This Theory of mine, The "Dark Glove"

[Simone Mancini]

Before anything else, forgive me for my limited use of and knowledge of English language..

 

"Dark Glove Theory" Multiverse Behaviour, Black Holes, Inflation , The Nothing by Simone Mancini, Ravenna , Italy

My Theory is the following , its not essential to inject new mathematical codes like the Inflation inside the Standard Model of Cosmology

in order to explain the accelleration boost of outer galaxies and matter in general, the conclusion I reached is that the 'Nothing' , this non visible nor quantifiable entity

which composes Black Holes , in facts , It's the same entity which upholsters the universe.

Exactly like Black holes do attract Matter to itself, following the Newton rule of Universal Gravitation, the closer an object gets to another trough gravitational attraction,

the faster this object will move toward the other, thus the outermost Galaxyes are moving away from the theoretical Mid of the known Universe faster than the innermost are,

the farthest the faster. On an "endless" quest for reaching the Nothing outside (Dark Glove).

The everything (time x space x matter) is attracted by the Nothing in order to reach a natural balance ; as we know , once an oject (star/planet/etc) reaches a Black Hole,

this object does "vanish in thin space" , what it was, is no more , quite scary under a phisical point of view, but not quite impossible mathematically?

What if this nothing which composes Black holes and upholsters the universe could be aswell considered as a Dimension of the whole? Just like space time and matter are.

What if the matter that vanishes after reaching this "Dark Glove" and Black Holes , does not actually stop existing, but only dilatates to point infinite by losing 1 dimension in the process?

Moving from a 3 dimensional finite object to an infinite 2 dimensional one? Could the gravitational attraction power of such a huge portion of nothing be SO strong to pressurize matter

to point 0? We do know nothing can be destroyed but everything can be modified, what if this "fifth" dimension we can call The Nothing, is phisically able to decompose other dimensions?

Killing Matter till point 0, so that other ones (space/time) can reach point infinite? We could consider the universe like a heart beating, a compression and inflation, which takes billions of years

instead of a second, Galaxyes (math) are costantly attracted by the Dark Glove, each time some of this matter reaches it, it gets istantly decomposed into Space and time, losing the

Matter dimension, thus enlarging universe itself and extending time analogically, once all the matter will be decomposed into space and time reaching a total and perfect bidimensional infinite,

the perfect point infinite, when the Nothing becomes the everything itself, then the necessity for another dimension to be created (matter) will be phisically unavoidable, thus creating the

pre Big Bang, in other words, Matter at its maximum dimensions, and time/space at point 0, followed by an "explosion" which actually is a dilatation of dimensions, space and time need to exist,

matter will start to slowly decompose again and turn into space/time till the latters reach point Infinite and so forth, inflation and compression, The everything turns into Nothing, which

turns into the everything, which turns into the nothing, in an infinite Loop. A slow but costant beat of Dimensions, with The Nothing (Black holes/ Dark Glove) being the one dimension which

regulates the existance of other ones trough phisical decomposition. Makes any sense?

Edited September 4, 2013 by Simone Mancini

[ajb]

"Dark Glove Theory" Multiverse Behaviour, Black Holes, Inflation , The Nothing by Simone Mancini, Ravenna , Italy

 

Giving your "theory" a cool name always helps!

 

My Theory is the following , its not essential to inject new mathematical codes like the Inflation inside the Standard Model of Cosmology

in order to explain the accelleration boost of outer galaxies...

Are you talking about the inflationary epoch or the acceleration of the Universe today? They are at different energy scales and so are thought to be seperate phenomena.

 

...following the Newton rule of Universal Gravitation..

Okay, but we do have a better theory of gravity to play with here; General Relativity. That said, it is true that quite a lot of cosmology can be understood in the Newtonian limit.

 

...the theoretical Mid of the known Universe...

The what?

 

There is no centre of the Universe in the sense you mean. Or rather, any point can be considered as the centre!

 

 

And I stop here.

[Simone Mancini]

Hey Ajb , you put a lot of interesting questions and statements there which I really appreciate.

I was referring to Universe accelleration, considering the fact that a moving object, like a star for example, does just that, move, it doesnt create time and space along its path. It travels trough it as long as there is some, for the same reason you wont see a star enter and exit a black hole from the other side. This theory focuses on two main questions:

 

1) What happens to the matter that meets a Black Hole

2)Why is Matter accellerating its speed toward the Space/Time bounds, and the fact that the farther away this matter is, the faster is moving, which reminds us a lot of Newton Law

 

Im pretty sure you can understand what im talkin about, im pretty sure you can also understand that a theoretical centre of the known universe is needed or you simply could not state the fact that galaxyes are moving away (from what ? ) the faster they are far away from ( what?)

 

But yes, space/time is expanding, thats a fact, it is also a fact as far as I know that matter is goin missin, Black Holes, this is interesting isnt it?

Something "disappearing" and something else expanding at the same time, the way galaxyes are moving outward aswell, I really belive the nothing is a dimension itself which forms up the whole with the other known dimensions, and they do interact with each other

[pears]

Im pretty sure you can understand what im talkin about, im pretty sure you can also understand that a theoretical centre of the known universe is needed or you simply could not state the fact that galaxyes are moving away (from what ? ) the faster they are far away from ( what?)

 

Everything is moving away from everything else.

[ajb]

I was referring to Universe accelleration...

 

Ok, the acceleration we see today rather than the inflationary epoch?

 

Or are you just refering to Hubble's law?

 

Im pretty sure you can understand what im talkin about, im pretty sure you can also understand that a theoretical centre of the known universe is needed or you simply could not state the fact that galaxyes are moving away (from what ? ) the faster they are far away from ( what?)

Every point "looks like" the centre of the Universe! There is no special point in the Universe that can be called the centre. From any point in the Universe any observer sees all (ok, mod any in his local group) galaxes moving away from him and obeying Hubble's law.

 

But yes, space/time is expanding, thats a fact, it is also a fact as far as I know that matter is goin missin, Black Holes, this is interesting isnt it?

I ask you for clarification on matter going missing. Some mass does fall into black holes, but I expect that to be cosmologically insignificant. Dark matter is most likley not to be just black holes, if that is what you are suggesting?

Edited September 4, 2013 by ajb

[Delta1212]

When matter meets a black hole, it falls in. In the same when that when matter meets Earth, it falls to the ground. A black hole is just a lot of matter in a small space with a comparably strong gravitational pull. It's not made of some strange dark substance and despite "black" and "dark" conjuring similar images, black holes are not made of dark matter.

[ajb]

...black holes are not made of dark matter.

Black holes have been suggested as a candidate for dark matter, though this now does not fit with the cosmological data we have in the sense that they cannot be a significant proportion of the missing mass. The same holds for brown dwarfs and other such objects. Primordial black holes also have come up as candidates, similarly they appear not to be able to account for all the missing mass in the Universe, but this is not a settled issue by any means. So, some mass may be hidden from our observation in the form of black holes, they cannot be a major constituent.

 

Anyway, was this what Simone was suggesting?

Edited September 4, 2013 by ajb

[Delta1212]

Black holes have been suggested as a candidate for dark matter, though this now does not fit with the cosmological data we have in the sense that they cannot be a significant proportion of the missing mass. The same holds for brown dwarfs and other such objects. Primordial black holes also have come up as candidates, similarly they appear not to be able to account for all the missing mass in the Universe, but this is not a settled issue by any means. So, some mass may be hidden from our observation in the form of black holes, they cannot be a major constituent.

 

Anyway, was this what Simone was suggesting?

Perhaps not. I may have read too quickly and conflated the "Dark Glove" moniker with some other points of confusion.

 

It seems Simone is proposing that black holes are made of some sort of "nothing" and that matter entering a black hole vanishes. The proposal is then that the universe is surrounded by the same "nothing" substance that black holes are made of, and that this substance sucking matter towards it is what causes galaxies that are farther away to be moving faster; they being closer to the edges of the universe.

Edited September 4, 2013 by Delta1212

[ajb]

It seems Simone is proposing that black holes are made of some sort of "nothing" and that matter entering a black hole vanishes. The proposal is then that the universe is surrounded by the same "nothing" substance that black holes are made of, and that this substance sucking matter towards it is what causes galaxies that are farther away to be moving faster; they being closer to the edges of the universe.

Maybe, lets see what he says next.

[GeeKay]

Simone - I don't as yet pretend to understand a great a deal about your aptly named 'Dark Glove' theory (for some odd reason, the name makes me think of the Glove in the Beatles' 'Yellow Submarine' movie). That said, I do very much like the idea of matter 'losing a dimension' inside a black hole. It seems to make a weird kind of sense too, especially given the non-Euclidian geometry in regions of intense gravity. . . not to mention quantum mechanics as well? This is aesthetics speaking, though, not mathematics, I'm bound to admit.