0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Theory D is the Ultimate theory for our Universe.
So, how long it might take to get the Nobel Prize?
Quote from: Dave Lev on 20/04/2020 16:38:47So, how long it might take to get the Nobel Prize?I am beginning to think there may be something wrong with you.Why would you enjoy writing about silly crap on a subject you know nothing about exposing yourself to riddicule?
It's not a theory.It's plainly wrong.
Yes, the impossibility of an infinitely old universe, and thus the impossibility of your so-called "theory".
Show me one.It only takes one.Go on...Give us a single observation which is inconsistent with the BBT.
I am beginning to think there may be something wrong with you.Why would you enjoy writing about silly crap on a subject you know nothing about exposing yourself to riddicule?
How can you claim for that while you didn't even try to read it and understand how it really works?
As I have stated, based on the BBT, it is clearly impossible to have infinite old Universe.
If you still think differently, then would you please show why an infinite Universe which generates constantly new matter can't live forever?
After deep learning science and physical laws, it was very clear to me that there is a fatal error with the BBT.
I have master in engineering and communications
https://www.express.co.uk/news/science/889405/black-hole-big-bang-theory-wrong-big-bounce-universe-space"Big Bang theory wrong: Black hole found that's so big and old it makes Big Bang IMPOSSIBLE"Is it good enough?
Can you please direct me to the article that could confirm the age of the Universe by uranium?
Please remember that based on theory D each planet and moon had been created as hot gas ball.So, how the Uranium could set the age of a hot gas ball?
In any case, why do you think that stars should come with a fixed expire date.
No it isn't. That headline is just a sensationalism to attract readers.
The fact that the universe is not infinitely old was pointed out by Olber a long time before the BBT was introduced.So, I'm not saying your idea is wrong because it conflicts with the BBT.I am saying it is wrong because it goes dark at night.
The assumption that an infinite Universe could keep the light during the night is a poor fiction.We actually get a direct light only from galaxies that are drifting away from us at a velocity which is less than a speed of light.Our scientists assume that due the speed of light, the maximal distance that we can still see a far away galaxy is about 13 Bly.If we will draw a direct line to any direction up to the infinity, we technically should find only in this line an infinite no of galaxies. However, more than 99.9...9 present of the galaxies are drifting away from us at a speed that is faster than the speed of light. Therefore, we can't see them. Only 0.0..1 are located at the observable aria in our Universe.So, the total galaxies in that line which are still located in the "observable aria" are quite neglected and therefore it goes dark at night.Is it clear?
Everything in our Universe is relative (you can ask Einstein about it...)Let's assume that there is a galaxy at a distance of 130 BLY (galaxy A) that is drifting away from us at 10 times the speed of light.In order to understand what will happen with a light that is traveling today to our direction, let call it Light A.So, as any other light in the Universe, Light A had started today its movement to our direction at the speed of light.However, that speed of light is relevant to its point of source, which is galaxy A.Hence, as galaxy A is drifting away from us at 10 Times the speed of light, while Light A is moving in our direction at the speed of light, than the real outcome is that Light A is drifting away from us at 9 times the speed of light.Therefore, light A won't get to us never and ever.
Interesting, but it just shows that you failed to grasp my other point.If the universe is expanding, and it always has been, why is there anything still near us?I should be able to see no stars, or a star in every possible direction."Let's assume that there is a galaxy at a distance of 130 BLY (galaxy A) that is drifting away from us at 10 times the speed of light."Who put it there? It has been moving away from us for an infinite time (according to you). Why is it still there?
Our Universe isn't expanding!!!Only the matter/galaxies in our infinite Universe are expanding.I have already copy the explanation for you.
I am very dubious about your ideas, but let's discuss them. Let's ignore the BBT and concentrate on your ideas.
Am I right in saying your idea is that the universe is infinite in size and infinite in age?
Is another part of your idea that the universe is expanding?
ExpansionBased on theory D, there is no need to set any space Expansion. We actually see the far end galaxies as they are moving away from us at almost the speed of light while there is no change in the space.So how it really works:Once upon a time a new Born BH had arrived to our Infinite Universe. It was the first spinning BH in the whole empty & dark space.Due to that spinning momentum, Magnetic field had been created. Therefore, some of its energy had been transformed by that magnetic field to create new particle pairs at the Photon Sphere. .One particle from those new created pair had been eaten by this first BH, while the opposite charged particle had been ejected outwards to the magnetic accelerator that we call now - accretion disc..This BH will increase its mass and energy over time. It will also be converted to the first Massive BH Hosting a dwarf galaxy. Later on it will be converted to a SMBH hosting a mighty spiral galaxy as the Milky Way.It will generate new atoms, molecular, Asteroids, Moons, Planets, Stars and even its own baby BHs.So, this first BH will become the mother of the first matter in the Universe.As we all know - Mothers do not eat their children. Therefore, also this first BH has no intention or need to eat its Babies.Over time all the new created matter, stars BH's…will be ejected outwards from the galaxy.Our milky way acts as one of the biggest stars sprinkler in the Universe. Therefore we see more stars outside the galaxy than in the galaxy.Ejection Velocity (Ve) – The average velocity of the ejected Stars/BHs from the Galaxy.Each one of the second generation baby BHs will start to create new matter and over time it will be converted to MBH. At that time it might host a new dwarf galaxy while creating other new baby BHs.Maturity Time (Tm) - The time that it takes to a new born BH till it starts to generate its own baby BHs. I assume that by that time it will host a dwarf galaxy and it will drift away from its Mother galaxy at Ve velocity.Let's assume that all the new babies are drifting away at the same line direction.So, the second generation of BHs are drifting away from the first BH at Ve. The next generation will drift away from the first BH at 2Ve. After n generations, the relative velocity between the first mother to the last generation should be nVe.Based on my calculation:Let's assume that Ve is equal to the orbital velocity of our Sun around the Galaxy = 220 Km/s or 0.073% of the speed of light. Therefore, after 1370 generations, the last generation will move at a speed which is almost the speed of light (relatively to the first mother galaxy).We can see it as a rocket over rocket over….rocket. 1370 times.It will take it = Te * 1370 generationsTherefore, as far as we look, we see that galaxies are drifting at faster velocity from us.There is no limit for that velocity.After m * 1370 generations, the relative velocity will be M times the speed of light.As the Universe is infinite, at the far end there are galaxies that are drifting away from us at almost infinite speed.However, please be aware that new born BHs are ejected away in all directions. Therefore, in any nearby aria we see that the galaxies are moving in all directions.Therefore, there is no need to space expansion or dark energy to explain the ultra velocity of the far end galaxies.We only need to understand, that it is achievable after long enough time.There is a clear observation for the ejection process. We see that Triangulum (relatively small spiral galaxy – 40 Billion stars) is directly drifting away from it mother Andromeda (A supper massive spiral galaxy with about one Million Billion stars)As they are drifting away from each other, they set hydrogen "bridge" between them:http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2012/06/120611193632.htm"The new observations confirm a disputed 2004 discovery of hydrogen gas streaming between the giant Andromeda Galaxy, also known as M31, and the Triangulum Galaxy, or M33."This Hydrogen bridge is like an Umbilical cord which connects the mother galaxy – Andromeda' to her Embryo – Triangulum.
In other words you agree with the observations having to do with red shift and other evidence of expansion?
So please let me know if you still have difficulties to understand why in our infinite universe it goes dark at night.
drifting away from us at 10 times the speed of light.
Our Universe is not expanding.
QuoteQuote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 23:59:20So please let me know if you still have difficulties to understand why in our infinite universe it goes dark at night.OK, here's the problem
Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 23:59:20So please let me know if you still have difficulties to understand why in our infinite universe it goes dark at night.
QuoteQuote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 23:59:20drifting away from us at 10 times the speed of light.Things don't travel faster than light.
Quote from: Dave Lev on Yesterday at 23:59:20drifting away from us at 10 times the speed of light.
You can only get that by expanding space itself but
There's also the problem that matter attracts other matter.
so you need to explain what has been pushing all this infinite time (thereby expending an infinite amount of energy- an infinitely worse problem than "funding " the energy for your misunderstanding of the big bang and doubly infinitely worse than actually providing the zero energy needed).
QuoteQuote from: Bobolink on Yesterday at 18:34:38No it isn't. That headline is just a sensationalism to attract readers. Indeed so. Express is not a good website to get news from. It is filled with misleading, click-bait articles.
Quote from: Bobolink on Yesterday at 18:34:38No it isn't. That headline is just a sensationalism to attract readers.
So, you do understand that the velocity between galaxies A to B is 2c.
This idea is totally wrong. I really can't understand how any person that calls himself scientist could accept this kind of imagination.
There are about 400 Billion stars. If mater attracts other mater than how could it be that those 400 B Stars do not collide with each other?
you would reject any idea that contradicts the BBT.
However, you totally ignore the idea that this is a clear OBSERVATION.
I have offered a clear observation that contradicts the BBT:
Our Universe is not expanding. It has infinite space. This space is fixed. There is no way to stretch it or expand it over time.Only the mater/galaxies are expanding in the infinite space of our universe.Please read the following explanation about the expansion:
So when we see galaxies moving away from us it is because they are moving through space, not because space is expanding? Correct?
I understand physics.So I know that , for high velocities, newtonian mechanics (such as the additivity of velocities) is inappropriate.https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Velocity-addition_formulaShouldn't you have learned that before trying to say that everybody else is wrong?
Sure
That presents a problem, because you said the galaxies move faster than c so that would violate relativity. How does your idea address that issue?
It is quite clear to me by now that you are using terms/laws/formulas/theories/hypothesis... only to disqualify other theories.