secondtrooper Posted October 22, 2015 Posted October 22, 2015 Hello! I had a theory, thats been scraching my brain for quite some time and i didnt know where to write this. So, science says, that The Big Bang doesnt have a center, a starting point. That it expands from anywhere to everywhere. And this table showed, that it expands constantly from any point, any planet or star if we look at it so. A B C From A 0 km/s 10,000 km/s 20,000 km/s From B -10,000km/s 0 km/s 10,000 km/s But doesnt universe expand exponentially? Taking example, that point B is where we stand, and the The Big Bang's starting point is somewhere before point A, the point C would "run" from us faster, than the point A and it would prove, that The Big Bang started from point somewhere before A. Even taking The Famous Balloon Analogy, Universe is multi-dimentional, it can't be a sphere. And if you imagine, that Universe is the air inside the balloon, blowing it up the particles would expand exponentially and there would be a center.
swansont Posted October 22, 2015 Posted October 22, 2015 The Famous Balloon Analogy, Universe is multi-dimentional, it can't be a sphere. And if you imagine, that Universe is the air inside the balloon, blowing it up the particles would expand exponentially and there would be a center. The balloon analogy is just that, and analogy, and it assumes you are only looking at the surface. It's a two-dimensional representation so you can see an example, because it's harder to envision it in three dimensions. Does the surface of a balloon have a center?
puppypower Posted October 22, 2015 Posted October 22, 2015 (edited) If the BB primordial atom; singularity, had quantum divided, similar to cell division, the lowering mass density induced by each division, would lead the expansion of space-time via GR. This would create an expanding universe that appears to expand at many centers at the same time, due to GR, This model has other advantages in that it also allows the superstructures of the universe to form early due to starting with large quantum chunks, instead of the assembly of atomization, implied by the standard model. The observed expansion of the universe, relative to the galaxies, would then suggest that the galaxy level cells, were the last cell division. These terminal cells would expand in a more atomized way similar to the standard model, with local gravity in control. The advantage of the quantum division is this schema has a smaller entropy profile compared to a singular BB dissociation event. In other words, there is less entropy increase for the first the first division, compared to a complete atomization. Since an entropy increase requires energy, the cell division schema needs less energy to begin an expansion. Edited October 22, 2015 by puppypower
secondtrooper Posted October 22, 2015 Author Posted October 22, 2015 The balloon analogy is just that, and analogy, and it assumes you are only looking at the surface. It's a two-dimensional representation so you can see an example, because it's harder to envision it in three dimensions. Does the surface of a balloon have a center? Ok, but why then use such an example, if it leads me of, as I see, proof? Holding on to topic. What do you think, looking at 2 stars in 2 different directions from a point, like earth. Would it be possible to measure the speed of those 2 stars using visible spectre.What i meant i draw in paint.
swansont Posted October 22, 2015 Posted October 22, 2015 Ok, but why then use such an example, if it leads me of, as I see, proof? You use it because it demonstrates the specific bit it's meant to explain. Holding on to topic. What do you think, looking at 2 stars in 2 different directions from a point, like earth. Would it be possible to measure the speed of those 2 stars using visible spectre.What i meant i draw in paint. If you were at the so-called "center" point, you would see A, B and C receding from you at a speed proportional to their distance. But this would be true if you were at any other point. You can measure the recessional velocity by measuring the redshift of spectral lines.
Endy0816 Posted October 22, 2015 Posted October 22, 2015 (edited) Yeah, think of the balloon analogy, but now imagine what you would witness looking out from one of those little dots. You don't see yourself as moving, but you will see the rest of the dots as moving away from you. Edited October 22, 2015 by Endy0816
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now