The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. On the Lighter Side
  3. New Theories
  4. If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« previous next »
  • Print
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 60   Go Down

If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?

  • 1188 Replies
  • 479433 Views
  • 8 Tags

0 Members and 16 Guests are viewing this topic.

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #260 on: 29/01/2018 19:16:40 »
My reason for thinking this is because an astronaut in space can not see a blue sky, where the person on the earth sees the light coming towards them . The light coming towards being the low energy light that is travelling away from them being intensified and force feed backed by the incident rays of the sun.
Also it can not be a scattering because the air is thinner up there, the air is denser down here and it is not blue .
Logged
 



Offline Bogie_smiles (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1456
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • Science Enthusiast: Be cheerful; be careful.
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #261 on: 30/01/2018 02:07:57 »
Quote from: Thebox on 29/01/2018 19:00:54

Ok , I will try to define what I mean exactly.

Imagine a light sphere and the spherical boundary is the ''edge'' of observation .  You are at the centre of this light sphere.   In any direction you look, you have a linearity, a clear line of sight

You..............................→line of sight

Now this would be equally as true for any direction you was to look, it would be isotropic and linear. 

Now imagine the electrical Neutral field of the Earth looks like this.

So then I consider what would happen if one of these lines was to receive a force feedback, I consider the line(s) would wave.

I consider the blue sky is waving back literally.





Quote from: Thebox on 29/01/2018 19:16:40
My reason for thinking this is because an astronaut in space can not see a blue sky, where the person on the earth sees the light coming towards them . The light coming towards being the low energy light that is travelling away from them being intensified and force feed backed by the incident rays of the sun.
Also it can not be a scattering because the air is thinner up there, the air is denser down here and it is not blue .

Thank you for that. I get the picture. There is cause and effect, and we observe the effect. Now about the cause … what is this thing called “force feedback” that causes the lines to wave?
Logged
Layman Science Enthusiast
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #262 on: 05/02/2018 12:00:08 »
Quote from: Bogie_smiles on 30/01/2018 02:07:57


Thank you for that. I get the picture. There is cause and effect, and we observe the effect. Now about the cause … what is this thing called “force feedback” that causes the lines to wave?
The same as any other force feedback really,  the out-going is forced back and gains strength  by the incoming .   The outgoings and incoming of course being Photons ( mass energy transfer) .   I visualise fields as being like a wire and forces and energies travel up and down this wire,  the ''wire'' coupling all mass , thus allowing energy ''time'' share.

E/t
Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: Bogie_smiles

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #263 on: 05/02/2018 12:19:04 »
Quote
Larger objects begin to emit a mishmash (layman term) of frequencies and when combined, the emissions are simply gravitational wave energy emitted into the local wave energy density profile of space. But the beauty of that, in the ISU, is that all of the gravitational wave energy is emitted in quantum increments from the orchestra of particles making up the object.


That brings us back to the fact that gravitational wave energy in space is made up of the out flowing gravitational wave energy of wave particles, that get added to the gravitational wave energy density profile of space in quantum increments. Massive objects emit massive amounts of gravitational wave energy, all emitted in quantum increments, but you have to maintain the realization that all of the energy is emitted, quantum by quantum, from the surface of the wave particles within the object, and those wave particles are all composed of wave energy in quantum increments.

gravitational wave energy    =  electrodynamics fluctuations in the fields.

I think you actually need to change that and put field energy, uniting all the ''fields''.    I consider particles or wave energy particles, emit one and the same field.  I think that all other fields , are transformations/fluctuations in this unified field.

In another words, I don't think a gravitational field exists, gravitation would be a property of the one field that has several affects.

Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: Bogie_smiles

Offline Bogie_smiles (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1456
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • Science Enthusiast: Be cheerful; be careful.
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #264 on: 23/02/2018 01:17:11 »
Reply #264
Isomer depletion as experimental evidence of
nuclear excitation by electron capture

For those interested in this kind of thing:
Page 218 | NATURE | VOL 554 | 8 FEBRUARY 2018


https://www.nature.com/articles/nature25483.epdf?referrer_access_token=CmE7kxF-TsuCQm3mAJa7cdRgN0jAjWel9jnR3ZoTv0Md-VK8QOYatYRAlj6DBQ4mSTeRdoPRn72_83QX3MRzjtzy9z38B9bJaXehR-mxkkCkpjl9erGttPin1GcGRWA6xp5FyNZD_5zulA8WQ1uPyOdXLV4DzBJnkv5Udj1tUwU7_s-V06aVsywp70wFGt2t95C8fXd1B6TejqNaL6UJsvtIiEPuKyYQ-7KD9sgozAZjf1Tc8gcJIvaUodB7SqsRQNkM77c5HjUqLM8KYpATqQgN6Szr3-AgRyojKT1gtuI%3D&tracking_referrer=physicsworld.com

This is interesting. A look inside the nucleus that is excited by the forced or coerced capture of an electron, and the pattern of the subsequent decay.

Logged
Layman Science Enthusiast
 



Offline Bogie_smiles (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1456
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • Science Enthusiast: Be cheerful; be careful.
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #265 on: 08/03/2018 20:31:35 »
Reply #265
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_27_01_18_2_29_16.jpeg

This post isn't new. It is somewhere back in this thread, and was originally written and posted elsewhere years ago, but having been occupied for a couple of months on an off-line project, I went back and read it again to get my mind back in tune with the ISU. I decided to post it again to summarize the ISU for the many new viewers that peek in at this space regularly:
.


The Universe, Infinity, Life, and God
The Cosmology and Philosophy of the Infinite Spongy Universe (ISU)

The Infinite Spongy Universe (ISU) is all inclusive, all there is, all matter, energy, everything in one infinite and eternal, life and consciousness producing expanse of wave energy that does nothing but carry out its own Eternal Intent.

Thresholds and limits of energy density govern natural processes that produce matter and gravity in environments characterized by the opposing forces of expansion and contraction to produce dynamic and evolving arenas that are continually forming and playing out across the infinite arena landscape of the greater universe.

The ISU is governed by natural law, and natural law is described in three categories, Quantum Wave Cosmology, the Generative and Evolvative Forces of Life, and the Concept of Eternal Intent.

Overview of Natural Law

In regard to Natural Law, we have an advancing boundary between what has been achieved by science, and what is yet to be achieved. What has been achieved is the quantification of the known physical sciences. In the realm of the “yet to be achieved” is the discovery and quantification of the unexplained and/or unknown natural laws. It is the role of science to confront the problems it faces and to advance the boundary into the realm of the “as yet” unknown.

When addressing the unknown, it is an axiom that the laws of nature are invariant. Based on that axiom, invariance is a characteristic of both the science we know and the natural laws we don’t yet know or understand. Science is advanced using the scientific method and according to that method and the invariance axiom, it follows that anything that is as yet unexplained has natural causes that we don’t yet understand.

The physical aspect of the ISU is described by Quantum Wave Cosmology (QWC) which envisions the universe as it would be if all of the as yet unknown physical laws of nature were known. It is the life hosting feature of the ISU where the generative and evolvative forces of life flourish on a grand scale, undaunted by the inevitable local cataclysms that characterize the eternal process of arena action.

Across the infinite and dynamic arena landscape which hosts a potentially infinite number of life hosting environments at any given point in time, there exists conscious, self aware, intelligent, highly evolved life forms whose individuals contemplate the concepts of the universe, infinity, life and God, and act and interact with freewill that is moderated by their individually developed consciences.

That is the Eternal Intent.

Overview of Quantum Wave Cosmology (QWC)

QWC is characterized by two processes, quantum action at the micro level and arena action at the macro level. These two processes are strikingly similar in mechanics but the vast difference in scale makes quantum action look toward the infinitesimal and arena action look toward the infinite.

Quantum action works on the infinitesimal scale and orchestrates wave energy to establish the presence of matter and gravity. The key is that the universe is composed of nothing but wave energy and the tiniest meaningful waves have roles in the establishment of matter and gravity. The existence of particles and gravity demonstrates the success of quantum action.

Arena action works on the infinite scale of the landscape of the greater universe. The key to arena action is the existence of the opposing forces of expansion and contraction that play out in the great waves of energy that traverse the infinite landscape. It is the multiple arena landscape that prevents the eternal inflation of the universe and avoids the ultimate Heat Death.

As galaxy filled arena waves collide and overlap, cataclysmic events surround the collapse of galactic material under the compression of gravity. As big crunches form in the overlapping spaces where arenas converge, they reach a finite capacity of matter and energy density and collapse and bounce into expanding arenas of wave energy. It is the natural law of critical capacity that makes crunches finite and prevents the entire ISU from falling into a final Big Crunch.


Overview of the Generative and Evolvative Forces of Life

Arena action produces galaxy filled expanding arenas where it is natural for solar systems to host habitable planets and where the conditions are conducive to the generation of life.

Given the right mix of chemistry and environment, physical iterations of all the finite possible combinations occur and the combinations for reproductive life inevitably arise. Life is adaptive and evolvative, and as early life takes hold, and as evolution occurs, life forms take full advantage of the hospitable environment across the host planet.

Evolution proceeds toward the natural characteristics of advanced life forms, bringing the consciousness and self awareness that mark highly evolved individuals.

Overview of Eternal Intent

The existence of Eternal Intent does not require any violation of the invariance axiom. All of the natural laws of the ISU are invariant, and in an eternal and infinite universe, that means that the natural laws that are in effect now are the same laws that were in effect before, at all times in the infinite past.

Reason and logic of the highly evolved life forms is sound, and when those individuals contemplate the universe, infinity, life, and God, the concept of Eternal Intent emerges as the reasonable and responsible view of the common ground between all contemplative life forms across all space and time. No one religion that is peculiar to one sect on one planet in one age will serve that universal purpose. Eternal Intent must emerge time and time again to show the way.

The definitions of God within organized religions and their doctrine become the basis of the beliefs of their followers. There are sacred unexplained events specific to the history of each religion that lead to the God concept that differs among religions, but there is no evidence of any violation of the natural laws when evaluated by the scientific community as a whole. Specific definitions of God become a matter of faith associated with each religion, but organized religion cannot lay exclusive claim to the natural and inevitable contemplation of God. God and religion are not one and the same.


A non religious, scientifically compatible definition postulates that Eternal Intent is a characteristic of the universe, and the natural laws and Eternal Intent are one and the same. It is the ultimate universal common denominator, not just among peoples here on Earth, but among contemplative and conscientious life forms at the height of the evolvative process across the infinite and eternal universe.

The definition of nature which includes Eternal Intent is not in violation of the scientific method. It acknowledges nature as the potentially infinite and eternal universe whose Eternal Intent is carried out by invariant laws which provide for the perpetual existence of habitable environments where conscious life is generated and evolves to self aware free willed intelligent and conscience bearing individuals who are capable of contemplating the universe, infinity, life and God.

Therefore Eternal Intent would be the quintessential feature of a natural invariant universe and the view that God and the universe are one and the same are fully compatible in the ISU.

Many aspects of the universe that are attributed to the invariant natural laws point to the Eternal Intent of the natural laws:

The perpetual existence of hospitable and habitable environments
The generative and evolvative forces of life
The existence of consciousness
The existence of intelligence
The existence of free willed beings that interact with each other
The existence of our own consciences to moderate our actions and interactions

Within those few aspects of the ISU there is room for hope and faith that the future can unfold as we would have it. Beyond the boundary of scientific knowledge, in the realm of the unknown laws of nature, all things seem possible. It is that realization that makes room for eternal hope for those who care to call upon it in their daily lives.

As a corollary to that, there is no clear right and wrong at every turn of life, and where there is room for eternal hope for well intended outcomes, we are free to seek council from beyond the boundary to guide us through life as well. We consciously seek acknowledgments from beyond the boundary of known science and receive personal, individual, unexplainable guidance from the unknown in accord with invariant natural laws that we don’t yet understand.

It is the Eternal Intent of the ISU that we do so.

In Conclusion

When I talk about Eternal Intent, and seeking acknowledgement and guidance from beyond the boundary of science and understanding, there are some things you should realize.

In order for something to be science I mean that it has to be quantified or quantifiable under the procedures recognized as the scientific method. It should subject itself to mathematical equations that are compatible with all aspects of known science, or at least that cannot be shown to be inconsistent with scientific observations and data. So when I say "we don't yet understand", I am referring to as yet unquantified science from the perspective of the scientific community; theories that are not tested and repeatable but that are suspected because of the way outcomes often seem to be favorable responses to our needs and desires.

Further, there are prerequisites before Eternal Intent can be considered:

The universe has to be infinite and must have always existed; it doesn’t work otherwise.

The universe must be governed by invariant natural laws that are in effect in all places at all times (no supernatural events are possible).

There can be no violations of natural law (apparent violations are caused by as yet unknown invariant natural laws).

There must be conscious, self aware, intelligent, contemplative individuals.

There must be as yet unknown natural laws associated with consciousness that trigger some unknown equation; a combination of conscience, intent, emotions, love (or maybe just love of something, even love of power or money, etc.), and expectation or hope or faith that somewhere in the unknown natural laws there is an equation that yields an invariant response guided by our seeking.

The act of seeking acknowledgement from beyond the boundary of our understanding should be differentiated from prayer (in its religious sense) because the source of the response is invariant natural law that has always been in place and is not a response from a personified, conscious God who can pick and choose responses or that has any real time decision making power at all.

That does not mean that prayer will not work for the religious. It means that there are certain combinations of natural law that must come together in a successful equation, and there might be counterproductive aspects involved when prayer is based on a plea to a God within the framework of a given religion.

The stimulus for favorable unfolding of Eternal Intent from beyond the boundary logically includes the quality of the individual intent.

I seek an acknowledgement that the natural and invariant laws that enable the Eternal Intent of the ISU, will serve as the quintessential source of hope and council for all who have faith that there is Eternal Intent.





------------
Comment freely.
« Last Edit: 08/03/2018 20:46:55 by Bogie_smiles »
Logged
Layman Science Enthusiast
 

Offline Bogie_smiles (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1456
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • Science Enthusiast: Be cheerful; be careful.
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #266 on: 13/03/2018 17:55:38 »
Reply #266

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_27_01_18_2_29_16.jpeg 



From the opening paragraph of that essay, “The Cosmology and Philosophy of the Infinite Spongy Universe (ISU)”…

“The Infinite Spongy Universe (ISU) is all inclusive, all there is, all matter, energy, everything in one infinite and eternal, life and consciousness producing expanse of wave energy that does nothing but carry out its own Eternal Intent.”

The American Heritage Dictionary definition doesn’t share my enthusiasm for the ISU. Their definition doesn’t touch on the most important part of the definition, i.e., infinite and eternal.

They say: universe (yo͞oˈnə-vûrsˌ) n. All matter and energy, including the earth, the galaxies, and the contents of intergalactic space, regarded as a whole.

Their limited definition opens the discussion to anyone who would like to take the position that the universe does not necessarily feature the infinities of space, time, and energy.

There is nothing new about the idea of the infinities in regard to the nature of the universe, but generally, theories must be testable, and you can’t test for infinite space, time, or energy; it will never be more than a logical possibility.

On the other hand, when you consider the alternative, i.e., that the universe is finite, and that there was a beginning to space, time and energy, then the ISU view featuring the three infinities can take on a little more credibility. The fact is that there is no testable scientific theory about any explanation for a beginning of the universe either, but because something from nothing is largely considered impossible, the “always existed” scenario takes on a logical advantage in the debate.

There is a set of people who agree that it is not possible for something to come from nothing, and to them, consider the ISU, and begin to contemplate the meaning of an eternal past.

———————
Comment freely.
« Last Edit: 13/03/2018 18:00:21 by Bogie_smiles »
Logged
Layman Science Enthusiast
 

Offline Bogie_smiles (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1456
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • Science Enthusiast: Be cheerful; be careful.
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #267 on: 14/03/2018 15:31:07 »
Reply #267




One meaning of an eternal past is that the greater universe (ISU) can be visualized as a perpetual motion machine, featuring the two ongoing processes of quantum action and big bang arena action. Given the premises that every event is finite in space, time and energy, and the universe is infinite in space, time and energy, the contemplation of the three infinities and an eternal past hold a promise of new thought experiences; and possible mental rewards.


If you are in the set of people I mentioned in the last post (who agree that it is not possible for something to come from nothing), one reward is that you start gaining a growing appreciation for the meaning of, and the implications of infinity; you begin to grasp the reality of it, and you will soon appreciate its power to bring new revelations.

For me, accepting the concept of the infinities of the ISU opened a door “at the back of my mind” to a place from which I have never cared to look back.

Logged
Layman Science Enthusiast
 

Offline Bogie_smiles (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1456
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • Science Enthusiast: Be cheerful; be careful.
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #268 on: 16/03/2018 17:09:28 »


I want to post a question to any members who follow this thread ... are you in the set of people who don’t believe it is possible for something to come from nothing? The ISU model is an alternative you can feel comfortable with, because “something from nothing” is not possible in the ISU.

___________
Comment freely.
« Last Edit: 16/03/2018 21:37:46 by Bogie_smiles »
Logged
Layman Science Enthusiast
 



Offline Bogie_smiles (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1456
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • Science Enthusiast: Be cheerful; be careful.
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #269 on: 17/03/2018 00:56:46 »
Reply #269



There are no admissions yet from the audience on believing that it is impossible for something to come from nothing; there may not even be an audience, lol.

Here is a video that leads into the next argument for how considering the infinities can shape your view of cosmology (and thoughts on dark matter);

See minute 2:19
“and we have had to sort of  invoke some
02:24
tooth fairies to keep things sensible.
02:28
One of those is dark matter.”

https://youtu.be/P1dd8vVp1Vw

Watch it and think about how the idea of dark matter might be a consequence of the finiteness of the consensus model, and if so, how the infinities of the ISU can resolve the dark matter question.

To be continued …

Logged
Layman Science Enthusiast
 

Offline Bogie_smiles (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1456
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • Science Enthusiast: Be cheerful; be careful.
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #270 on: 17/03/2018 21:48:34 »
Reply #270




Did you view the video and get the gist of why finiteness of the cosmological model might be related to our current lack of understanding about dark matter?


Let’s back up. Members and guests might have read earlier ISU posts that talked about things like high energy density spots at the convergences of gravitational waves, and in which it was posited that matter is quantum. It is simple logic in the ISU; matter is composed of energy in quantum increments, quanta are composed of high energy density spots at the convergences of gravitational waves that carry energy through space, and gravity waves have an infinite reach.


The quanta that make up matter are composed of the convergences of many tiny, seemingly insignificant gravitational waves (the oscillating background) that individually carry energy through space and consequently fill all space. When there are a sufficient number and magnitude of their wave fronts intersecting at a given point in space, that constitutes the formation of one of those quanta; perhaps billions or even trillions of those quanta (high energy density spots) might be required to establish the presence of a single proton.


All of that is going on in the infinitesimal realm, below the threshold of observability, but all infinite space has those convergences going on in it, though not in sufficient amounts to produce particles in all space. Huge numbers of convergences compose a single quantum increment of mass, and so each sub-quantum individual convergence, and the resulting momentary high energy density spot that is composed of many of those convergences, involves a hint of mass. On the basis that space is filled with gravitational wave energy coming and going in all directions at all points, space literally has mass in the ISU.


Since all space is filled with those ongoing convergences, and the inner space of galaxies has a much higher concentration of them, why do we even need dark matter to explain the gravitational anomalies at the outer reaches of galaxies? It is caused by the presence of the hint of mass in each of those wave convergences, each emitting a gravitational third wave of energy that has an infinite reach.


Combine that with the inverse square law, and there is your invisible dark matter. The gist is that all of the space occupied by the entire galaxy is fat with those sub-quanta, and though the sub-quanta are not visible, in aggregate they add a significant amount of mass to the gravitational potential, looking in from the spiral arms.


Comment freely :) .
« Last Edit: 31/03/2018 23:34:38 by Bogie_smiles »
Logged
Layman Science Enthusiast
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #271 on: 18/03/2018 12:18:45 »
Quote from: Bogie_smiles on 17/03/2018 21:48:34
It is simple logic in the ISU; matter is composed of energy in quantum increments, quanta are composed of high energy density spots at the convergences of gravitational waves that carry energy through space, and gravity waves have an infinite reach.
Sometimes I think we are saying the same thing.  I call this a N-field particle,  the convergence of two opposite polarity energies at the same point.  I then consider photons are perturbations in the emitted n-field.  I never considered the N-field particle to be a perturbation in a n-field.

Are you relating your notion in respect of a Higg's type field?  Points of the field having a greater denser in the form of an energy particle?

Logged
 
The following users thanked this post: Bogie_smiles

Offline Bogie_smiles (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1456
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • Science Enthusiast: Be cheerful; be careful.
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #272 on: 18/03/2018 18:51:26 »
Reply #272


Quote from: Thebox on 18/03/2018 12:18:45
Sometimes I think we are saying the same thing.  I call this a N-field particle,  the convergence of two opposite polarity energies at the same point. 
https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/gallery/43933_27_01_18_2_29_16.jpeg



It is possible that our efforts to shape our personal views of cosmology, loosely referred to by us as our layman science enthusiast models, address the same concepts and attempt speculations based on known science and generally accepted observations and data. It would be reasonable to conclude that we would come to some of the same conclusions, and I find it gratifying that you might look favorably on aspects of our musings as being compatible in some respects.


This particular example, paraphrased as “the convergence of gravitational waves that produce momentary high energy density spots at a point in space” in my post, and “the convergence of two opposite polarity energies at the same point” in your post is an intriguing similarity.


I’d be interested to know if you viewed the video posted in reply #269, and if you could understand my proposition. The idea being put forth is that if dark matter is a fix to the apparent absence of some amount of gravitational energy at the outer boundaries of certain types of galaxies, a problem that we don’t yet understand, could that be a non issue if the cosmological model invoked infinite space and energy.


The infinities of the ISU model is what I have in mind. Could the missing gravitational energy simply reside in space, to varying degrees in varying directions, based on the idea that all space carries a hint of mass (in sub quantum amounts) at all points, because of the convergences of gravitational waves that regularly occur at all points in the ISU model?

Logged
Layman Science Enthusiast
 



Offline Bogie_smiles (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1456
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • Science Enthusiast: Be cheerful; be careful.
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #273 on: 23/03/2018 13:48:59 »
Reply #273




I have had the pleasure of a brief discussion on another thread about the subject of preconditions to the Big Bang, with an open minded thinker who has strong preferences for pre-existing “Something,” and is open to discussing the possibilities. Always being in the ready mode for any such discussion, it is a tendency of mine to argue for my own personal views, and so let me do that here instead of in a new member’s thread that has just started to unfold.


Quote from: Thinklots on 23/03/2018 01:40:48
Quote from: Bogie_smiles on 22/03/2018 20:29:59
I’m seeking clarification about the definition of the word universe. Do you agree that, “Universe” encompasses all there is, and therefore the universe could be any one of many possible scenarios, i.e., do you agree that there is one universe, regardless of the various possible characteristics it might have?
According to most cosmologists if we play the movie backwards, our universe shrinks into a single point of extreme density and energy. I see your point that perhaps this singularity existed in what was already "the universe". My belief has been that the Big Bang caused our universe to come into being. But I am understanding that you are proposing that the Big Bang only populated an already existing universe. Do I understand you correctly?

The idea appeals to my sensibilities :) .
Quote
This would certainly fit my hypothesis because what better prerequisite can the Big Bang have than an already existing universe with the laws already intact?
Quote from: Bogie_smiles on 22/03/2018 20:29:59
Infinite space could be hosting an ongoing and perpetual process.
Absolutely. I have listened to astrophysicists saying that time and the fabric of space began at the time of the Big Bang so many times that I accepted it without considering other possibilities. Thank you for sharing a very feasible one.


My pleasure. Hopefully your thread will proceed with much interesting discussion.

The premise that the reality of the universe and the natural laws that govern it can be any of an endless list of scenarios is a daunting fact, but the universe is as it is, and could be no other way, meaning that my thinking is that only one universal scenario has always been in effect. That speaks of a sameness that has and is and always will be governed by what I speculate are a set of invariant natural laws.

Thanks for listening and keeping an open mind.

Examples of various scenarios include the possibility that it could be 1) the model that you are working on, or 2) it could be just our local big bang universe with an as yet unexplainable beginning, or 3) it could be a multiverse as in string theory with an infinite number of separate and independent universes with different sets of laws, or 4) it could be a finite cyclical universe that goes from bang to expansion, to contraction, and back to bang, in a perpetual cycle, or 5) it could be an infinite space with multiple big bang arenas that each had the preconditions of two or more preceding parent arenas expanding, intersecting and overlapping, each contributing a portion of their galactic material to a new big crunch that forms at the center of gravity in the overlap space, and due to the compression of gravity, reaches a critical capacity that results in a collapse/bang into another new expanding big bang arena, merging into the existing landscape, filling with galaxies out of the hot dense plasma soup of oscillating gravitational wave energy that decays out of the big bang’s energy ball, and follows the same pattern as its parent arenas, all part of an ongoing process of big bang arena action that continually occurs across the infinite landscape of the greater universe (a not so subtle mention of my layman science enthusiast’s model, lol. The Infinite Spongy Universe model (ISU)).
« Last Edit: 23/03/2018 14:00:16 by Bogie_smiles »
Logged
Layman Science Enthusiast
 

Offline Bogie_smiles (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1456
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • Science Enthusiast: Be cheerful; be careful.
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #274 on: 25/03/2018 19:21:22 »
Reply #274



My model, The Infinite Spongy Universe (ISU), in ~300 words (read slowly before bedtime every night as a sleep aid):


The universe could be an infinite space with multiple big bang arenas, each with similar preconditions, characterized by two or more preceding “parent” arenas, expanding, intersecting and overlapping, with each parent contributing a portion of their galactic material to a new big crunch that forms at the center of gravity in the overlap space, and due to the accumulation and accretion of matter and gravitational wave energy, under the compression of quantum gravity, reaches a finite invariant energy density limit, a critical capacity, that results in a collapse/bang of each new big crunch into another new expanding big bang arena, merging into the existing space in the vicinity of the landscape of the greater universe where the parent big bang arenas (and over a larger space and further back in time, their grandparent arenas) previously merged, and whereupon, in accord with the invariant laws of nature, each similar new arena cools and expands as it fills itself with galaxies, forming from wave-particles that take shape out of the hot dense plasma “soup” produced by the big bang’s energy ball, that is expanding locally within the universal oscillating gravitational wave energy background, and which follows the same pattern as its parent arenas, all part of an ongoing perpetual process of big bang arena action that continually occurs across the infinite landscape of the greater universe, and that defeats entropy by recycling high entropy old cold galactic matter and energy, via the big crunch/bangs, into hot dense balls of low entropy energy that expand, decay into wave-particles, form galaxies, and become parent arenas in their own right, blended into the eternal sameness of the infinite past that continually accrues across the infinite landscape of the greater universe; my layman science enthusiast’s model in a nutshell, the ISU.





« Last Edit: 26/03/2018 12:02:03 by Bogie_smiles »
Logged
Layman Science Enthusiast
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #275 on: 25/03/2018 19:37:36 »
Quote from: Bogie_smiles on 18/03/2018 18:51:26
This particular example, paraphrased as “the convergence of gravitational waves that produce momentary high energy density spots at a point in space” in my post, and “the convergence of two opposite polarity energies at the same point” in your post is an intriguing similarity.
Practically saying the same thing, my notion explains slightly deeper the mechanics involved in what you call a high energy density spot.  My notion tries to explain what the properties of the spot is, using present physics as my guidelines. 
My notion additionally explains an energy field permeating from any given energy spot.   All fields being a variate of this united field.  All wave functions being ''ripples'' of this field.
This field having physicality and mass relative to other fields.

I will watch your video link a few times before I comment on the video.
Logged
 

guest39538

  • Guest
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #276 on: 25/03/2018 19:40:09 »
Quote from: Bogie_smiles on 25/03/2018 19:21:22
The universe could be an infinite space with multiple big bang arenas,
Almost, relative to an infinite universe they are micro bangs.  Consider zooming out on a big bang in an infinite space.
Logged
 



Offline Bogie_smiles (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1456
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • Science Enthusiast: Be cheerful; be careful.
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #277 on: 26/03/2018 21:41:57 »
Reply #277


Quote from: Thebox on 25/03/2018 19:37:36
Quote from: Bogie_smiles on 18/03/2018 18:51:26
This particular example, paraphrased as “the convergence of gravitational waves that produce momentary high energy density spots at a point in space” in my post, and “the convergence of two opposite polarity energies at the same point” in your post is an intriguing similarity.

Practically saying the same thing, my notion explains slightly deeper the mechanics involved in what you call a high energy density spot.  My notion tries to explain what the properties of the spot is, using present physics as my guidelines. 
My notion additionally explains an energy field permeating from any given energy spot.   All fields being a variate of this united field.  All wave functions being ''ripples'' of this field.
This field having physicality and mass relative to other fields.

I will watch your video link a few times before I comment on the video.


I give you credit for musings on a par with mine, lol. Taking ourselves seriously would be our biggest fault, because we are speculating, and speculations are tolerated best when they leave a vague feeling of, “yeah, maybe”, but “my idea is …”.
Quote from: Thebox on 25/03/2018 19:40:09
Quote from: Bogie_smiles on 25/03/2018 19:21:22
The universe could be an infinite space with multiple big bang arenas,

Almost, relative to an infinite universe they are micro bangs.  Consider zooming out on a big bang in an infinite space.
Yeah, maybe, but are you aware of the similarity between Arena Action which is the macro level scenario, and Quantum Action at the micro level (not to be confused with the quantum of action in the Planck regime)? The similarity between those two ISU action processes is striking, and together (simultaneously), contemplation of each level lent to the process of idea-development of the detailed characteristics of each. They work together, are internally consistent, and not inconsistent with generally accepted scientific observations and data, to the best of my knowledge.

Case in point, a big crunch, that forms out of the intersection and overlap to two or more expanding parent big bang arena waves at the macro level (which are the preconditions of each new expanding big bang arena), equates to a high energy density spot that forms at the point of convergence of two or more intersecting/converging, spherically expanding gravitational waves in the oscillating wave energy background, at the micro level (which in huge numbers contribute to the establishing and maintaining the presence of wave-particles).

The similarities between the two simultaneously ongoing action processes constitute the basis of the “sameness” doctrine of the ISU.
Logged
Layman Science Enthusiast
 

Offline jerrygg38

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1033
  • Activity:
    0%
  • Thanked: 34 times
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #278 on: 27/03/2018 11:31:51 »
   It seems to me that there were many big bang inversions. As I see it the universe is composed of Co/Cs energy where C0 is 186,000miles per second and Cs is 1000 light years per second. At the big bang inversion Cs/Co energy came upon a small spherical surface and inverted. It looks like a big bang but that is because the inversion was very rapid. The dot-waves of our universe oscillate between these light speed levels causing mass and the gravitational field. It appears to me that there was a series of these inversions with physical light speeds of Co, 2Co,4Co,...etc. this would produce many separated universes from the common big bang inversion spherical surface.
Logged
 

Offline Bogie_smiles (OP)

  • Naked Science Forum King!
  • ******
  • 1456
  • Activity:
    7.5%
  • Thanked: 118 times
  • Science Enthusiast: Be cheerful; be careful.
Re: If there was one Big Bang event, why not multiple big bangs?
« Reply #279 on: 27/03/2018 12:21:06 »
Reply #279

Quote from: jerrygg38 on 27/03/2018 11:31:51
It seems to me that there were many big bang inversions. As I see it the universe is composed of Co/Cs energy where C0 is 186,000miles per second and Cs is 1000 light years per second. At the big bang inversion Cs/Co energy came upon a small spherical surface and inverted. It looks like a big bang but that is because the inversion was very rapid. The dot-waves of our universe oscillate between these light speed levels causing mass and the gravitational field. It appears to me that there was a series of these inversions with physical light speeds of Co, 2Co,4Co,...etc. this would produce many separated universes from the common big bang inversion spherical surface.
Yeah, maybe, but in the ISU, there is only one universe and it includes everything there is. Though the ISU is a multiple big bang arena universe, all big bang arenas are included in the landscape of the greater universe, and share the same physics.

Also, light speed in the ISU model is governed by the local gravitational wave energy density, so light, relative to some common point, accelerates and decelerates as the local wave energy density changes. For example, starlight traversing deep space will be traveling faster relative to that common point, than it does as it passes a massive body like our sun. The slowing of light as it passes a massive body causes the curvature of the path of light.
Logged
Layman Science Enthusiast
 



  • Print
Pages: 1 ... 12 13 [14] 15 16 ... 60   Go Up
« previous next »
Tags: infinite spongy universe  / eternal intent  / pseudoscience  / speculation  / hypothesis  / isu model  / conformal cyclic cosmology  / sir roger penrose 
 
There was an error while thanking
Thanking...
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.184 seconds with 64 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.