The Naked Scientists

The Naked Scientists Forum

Author Topic: Does U = ∞  (Read 1980 times)

Offline CPT Kirk

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Does U = ∞
« on: 05/02/2011 21:02:19 »
As we look around the universe, we see two basic shapes. There are disc shapes and there are spheres. Everything is round, was round, or will eventually be round. Now why would scientists decide that the universe is flat, but not mention that these dimensional membranes are round. Just like atoms and molecules, rain drops and hurricanes, moons and planets, stars and planetary systems, black holes and galaxies, the universe is one giant round disc-shaped entity, swirling around a central core. There are countless universe discs out there, swirling, just as there are countless planetary systems in each galaxy, countless galaxies in this universal and countless universe-sized black holes riding around on this universal disc. Current theory refers to them as branes, a theory which I contend is responsible for brane-washing many contemporary scientists.
You ask for evidence. Well I began this quest looking for evidence. Inspired by Einstein, then by Hawking, then by a decade of random and sporadic introspect. After a few personal breakthroughs, the most awe-inspiring of them all being that the universe is much more simpler than most people think. After reading complicated theories on multiple dimensions that stretch my imagination, I began to think about how basic the universe that we understand really is. I don’t claim to understand the complexities of black holes, nor matter created in particle accelerators. I do however understand what matter is, how energy combines, and the inexhaustible manifestations of spherical and ring-shaped objects. That would seem to make me a self-proclaimed genius and a amateur writer. I will amaze you with the simplicity of my theory about the construct of the universe, the relative weakness of gravity, and the origin of the big bang. Perhaps in my shotgun blast of science a grain of truth may withstand the critics long enough for science to catch up.

The Universe

Our universe is immense, hence the title, and 99.9999 percent of this universe is dark. We are surrounded by black holes. Not tiny, quickly evaporating ones. Not large, swallow the Earth ones. Not super-massive, center of the galaxy ones. But the size of our entire visible universe, and everything we cannot see, a universe-sized “super colossal massive” black hole. And these are all around us, spread out in various proportions, but fairly equally, in a colossal disc. Our visible universe is but one tiny speck in this disc.

This disc is similar in shape to the rings of Saturn. Dense enough to be substantial, but very thin, much like this membrane theory, without all the extra dimensions and other science fiction embellishments. And of course, this universal disc full of “super colossal massive” black holes is not alone. There are an infinite number of these discs hurling themselves through space and time in all directions. I have not had the time or energy to envision any further than that, but infinity seems like a decent stopping point for now.
 

The Relative Weakness of Gravity

As stated above, the universe is really 99.9999 percent colossal-sized black holes in the shape of a disc. Our visible universe is but one tiny speck in this disc. We are surrounded by these immense gravity exerting masses and they pulling at us in every direction. Gravity is one of the four known fundamental interactions, all of which are non-contact forces, are electromagnetism, strong interaction, weak interaction (also known as "strong" and "weak nuclear force") and gravitation. Gravity a greater force than one might think from the local evidence. It is just as strong as any of the other fundamental interactions. A magnet is believed to be able to overcome gravity because it is a stronger force than gravity. However, I submit that gravity is just diluted by the overwhelming, omnidirectional pull of these colossal-sized black holes. Just as a flashlight is bright in the dark, yet hardly impressive in the daylight, thus would gravity be a much stronger force, if it were not surrounded by much “brighter” sources than itself.
According to science, gravitation is the only interaction that acts on all particles having mass and has an infinite range, making it responsible for such large-scale phenomena as the structure of galaxies, black holes, and the expansion of the universe. Gravitation cannot be absorbed, transformed, or shielded against, and always attracts and never repels. Nothing "cancels" gravity, since it is only attractive. On the other hand, all objects having mass are subject to the gravitational force, which only attracts. My third chapter asserts that the last assumption false.

The Big Expansion

The size scale for black holes needs some adjustment. We began with Einstein’s theory of black holes, and they were already extremely massive objects. Then there was the discovery of super-massive black holes located at the center of galaxies. So I had to invent the term “super, colossal-sized, massive” black holes for the universal-sized masses that spin in a “super, colossal-sized, massive” black hole-filled disc.
My first theory as to how the big bang initiated, was (http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=12735.0) a head-on collision of two of these super colossal massive black holes. I still believe that the collision, if it occurred near the speed of light, would be sufficient to create such an event as the big bang. However, this theory was shot down and deemed impossible. So that must mean that wither I was wrong, Hawking was wrong, or this interpretation of the theory was wrong. I decided that we were probably all mistaken. There must be a mechanism that cancels gravity. This is implied by the rapid expansion of the very early visible universe, since it seems to have expanded faster than light. I know that space can expand faster than light, but that seems to be an afterthought, proposed by scientists after they noticed that our visible universe had been breaking the speed limit.
I propose that there is a critical mass of black holes, in which all the matter contained in the black hole is so condensed, so incredibly hot, as to fundamentally alter the four fundamental interactions, electromagnetism, strong and weak nuclear force and gravitation. Matter, when compressed and heated to this critical point is super dense and super volatile. The four forces that govern this black hole matter combine into one “super” force which is posi-negative. Not positive, nor negative, but identical and because it is identical, it repels with great force. Furthermore, as the four fundamental interactions have been transformed to a “super” repulsive force, there is no gravitational force holding the mass together and an tremendously rapid expansion of matter ensues instantaneously. The critical mass required to transform the four fundamental interactions is approximately the amount of mass currently expanding in our visible universe. So about 14 billion years ago, our blackhole and another merged into a black hole so large that it reached critical mass and conventional laws of physics broke down for a split second, long enough for the great expansion to occur, for matter to go flying out in all directions at greater than the speed of light, and a split second later the matter cooled and expanded to the point where gravity (and the other three forces) became an individual force again.

The “super, colossal-sized, massive” black holes that surround our visible universe aid in the expansion process today, as our visible universe is getting closer and closer to them. These other “super colossal massive” black holes may reach critical mass from the new matter it collects from us and start a new universe cluster, or they may have to wait until they black holes stray too close to each other and their combined mass triggers the critical “four forces into one” breaking point.

Additionally, the “super colossal massive” universal disc must be spinning around something large enough to keep it together. I close my eyes and imagine a “super, super colossal massive” black hole mass of matter that churns and boils due to the instability of the four forces trying to rip it apart, and the mass a few moments later that again has immense gravity and pulls back together. It pulsates like the heartbeat of the universe, a never ending dance of matter so hot that I believe I can sense it myself, if I just try a little harder.
« Last Edit: 06/02/2011 20:27:14 by CPT Kirk »


 

Offline Bored chemist

  • Neilep Level Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8645
  • Thanked: 42 times
    • View Profile
Re: Does U = ∞
« Reply #1 on: 06/02/2011 15:47:21 »
Re.
"However, this theory was shot down and deemed impossible by a nerd "
you might want to read the rules.
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=8535.0
« Last Edit: 06/02/2011 15:49:22 by Bored chemist »
 

Offline CPT Kirk

  • First timers
  • *
  • Posts: 2
    • View Profile
Re: Does U = ∞
« Reply #2 on: 06/02/2011 18:37:31 »
Re.
"However, this theory was shot down and deemed impossible by a nerd "
you might want to read the rules.
http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=8535.0
Yes, well, sorry if I offended. I use the term "nerd" quite affectionately, since I myself am a self-proclaimed nerd. In fact, I proclaim myself to be quite a few things, but never am I the kind of guy who picks on anyone.

I was really hoping to get some sort of feedback from ANYONE about the membrane is really a large disc or the big bang expansion theory. I guess it has been a slow weekend for posting. I am the only nerd not out partying, I guess. And you, bored guy... lol
 

The Naked Scientists Forum

Re: Does U = ∞
« Reply #2 on: 06/02/2011 18:37:31 »

 

SMF 2.0.10 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines
SMFAds for Free Forums
 
Login
Login with username, password and session length