretty sure it will tend to Lose Pressure in the same way. Another person, Boyle, said that if it's Losing Pressure, it's Increasing in Volume - Expanding.

 

...it would also heat up due to friction with the air.

 

Correct. The skin would warm slightly. But any falling body will give up Potential Energy (in the form of Heat) and it will Cool Down. When it warms up, is when it hits the floor.

 

sounds like you need to work on it some more. S/T/E\P/ is no longer a pretty pattern.

 

Right again... S/T/E\P/ is not pretty. You do, however, admit the falling ball Speeds Up. But Warming too? I doubt it. And Compacting? In mid-air? And Compressing? No, no, it's all mixed up. Are you sure you're not just kidding around?

[bascule]

There is no center of the universe. If you want to pick some point as the center, pick yourself. You are certainly the center of your universe. However "the universe" has no center.

[astrocat]

Yes, but if it was falling, I think that would give something rather certain in regards to attributes about the universe then.

 

Yes, let's examine these 'attributes'.

 

What I mean is say you drop some water, out of a cup, and the drop length is about 100 feet, I think the water as its falling in regards to variables, such as the earths gravity, atmospheric composition, temperature, pressure and so on like you go on about would give the water some specific traits, besides wind and all that stuff.

 

I try to keep the variables to a minimum in examples. Also, I find a ball makes for a good analogy - dropped from your hand to the floor, outside influences won't have much effect.

 

I guess you would have to put in that in connection with objects in the universe also having some impact, like if you put sand in the water per say. Have you looked at it from that angle.

 

Are you using Sand in Water to represent Matter in the Medium of Space? If so, I often use these very same ingredients to explain some of my points - for example, if you stir this water/sand combo, in a bowl, where does the sand go? Doesn't it Clump Up on the bottom, in the center?

 

I mean I don’t know how you would say the universe is taking on those properties. Plus where is the universe falling, and to what, and what’s causing it to fall, is the falling a uniform force applied to objects in the universe.

 

In this thread, I am allowed to say the Cosmos is falling into a Black Hole. I estimate we have to fall into about seven Black Holes, starting with the Black Hole at the center of the Galaxy, however many billion years that takes, before we hit the center...

 

And the Gravitational Forces involved are not neccessarily uniform. GR, General Relativity, allows for diffent rates of Time in different Gravitational Situations within the Cosmos - called Gravitational Time Dilation.

 

Lastly if I am in an elevator that is falling, falling rather fast relatively speaking, should I just be able to jump up and touch the ceiling for example, I mean I just don’t see it really when looking at what I understand of the cosmos is all.

 

If your elevator was in free fall, you would be weightless. But you might not notice you werte Speeding Up, unless you could see out, and if you fell fast enough, you might even experience some difficulty breathing.

 

I reralise it's hard. I'm asking you to suspend belief in a lot of what you have been taught, and trust me that I would never willingly lead you astray.

[astrocat]

There is no center of the universe.

 

Even so, the possibility remains.

 

If you want to pick some point as the center, pick yourself. You are certainly the center of your universe. However "the universe" has no center.

 

But you sound so sure.

[astrocat]

It's a northern constellation (I'd never heard of it either), why it's at the centre of the universe is another matter.

 

Actually, Snail, I said the center of the Universe was past the Corona Borealis.

[Sisyphus]

Even so, the possibility remains.

 

Actually, it doesn't. Observation from any point confirms cosmic expansion always away from that point. This is only possible if the universe does NOT have the kind of simple 3D geometry that you would need to have a "center" like the kind you're thinking of.

[insane_alien]

It's only a tendency to expand. That's why, when it lands, this ball will tend to Compact (opposite of Expand) and Compress.

 

umm, when it compacts on landing its because there is a big force acting on it. it does not need to expand first while on the second it would need to compact

 

Bernoulli said if a fluid Speeds Up, it will Lose Pressure. Now, if a Ball Speeds Up, you can be pretty sure it will tend to Lose Pressure in the same way. Another person, Boyle, said that if it's Losing Pressure, it's Increasing in Volume - Expanding.

 

yeah, cause solids really expand from a few pascals change in presure.

 

Correct. The skin would warm slightly. But any falling body will give up Potential Energy (in the form of Heat) and it will Cool Down. When it warms up, is when it hits the floor.

 

umm have you done any physics at all? the potential energy gets given up as kinetic energy. then some of that kinetic energy gets turned into heat with friction in the air and will heat the ball. it will only cool once it has landed.

 

Right again... S/T/E\P/ is not pretty. You do, however, admit the falling ball Speeds Up. But Warming too? I doubt it. And Compacting? In mid-air? And Compressing? No, no, it's all mixed up. Are you sure you're not just kidding around?

 

if your not sure about the ball compacting still, analyse a rock falling through water. if you still think it expands as the pressure get greater then we'll talk.

[Spyman]

...in my theory...

My advise to you would be to either present and explain your "theory" or ask more specific questions.

 

Randomly saying things like:

 

- The Black Hole at The Center of The Universe

- Hubble only noticed 1/4 of what the Universe is doing

- these letters make a pattern, (S/) (T\) (E/) (P\)

- the center of the Universe is somewhere past the Corona Borealis

- with the discovery of a Universal Axis

- There is other evidence the Cosmos is Whirlpool Shaped

- a finite Universe that definitely does have a center

- but there is no such thing - I'm sorry - as Dark Energy

- I estimate we have to fall into about seven Black Holes

 

Without any evidence, is NOT going to get you anywhere, except maybe the thread moved to Pseudoscience.

 

So do yourself a favour and explain your idea, but be prepared to prove it or to accept that you are wrong.

(And take the opportunity to learn from the experience.)

[Royston]

Well, if you were to provide all the main 'observations', and keep in mind the Laws that govern these 'observations', and arrange them in a way that clearly demonstrated how they inter-relate, yes - that's precisely what I'm looking for - real effects that are generally accepted by mainstream Science.

 

You mean mathematically...ummm, do you have any idea what that will involve, if I could do that, I'd be running a physics department (remember I'm not the one making a claim that I can find a relationship.) You're looking for real effects that are accepted by mainstream science, yet you claim there is no such thing as negative energy pressure (aka dark energy) and that there is a centre to the universe.

 

Merely to say, 'the Cosmos is expanding' is leaving out everything else. How can one see any picture in this light?

 

Again, it was an example that just stating observations, whether it's one, or a number of observations placed next to each other doesn't demonstrate anything.

 

Can we at least reach a concensus on what has been observed?

 

To reach a concesus you need to reject some flaws in your statements e.g there is a centre to the universe, that is not the accepted view in cosmology, in fact it hasn't been the accepted view for quite some time.

 

Please... I don't mean to sound rude, and I hope you don't take offence if I tell you, I don't have any 'repulsive' forces, as they are called, in my theory. Gravitational Forces did it all.

 

Then your theory doesn't agree with observation.

 

Ouch! you see, we have to be grown up about it.... I find I always have to warn people, I'm not trying to hurt anyone, or take away anyone's job - but there is no such thing - I'm sorry - as Dark Energy.

 

This article should give you some background...http://physicsweb.org/articles/world/17/5/7

[lucaspa]

Everything has a center - I don't know anything that doesn't - and the letters S/T\E/P\, like that, simply describe, in my opinion, what the Cosmos is known to be doing.

 

Are we in agreement so far?

 

Now you know something that does not have a "center" -- the universe. I think you would find this article very helpful:

 

7. Lineweaver CH and Davis TM Misconceptions about the Big Bang, Scientific American 36-45 March 2005. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147

[lucaspa]

Well, Spyman, I think it's also Speeding Up (S/) and Cooling Down or Losing Temperature (T\) as well as Decompressing (P\).

 

Together with Hubble's Expansion (E/) these letters make a pattern, (S/) (T\) (E/) (P\) or simply S/T\E/P\.

 

Hope you can see that?

 

What you "think" doesn't matter. It is what the data says that matters.

 

As it happens, the data is very clear that the universe is:

1. Expanding.

2. The rate of expansion is accelerating, or speeding up.

3. Temperature is constant thru the vacuum of space. Remember, temperature is a measurement of the motion of molecules. Therefore the universe itself doesn't have a temperature. Separate entities within the universe have different temperatures. For instance, the cosmic microwave background radiation is about 3.7 degrees K. But our sun is several million degrees K.

4. As the universe expands -- as spacetime increases --then yes, the density of matter in the universe decreases. This, however, is NOT the same as "decompressing".

 

However, all of this negates your idea of "falling into a black hole at the center of the universe".

 

You mention "my theory". With all respect, this is not the place to promote your theory. What you need to do is write it up for publication and then try to submit it to a physics journal. There it will be peer-reviewed by the experts in the field. They will either find merit in it or show up the flaws, either one much better than we amateurs can do. If your theory holds up to peer-review, then fine. If not, too bad. But in either case arguing with us is a waste of your time; we are not the ones you have to convince in order to get your theory accepted.

[lucaspa]

I reralise it's hard. I'm asking you to suspend belief in a lot of what you have been taught, and trust me that I would never willingly lead you astray.

 

Not good enough. What we have been taught is based on DATA. In science, trust in a person's good intentions is NEVER enough. What matters, and ONLY what matters, is the DATA. So far, what you said not only has no data, but is contradicted by the data.

 

 

In this thread, I am allowed to say the Cosmos is falling into a Black Hole.

 

Not really. Well, in the sense that no one is going to censor you and keep you from posting that sentence, yes, you are "allowed" to say it. But you are NOT "allowed" that we must take the statement seriously and as an accurate description of the universe. In order to do that, you must provide data.

 

I find I always have to warn people, I'm not trying to hurt anyone, or take away anyone's job - but there is no such thing - I'm sorry - as Dark Energy.

 

Bare assertions don't work in science. "Dark energy" is simply a shorthand name given to the OBSERVATION of the accelerating expansion of the universe. Some "repulsive" force that is causing the expansion. And yes, the data is irrefutable that the expansion is accelerating:

 

7. J Glanz, Exploding stars point to a universal repulsive force. Science 279:651-652, 30 Jan. 1998. New data indicates the cosmological constant is back.

7a. J Glanz, No backing off from the accelerating universe. Science 282: 1249-1250, Nov. 13, 1998. As the title says, 2 independent and competing groups continue to get data that agrees.

8. G Tarke and S.P. Swordy, Cosmic Antimatter. Scientific American, 278(4): 36-41, April 1998.

10. CJ Hogan, RP Kirshner, and NB Suntzeff, Surveying space-time with supernovae. Scientific American, 280: 46-51, Jan. 1999. Studies indicate that the rate of expansion of the universe is accelerating.

11. LM Krauss, Cosmological antigravity. Scientific American, 280: 52-61, Jan. 1999. discusses cosmological constant to explain accelerating expansion.

[THoR]

Now you know something that does not have a "center" -- the universe. I think you would find this article very helpful:

 

7. Lineweaver CH and Davis TM Misconceptions about the Big Bang, Scientific American 36-45 March 2005. http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?chanID=sa006&colID=1&articleID=0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147

Using any given point in space as the point of origin for an X,Y,Z axis, one may theoretically extend equidistant lines to infinity throughout the spectrum of three-dimensional coordinates. The procedure inscribes a sphere which theoretically encompasses the Universe. By definition, the selected point is the center of that sphere - and the center of the Universe. Since the same can be done for all points in the Universe, every point in the cosmos is its center.

[fattyjwoods]

... his mum?

 

sorry, had to be said.

 

on a more serious note, what does this have to do with a black hole at the centre of the universe? not that there even is a centre

 

phhhh hahahahahaha sooo funny...... Technically the universe cannot do his mum as it is far too big.

 

[igosaur]

Everything has a center - I don't know anything that doesn't

 

The surface of a sphere does not have a centre.