The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: The Invisible Universe, the BIG BANG, and the Weakness Of Gravity  (Read 10560 times)

Offline Loonie

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
OK, It looks like a lot, but it's all related. It came to me December, 2007 and I just can't shake the feeling that I'm right, so I'll need your help point out the flaws. I have always noticed that the simple explanations make more sense than the complex ones.

First of all, the universe is infinitely (or at least very much so) larger than our preconceived notion of the size of the universe. We are only looking at the visible portion. The majority of the universe consists of invisble Black Holes spread out relatively evenly in every direction. These BH's collective gravity generally keep them stable, pulling on each other. These BH roughly contain the amount of mass equal to all what we call the universe (our visible part). These BH surround our part of the universe and pull on it in every direction.

The Big Bang... was two of these BH's colliding together! The resulting explosion will send some material outward to the surrounding BH's and some matter will not escape its own gravitational pull and reform a BH.

Gravity is the evidence that these BH's exist and that they surround us in all directions. The gravitational forces they place on us minimize gravity's own effect on the matter close to us. Extremely powerful, yet distant forces negate much of our own gravity here in this part of the universe as our gravitational forces are so small comparatively. Like the light from a candle is bright in the middle of the night, but much weaker when surrounded by sunlight.

What do you think? Much simpler than string theory...


 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
How is gravity evidence of the existence of these black holes? Gravity acts between the Earth & the moon, between Earth & the sun, between the sun and every planet in the solar system, between our galaxy & the Andromeda galaxy and others, and between every mass in the universe. How can black holes external to our visible universe cause those effects?

Or are you implying that gravity is actually a much stronger force than we realise and that these external black holes somehow diminish its strength - that without those black holes everything would collapse back in on itself?

Who says that 2 black holes colliding will result in an explosion? If light cannot escape from a black hole, how can material be expelled in an explosion?
 

Offline socratus

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 329
    • View Profile
1.
A black hole / Hawking's / has a temperature within a few
millionths of a degree above absolute zero: T=0K.
/ Oxford. Dictionary./
2.
There are many-many …" mini… black holes"…….( !!! ??? )
3.
I have following questions.
Which particles give shape to a " mini black hole"
in a temperature within a few millionths
of a degree above absolute zero: T=0K.?
How from one…" mini black hole" , from local microgravity,
the macro gravity , the star formation going ?
What is about: " Hypoteses non fingo." ?
===================
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Quote
Which particles give shape to a " mini black hole"
in a temperature within a few millionths
of a degree above absolute zero: T=0K.?

Black holes are formed by gravity. Therefore the shape of the black hole is dictated by the way gravity affects the matter that forms the black hole. If gravitons exist, then they are the particles that are ultimately responsible.

Quote
How from one…" mini black hole" , from local microgravity,
the macro gravity , the star formation going

I don't think it has ever been claimed that stars are formed around mini black holes.

Quote
What is about: " Hypoteses non fingo." ?

It is Latin for "I feign no hypotheses" (I do not invent hypotheses). Its usage in scientific terms is attributed to Isaac Newton. He used it in reply to those who asked him to explain what gravity is, rather than just principles of kinetics. Newton had no idea what causes gravity (we still don't know for certain) and did not wish to speculate.
 

Offline Loonie

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
How is gravity evidence of the existence of these black holes? Gravity acts between the Earth & the moon, between Earth & the sun, between the sun and every planet in the solar system, between our galaxy & the Andromeda galaxy and others, and between every mass in the universe. How can black holes external to our visible universe cause those effects?

Or are you implying that gravity is actually a much stronger force than we realise and that these external black holes somehow diminish its strength - that without those black holes everything would collapse back in on itself?

Who says that 2 black holes colliding will result in an explosion? If light cannot escape from a black hole, how can material be expelled in an explosion?

While we cannot explain the reason for the relative weakness of gravity, I hypothesize that the surrounding Black Holes are responsible for diminishing its effect. I don't think gravity is necessarily stronger either. The pull from the surrounding BH's does make it easier for our own visible "universe" to expand so rapidly. The main point to my theory is that these are not your typical Black Holes, they are not even abnormally large,... they are SO large that their gravitational effects can be felt across distances I cannot even begin to fathom.

All the matter in the universe is attracted. So there must be large masses of matter all around us. If the universe is infinite, then these BH's could be relatively stable. If not then they are bound to pull together as one.

The collision of two super-sized BH's would result in a massive explosion like the Big Bang. The effects of gravity pulling them together faster than the speed of light would also make certain that they hit each other dead-on. I have never heard any other plausible theory of the Big Bang...

So DoctorBeaver, I too refuse to comment on the cause of gravity, but I would like to know what you (and others) think about my theory.
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Quote
The collision of two super-sized BH's would result in a massive explosion like the Big Bang. The effects of gravity pulling them together faster than the speed of light would also make certain that they hit each other dead-on. I have never heard any other plausible theory of the Big Bang...

BHs have mass so they cannot travel faster than light. Even if they were both travelling toward each other at 0.75C their combined velocity would still not exceed C due to relativistic effects.

So, I ask again, how can 2 BHs colliding cause an explosion? The matter inside them cannot escape no matter how great the collision.

Your theory is novel but, IMHO, does not have much merit.

I have come across a couple of theories as to why gravity is weak that seem much more feasible. The 1 I'm most attracted to (no pun intended) is the "warped extra dimension" theory developed by Lisa Randall and Raman Sundrum.
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
I have putting my little rodent brain to work on this.

What if 1 of the BHs was an anti-matter BH? If a matter BH and an anti-matter BH collided, they would annihilate each other in a massively big bang. If the matter BH was more massive, all the anti-matter will have gone but there would be residual matter; and that is what we see in the visible universe today.

This would mean that there was already a universe in which the BHs existed and our universe is merely expanding within that; pushing it further away from us in all directions. We would never be able to interact with it as it would always be outside of our visible universe.

I think I'll post a question about anti-matter BHs in the physics forum.
« Last Edit: 05/02/2008 08:22:04 by DoctorBeaver »
 

Offline Loonie

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
This would mean that there was already a universe in which the BHs existed and our universe is merely expanding within that; pushing it further away from us in all directions.

That's exactly what I'm talking about. Throughout history we have always assumed that we are the center of everything, but the sun does not revolve around us. Our universe is just a tiny little speck of the universe, it's just the only part we can see. Just because we cannot see the rest of it does not mean it's not there.
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
Scientists are already pretty sure there is more to the universe than we can see. 1 of the theories I feel particularly drawn to is that our universe exists on a 3D brane within a higher-dimensional bulk.
 

Offline Loonie

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
BHs have mass so they cannot travel faster than light. Even if they were both travelling toward each other at 0.75C their combined velocity would still not exceed C due to relativistic effects.

So, I ask again, how can 2 BHs colliding cause an explosion? The matter inside them cannot escape no matter how great the collision.

OK so if both BH's are traveling at 75% of C, then a head-on collision of both would be the equivalent of one BH doing 150% the speed of light and hitting a brick wall. Would that not be enough momentum and energy to cause the Bose-Einstein matter to scatter and cause at least some of it to escape? In theory? I have to trust your opinion, while I have just a PBS grasp of physics. And we are just beginning to understand the Bose-Einstein condensates, they act so differently than solids or liquids, like a wave of connected matter, maybe they would explode under such extreme conditions... (I am not talking about antimatter/matter, because there doesn't appear to be enough antimatter to form a BH according to your other post.)
 

Offline DoctorBeaver

  • Naked Science Forum GOD!
  • *******
  • Posts: 12656
  • Thanked: 3 times
  • A stitch in time would have confused Einstein.
    • View Profile
BHs have mass so they cannot travel faster than light. Even if they were both travelling toward each other at 0.75C their combined velocity would still not exceed C due to relativistic effects.

So, I ask again, how can 2 BHs colliding cause an explosion? The matter inside them cannot escape no matter how great the collision.

OK so if both BH's are traveling at 75% of C, then a head-on collision of both would be the equivalent of one BH doing 150% the speed of light and hitting a brick wall.

No. Their closing velocity will still not reach C because they have mass. At relativistic speeds, the maths goes a bit wonky; straightforward addition isn't straightforward. So, 0.75+0.75≠1.5 even though it's what you would normally expect. That old boogaboo, time dilation, steps in and says "Whoa... you can't do that".

 

The Naked Scientists Forum


 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums