Theory

[Curiousabout]

What if it is more like the big ignition then a bang? All matter that is, was here all the time, atoms mingled with dark matter floating in infinite space. The ignition (introduction of energy) began to form the planets, solar systems, galaxies. Dark matter and dark energy causes the expansion. Gravity is relative to the curvature of space time. Dark matter is not influanced by gravity. Blac holes are the blenders in the universe recycling matter. ??????????????????

[Endy0816]

There's evidence due to the structure of the Universe that it expanded. Cosmic microwave background radiation is another good bit of evidence. Dark Energy is thought to be the present reason for its continued expansion.

 

Dark matter is separate from Dark energy. It does have a gravitational effect, how we determined its existence in the first place. Recently we even have what are effectively images of it due to its attraction of gasses. You can search "dark matter web" if you want to take a look.

 

I'm not sure what you mean by "blender". The accretion disk for Black Holes, are larger than those normally formed, but otherwise pretty standard. Black holes *may* represent a form of matter storage until a point in the future. You can term them as recycling in that sense.

[Curiousabout]

Our reality is based on natural laws. Each new discovery confirms the laws for this universe. We have been able to witness the birth and death of a solar system. We understand that a collapsing star can produce such a strong gravitational pull that it can form a black hole. We have witnessed galaxies collide. I am curious about these things, and find myself pondering our universe trying to apply the natural laws of this universe. An infinitely dense singularity that somehow explodes has never seemed to be correct to me. There are theories that our universe is like a rubber band that at some point it will reverse and collapse on itself. I would think that if a star could create such a gravitational pull when it collapses’ on itself to create a black hole. What do you suppose would happen if the universe collapsed on itself? It would be more likely that if the universe would collapse it would likewise make a black hole that could never expand again. Other theories suggest galaxies will be eaten from the inside out as the orbits of the stars in the galaxy continue to lose energy via the emission of gravitational radiation. Black holes will vanish because; it too is radiating energy and evaporating. In the end, all that is left over in the universe will be no black holes and a thinning soup of electrons, neutrinos, anti-electrons and photons. This theory is more viable as to the possibility of our universe cycling through ignition as opposed to explosion. Thank you for the response and for reading my thoughts.

Curious about

[Mordred]

What if it is more like the big ignition then a bang? All matter that is, was here all the time, atoms mingled with dark matter floating in infinite space. The ignition (introduction of energy) began to form the planets, solar systems, galaxies. Dark matter and dark energy causes the expansion. Gravity is relative to the curvature of space time. Dark matter is not influanced by gravity. Blac holes are the blenders in the universe recycling matter. ??????????????????

 

 

You also seem to have a misconception of the hot big bang model, scientifically speaking we do not know how the universe first formed, the hot big bang model simply describes a hot, dense beginning. Due to the dark ages we will never be able to see far enough back to see the beginning. The furthest we will be able to see is the time of the CMB. Light prior to that had too short of a mean free path. (dark ages). Our knowledge prior to the dark ages is based upon our stidies of particle physics. The so called explosion you often read about in pop media is an explosion in the volume of space. It is not the same as an explosion like a stick of dynamite. Simply put the universe suddenly expanded exponentially during inflation. The universe today continues to expand due to the cosmological constant.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chronology_of_the_universe

Our reality is based on natural laws. Each new discovery confirms the laws for this universe. We have been able to witness the birth and death of a solar system. We understand that a collapsing star can produce such a strong gravitational pull that it can form a black hole. We have witnessed galaxies collide. I am curious about these things, and find myself pondering our universe trying to apply the natural laws of this universe. An infinitely dense singularity that somehow explodes has never seemed to be correct to me. There are theories that our universe is like a rubber band that at some point it will reverse and collapse on itself. I would think that if a star could create such a gravitational pull when it collapses’ on itself to create a black hole. What do you suppose would happen if the universe collapsed on itself? It would be more likely that if the universe would collapse it would likewise make a black hole that could never expand again. Other theories suggest galaxies will be eaten from the inside out as the orbits of the stars in the galaxy continue to lose energy via the emission of gravitational radiation. Black holes will vanish because; it too is radiating energy and evaporating. In the end, all that is left over in the universe will be no black holes and a thinning soup of electrons, neutrinos, anti-electrons and photons. This theory is more viable as to the possibility of our universe cycling through ignition as opposed to explosion. Thank you for the response and for reading my thoughts.

Curious about

 

 

there is significant difference between the singularity of the hot big bang and the singularity of a black hole. in the first case the BB model does not predict a finite infinitely dense volume. he singularity is simply a point where our physics can no longer describe what is going on (the math etc cease to make any sense, too many infinities etc.) In the BH singularity this is said to be an infinitely dense state in the GR model, in the QM model the smallest size would be a planch length. In particular the balloon analogy and "What we have learned from Observational Cosmology"

 

these articles will help catch you up to speed on current cosmology

http://www.phinds.com/balloonanalogy/ : A thorough write up on the balloon analogy used to describe expansion

http://tangentspace.info/docs/horizon.pdf :Inflation and the Cosmological Horizon by Brian Powell

http://arxiv.org/abs/1304.4446 :"What we have leaned from Observational Cosmology." -A handy write up on observational cosmology in accordance with the LambdaCDM model.

http://arxiv.org/abs/astro-ph/0310808 :"Expanding Confusion: common misconceptions of cosmological horizons and the superluminal expansion of the Universe" Lineweaver and Davies

http://www.mso.anu.edu.au/~charley/papers/LineweaverDavisSciAm.pdf: "Misconceptions about the Big bang" also Lineweaver and Davies

http://arxiv.org/abs/1002.3966 "why the prejudice against a constant"

http://arxiv.org/abs/gr-qc/0508052 "In an expanding universe, what doesn't expand? Richard H. Price, Joseph D. Romano

http://arxiv.org/abs/1301.0219What's in a Name: History and Meanings of the Term "Big Bang" Helge Kragh

http://arxiv.org/pdf/0906.1442v1.pdf Is it possible to see the infinite future of the Universe when falling into a black hole?

Edited May 26, 2014 by Mordred

[MigL]

Both the big bang singularity and a black hole singularity have enough energy density to collapse in on themselves to create either a black hole or a still-born universe, and we currently lack a model to describe this state as it involves a quantum gravity theory.

 

There is a subtle difference however.

A black hole is a timelike singularity, existing in a small, limited space for an indefinite period of time.

The big bang singularity, on the other hand, is spacelike, existing through all space but only at the beginning of space-time.

One is a boundary or edge to space, the other is a boundary or edge to time.