0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Considering my previous post it becomes obvious that both spacetime contraction and mass-energy density increase would apply to both situations. It would be interesting to investigate this at the Planck scale. Although how that could be done is beyond me.
Quote from: jeffreyH on 20/11/2013 10:38:04Considering my previous post it becomes obvious that both spacetime contraction and mass-energy density increase would apply to both situations. It would be interesting to investigate this at the Planck scale. Although how that could be done is beyond me.You make some very interesting comparisons and I agree that the circumstances suggest a possible connection. From my position, it's clear that black hole dynamics may very closely parallel conditions necessary for the production of infant universes. Not sure if you're familiar with this theory but as you stated in a former post, light years of space/time may exist within and or adjacent to the event horizon. Interesting Jeff, very interesting indeed.
If it is heat death then the system isn't balanced and I really don't like that concept.
Quote from: jeffreyH on 01/01/2014 18:54:46 If it is heat death then the system isn't balanced and I really don't like that concept.Neither do I Jeff, heat death seems an extreme answer and counter intuitive, if intuition has any value. While it may be the possible fate our universe is destined to face, one must still ask a few simple questions. In the first case scenario, where our universe is singular and alone in the so-called bulk, it seems quite unlikely that if we happened once, we will likely happen again. And speaking of course as WE being our present universe.In the second case scenario, where we are living on a brane, it appears quick likely that the only possible outcome is another big bang given the close proximity of each brane to their associate member branes and the probable collisions between them.IMHO, the heat death solution is a drastic remedy to the question and should be discarded.
Well with the brane solution you would have to answer the question of what happens to the mass that is not consumed by black holes? If only a percentage of mass leaves our universe then the rest effectively keeps on expanding. If gravitation is also lost as an integral part of matter that makes the situation worse. This cannot be a satisfactory answer either.
Quote from: jeffreyH on 01/01/2014 22:35:41Well with the brane solution you would have to answer the question of what happens to the mass that is not consumed by black holes? If only a percentage of mass leaves our universe then the rest effectively keeps on expanding. If gravitation is also lost as an integral part of matter that makes the situation worse. This cannot be a satisfactory answer either.I am a firm believer in the conservation of mass and energy. Just exactly where it becomes located under these circumstances is a little beside the point. We know that the gravitation remains even though the mass seems to have disappeared. But the mass has really not evaporated into nothingness, it has just passed from here to there, where ever and what ever "there" means. And whether one believes in M theory and branes, or whether they believe in the multiverse of budding infant universes, the passage from our universe to the one adjacent by matter and energy should not doom either one to heat death. If mass and energy can transverse from here to there, the opposite must also be true. And just because we haven't detected the exchange from there to here yet does not mean that it is not occurring. I still have my doubts about exactly what this observed expansion really means anyway. It may be too early to really understand the significance taking into account that these measurements are still a bit new to us, especially the acceleration we think is taking place. Quite beyond our predicted assumptions about how all this is supposed to work.
The equation rs=2Gm/c^2 has to be modified as well because the mass is not always compressed at this radius so what happens to rs at lower densities?
Quote from: jeffreyH on 02/01/2014 02:51:44The equation rs=2Gm/c^2 has to be modified as well because the mass is not always compressed at this radius so what happens to rs at lower densities? I'm not following you here Jeff, the Schwarzschild radius is necessarily defined by this equation. Escape velocity is determined by the ratio of the rs/mass critical = 2G/c^2 compression and will always be less than c until this compression ratio is reached. You can't have a black hole until escape velocity reaches c. You just can't have a black hole unless these densities are reached.
OK then let me restate the problem. What does rs = 2Gm/r^2 mean where r > rs and r < c?
You're loosing me my friend..........Here is an example of this equation at work:Let's find the mass that would be required for an object with the radius of the electron to collapse to a black hole.....radius of the electron = 2.81794092 E-15speed of light squared = 8.98755179 E 16gravitational constant = 6.673 E-11[rs = 2Gm/c^2] or [ M critical = re * c^2/(2 * G)]mass critical = (2.81794092 E-15 * 8.98755179 E 16)/(2 * 6.673 E-11)mass critical equals 1.89767645 E 12 Kilograms In conclusion, a mass equal to 1.89767645 Kilograms compressed to a radius of the electron will collapse to a black hole. Likewise, any mass compressed to a sufficiently small radius will also collapse. However, the smaller the collapsed object is, the faster it will evaporate due to Hawking radiation. Supermassive black hole will take billions of years to complete this process.
Thank you Ethos_ I have been bending my brain over this and you have just given me the answer. You are a genius!
Quote from: jeffreyH on 02/01/2014 22:10:30Thank you Ethos_ I have been bending my brain over this and you have just given me the answer. You are a genius!I'm pleased to be of help Jeff but, sorry to say, I must correct you once again. I'm a long way from being a genius. Truth is, I flunked my first year of algebra. No sir, not even close to being one of those rare breeds.
Now if gravitation slows in effect at the event horizon it too can't escape. This may well have rid me of the density issue except that all calculations of g have to be outside the mass being modeled. If c stops then there is effectively no g. If there is no g then what stops light. This is chicken and egg. So we are back to density.
BTW Have you ever read up on phonons?