Jump to content


Photo
- - - - -

A Cosmological Theory - Extending on the Big Bang


  • Please log in to reply
5 replies to this topic

#1 arkain101

arkain101

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1931 posts

Posted 04 June 2009 - 07:36 PM

In this topic, I would like to discuss a theory that deals with the universe as a whole. A theory that attempts to provide a unique interpretation and explanation of the big bang and some general processes that occurred up until present time.

Secondly, I would like to move into ways to test and measure specific areas of explanations the theory provides, and discuss with members the challenges the theory faces.

The main subjects to be covered based on the theory (hopefully in order) will be:

1)After the big bang
-The massive expansion of space, and clustering of the first separated bodies.
-The various types of bodies, and an explanation as to how they form, what they are.

2)Black holes and Quasars
-The role they play as the type of bodies remaining after the big bang (even today).
-The relationship of Quasar effect and black holes
-The the role BH's play in the expansion of a local space relative to another location.
-The the role BH's play as the cause of the production of the local matter surrounding them.
-The life cycle of various black hole types.
-The explanation of a quasar
-The cause of a quasars pulsing effect
-The reasons for a quasars extreme brightness

4)Galaxies; An elaboration for the:
-formation of galaxies depending on the black hole type.
-Why some have black holes at their center and others may not.

5)Spacial Expansion, An elaboration:
-The cause of various redshift values in quasars, from minimum to extreme.
-A possible new interpretation of how the universe is expanding, non uniformly.

#2 arkain101

arkain101

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1931 posts

Posted 04 June 2009 - 08:50 PM

A summary of the general theory.

The theory is based on a few basic postulates. Before we get to them, I will just give a basic overview of the theories view of the process from the big bang untill today. After the big bang, and cooling started to occur, a result was spacial anti-retraction that separated various types of bodies in a random manner. The main types of these bodies were super sized massive chunks of the big bang, so hot and energized they are observed as spacially contracted sphere like objects, super sized black holes. These 'black holes' are big bang material if you will packed with extreme amounts of energy and due to their bloated size they have a massive surface area that is prone to cooling down. They are treated as black holes because they material is so energetic it is extremely time dilated and contracted (dense black objects). As they cool down on the otter edge, layers are burned off, by a means of anti-spacial contraction. Essentially this black hole is bleeding space and energy as it cools from its very unstable state emitting phenominal energy levels up to an "equivalent to one trillion [math]10^{12}[/math] suns.[link]".

The rate at which these primordial chunks of the big bang essentially 'bleed space and energy/matter' is expected to be proportional to the surface area. In the initial stages of a large quasar-black-hole body a continuous stream of energy and anti-spacial-contraction (spacial expansion) beams off providing extreme redshift magnitudes (he highest redshift known for a quasar (as of December 2007[update]) is 6.43,[2]). Essentially burning continiously untill a kind of equillibrium starts to occur, where pulsations of this energy and space start to burn off at certain and determinable frequencies. Finally, a point is reached where what is left is an early stage cloud of mass/matter surrounding the stabalizing black hole, as it reaches a stable surface area. The quasar effect dies off and galaxy formation begins from the material burned off from the earlier stages of the black hole.

What we are left with is a picture of the universe where galaxies and quasar effects (ealy stage galaxies) are separated by vast distances of space, redshifted relative to eachother, and formed galaxies are left with a super-massive black hole still containing the earlier stage of the big bang in their time locked sphere. Where very little of anything exists between these galaxies except for rare chunks of 'big bang material' that were basically torn apart and did not form into blackholes, but rather, small dust/cloud galaxies, and nebulas.

With the inclusion of relativity; In the perspective the black hole, all of space-time around it is contracted closely to it, essentially because its 'average' velocity is or energy is extremely close to C. Which in turn produces the perspective of the material around the black hole, where it is encapsulated in this bent or curved space-time well, revolving around an object apparently 'stopped in time'.

So how did galaxies grow so large? One possible explanation is that the initial expulsion of material from the earlier stages of the black hole was revolving extremely close around the event horizon in a kind of globe of energy. As space space essentially expanded in what can be thought of as layers or waves coming form the black hole, this material found that the black hole was accelerating away from them, in the sense that space was expanding between the material and the black hole. First, doubling a distance of some small distance like 1 meter, which again increases, and increases. Then, essentially forms the idea of age rings around the black hole, where the furthest orbiting material came from the earliest stages of the spacial expansion, that can be seen as up to 100,000 parsecs in diameter from the center of the black hole. This gives the assumption that the age of a galaxy can be calculated by its size and density.

Finally, as material orbits a black hole and meets with event horizon, it can essentially cool down a very thin outer layer of the black hole, causing it to pulsate or release a bit of space, matter and energy. The material galaxy is in turn expanded from the black hole, giving life to new stars. However, this local expansion observed from another location, such as our galaxy, is observed as a redshifted and receding galaxy, where space is literally expanding between this "observed past(time) galaxy" and our galaxy.

This gives a model of an expanding universe this is not uniform. That is, the expansion is caused by black holes themselves, and can be observed to be quite random due to the inconsistency of the size and stages of these early quasar-black-hole-galaxies. It would agree with the observations that the further away one of these galaxies are, the more redshifted it would be, due to the fact we are observing very ancient early stages of galaxy formation. A consequence of this interpretation is that the observed universe will in time be observed to become less redshift, and essentially will slow in expansion.


The postulates
:

1)Black Holes are remnants of super hot energetic big bang material

2)Black Holes emit space-time: In an earlier stage of a super massive black hole's (found at galaxy centers) life, they are observed as quasar's emitting vast amounts of spacial expansion.

3)Black Holes produce matter, mass and energy, during their earlier unstable stages of the life cycle.

4)(possible) A Gravity well is a local spacial contraction produced by most significantly, the highest energy zone of a body. Which is to say, the relative average velocity of a group of energetic bonded and non bonded mass. It produces the curvature of space-time explained in general relativity.
(Removes the idea that space-time must be some form of material, and replaces it with a different state of mass/energy relationship)

5)The observed red shift of the surrounding bodies in the universe is the spacial expansion coming from unstable stage black holes.

#3 Hasanuddin

Hasanuddin

    Questioning

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 163 posts

Posted 05 June 2009 - 04:37 AM

Dear Arkain,

We share similar interests. However, I cannot agree with where you have taken this narrative of your if I cannot agree with the starting point you choose.

You have ignored, it appears for convenience sake, the question of the missing observed antimatter in our quadrant of space:

Do you not agree that from what we know of high-energy events adherence to equal amounts of matter to antimatter as a byproduct of pair-production?

Do you not agree that the Big Bang was the highest energy event ever?

The conclusion necessarily follows that equal amounts of matter/antimatter were created at the time of the Big Bang.


Because your theory does not account for this necessary truth, it is necessarily flawed. (No offense.)

Sorry to be critical—I invite you to return the favor. You see, I also am in the process of advancing a modern retrofitting of the lens through which we view cosmologic data. I have been considering the paradox of the missing antimatter for some time, and the modern Dominium model begins there. I invite you to come and return the favor, I found your fatal flaw, you find mine.

Thread 1 of the Dominium: First eight moves, Big Bang to CMB http://hypography.co...hasanuddin.html

Thread 2 of the Dominium: #9 and higher, dark-matter, solar wind, next Big Bang http://hypography.co...l-part-2-a.html

#4 arkain101

arkain101

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1931 posts

Posted 05 June 2009 - 07:02 AM

[wiki-link]
Starting from theorems proved by Stephen Hawking, Jacob Bekenstein conjectured that the black hole entropy was proportional to the area of its event horizon divided by the Planck area.

[math]S_{BH} = \frac{kA}{4\ell_{\mathrm{P}}^2}[/math]

where where k is Boltzmann's constant, and [math] \ell_{\mathrm{P}}=\sqrt{G\hbar / c^3}[/math] is the Planck length.

The black hole entropy is proportional to its area A. The fact that the black hole entropy is also the maximal entropy that can be squeezed within a fixed volume was the main observation that led to the holographic principle
[end wiki]


I found this interesting and agreeable to the overall concept, that a black holes stability is based upon the surface area.

Although, what I have been reading is that for a black hole, a smaller surface area provides a greater rate of emission than a larger surface. This tends to go against the expectations of the theory. However I read over some issues that have not been solved, and I wonder what kind of results would be produced if the surface area was greatly bloated.

#5 arkain101

arkain101

    Creating

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1931 posts

Posted 05 June 2009 - 07:04 AM

Dear Arkain,

We share similar interests. However, I cannot agree with where you have taken this narrative of your if I cannot agree with the starting point you choose.

You have ignored, it appears for convenience sake, the question of the missing observed antimatter in our quadrant of space:

Do you not agree that from what we know of high-energy events adherence to equal amounts of matter to antimatter as a byproduct of pair-production?

Do you not agree that the Big Bang was the highest energy event ever?

The conclusion necessarily follows that equal amounts of matter/antimatter were created at the time of the Big Bang.


Because your theory does not account for this necessary truth, it is necessarily flawed. (No offense.)

Sorry to be critical—I invite you to return the favor. You see, I also am in the process of advancing a modern retrofitting of the lens through which we view cosmologic data. I have been considering the paradox of the missing antimatter for some time, and the modern Dominium model begins there. I invite you to come and return the favor, I found your fatal flaw, you find mine.

Thread 1 of the Dominium: First eight moves, Big Bang to CMB http://hypography.co...hasanuddin.html

Thread 2 of the Dominium: #9 and higher, dark-matter, solar wind, next Big Bang http://hypography.co...l-part-2-a.html


Sorry, I didn't notice this reply as I was preparing mine.

I'll get back to this later (I'm not ignoring you). sleeeptime..

#6 ntvinh986

ntvinh986

    Curious

  • Members
  • Pip
  • 1 posts

Posted 04 November 2009 - 03:07 AM

Sorry, I didn't notice this reply as I was preparing mine.

I'll get back to this later (I'm not ignoring you). sleeeptime..



Hi all!
I've just visited this forum. Happy to get acquainted with you. Thanks.


__________________