A brief hypothesis of space/time universe and non time microverse to find a meaning for the BIG BOUNCE BANG and ALL MATTER ENERGY.

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : A brief hypothesis of space/time universe and non time microverse to find a meaning for the BIG BOUNCE BANG and ALL MATTER ENERGY.
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

1 · 2 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Mark + Rita Hadley (earthbilly)
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Dec 16
Posts: 30
Credit: 28,355,726
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1925756 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 9:46:45 UTC

A BRIEF HYPOTHESIS OF TIME SPACE FABRIC, THE BIG BOUNCE BANG, AND WHAT WE CALL DARK MASS AND ENERGY

1.) EXTRAPOLATING BACKWARDS FROM UNIVERSE EXPANSION WE SEE.
First lets simply accept that since there is expansion in the universe, there must have been a starting point. That gave rise to an idea of a big bang. We also understand in the first moments the universe expanded at hyper light speed. Not all the energy within that bang made it to the event horizon. That unaccounted 4/5ths or so was left behind and went back into the singularity and what can be called the micro-verse with no time so it’s still in the same spot.
2.) We observe matter mass bends space time. We believe enough mass in one place creates a black hole. We believe time may stand still or not exist within these structures. This is the basis for thinking there are two parts to the universe. A, the fabric of space time and matter. And B, the realm where there is no time like inside a black hole. What we can measure about a black hole is a function of when they were formed by gravity from critical mass plus the mass that followed. That is why we can’t see all the mass in the micro-verse within a black hole. Take it one more step and if there is no time, all black holes are in the same micro-verse. We don’t see the extra mass which includes the energy that did not make it to the event horizon of the big bang. All black holes are basically in the same spot due to no time and space fabric within. Now we have all mass in the universe explained. There is a micro-verse where all black holes are because they have no time, the rule to be in the micro-verse. And there is the observable universe which is expanding.
3.) No matter how far the universe expands, when the supermassive black holes that formed within galaxies eat up enough mass, it will all be in the same spot. (No time there to move).
4.) Our discovery of gravity from missing mass we call dark matter is emanating from the micro-verse as if leaking through our space time fabric. We see more dark mass everywhere there is mass. I believe matter within our space time fabric bends space time just enough to make a leak. The more mass, more dark gravity leaks from the micro-verse. This is key as it’s needed to form galaxies as we observe them.
5.) We call the unknown energy that expands space time dark energy. In fact, this also is leaking from the micro-verse in the same way.
6.) Any energy leaking from the micro-verse where time does not exist will be observed as the energy of expansion of our space time fabric. Now walk through all mass falling into the same spot no matter how much space time expands and bangs out a new bounce where not all the energy can escape and forms a new duality as we observe now.
100% Powered by solar,
Sunny regards,
ID: 1925756 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3756
Credit: 1,999,735
RAC: 4
United States
Message 1925781 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 12:59:10 UTC - in response to Message 1925756.  

How about this explanation from a simple-minded viewpoint. The Big Bang created all of the energy that we now say causes the universe to expand. We say that the expansion is accelerating. The evidence for this is that the farthest reaches of the universe are said to be moving away faster than the nearer galaxies. Well now: If we view a galaxy that was at the edge of the universe ,we see what was happening 13 Billion years ago or so. I claim that his was at a time when gravity would not have had much time to slow the expansion. So maybe the universe is actually contracting. Obviously, I might be engaging in fuzzy thinking here; but I don't see my fallacies, and I like the simpler reasoning as opposed to inventing dark energy
ID: 1925781 · Report as offensive
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1925787 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 14:27:24 UTC
Last modified: 22 Mar 2018, 14:47:49 UTC

But still perhaps still "In the Beginning" for that of the Big Bang itself, because this next made for the Creation of the Universe, and also its rapid expansion,
which next by means of its name, could make for that of inflation.

Given its birth, next also its children as well, in that both Dark Matter and Dark Energy became part of this process, and next that it right now closed its door for its
remaining part, leaving only the expanding part visible.

Next translates into inflation when it also could be that of expansion.

Or perhaps it rather should be still an open door for that of a knowledge of the subject, for the actual events which happened.

If still the Big Bang, next also that of science for this, because it may be dealing with the unknown.

Blame the Forces of nature, including Instantiation, except for any thanks either, but perhaps we still could make it a different subject for that of a debate,
when it comes to the Universe itself.

I find it perhaps a different reason here, in that this moment of Creation next was also the initial moment of time for its beginning.

Both Dark Matter and Dark Energy next came into existence as a result of this moment, only because it was the start of everything.

Is lack of knowledge next a lack of facts, or should we take a couple of things for granted as we happen to know it?

If you happen to be a little brave or daring, next that a notion of time should be part of the Universe as well, except for not making it any Multiverses either,
and also a sense that things not already existed or were found in the past, but actually forever.

If perhaps still forever, next which way, in that we could be speaking about the past, present and next the future.

Should we believe in other reasons or causes, only to still making it one Universe only, or perhaps one among other for its existence?

Make it next a Theory of Everything, and it becomes a GUT as well, and next that this also should explain the initial moment of Creation as well.

My guess is that this still could be an open subject without any ending.
ID: 1925787 · Report as offensive
Profile Mark + Rita Hadley (earthbilly)
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Dec 16
Posts: 30
Credit: 28,355,726
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1925788 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 14:37:15 UTC - in response to Message 1925781.  
Last modified: 22 Mar 2018, 14:50:49 UTC

Expansion without energy added is against all physics as we understand.

I like easy though. Expansion is working more than gravity attraction so there must be energy added from somewhere.

If the universe was slowing expansion, you could be right. Then it simply would re-contract. I don't think that is what we believe is happening.
ID: 1925788 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3756
Credit: 1,999,735
RAC: 4
United States
Message 1925790 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 14:48:23 UTC - in response to Message 1925788.  

It doesn't have to be "added" unless it is actually accelerating.
ID: 1925790 · Report as offensive
Profile Mark + Rita Hadley (earthbilly)
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Dec 16
Posts: 30
Credit: 28,355,726
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1925791 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 15:02:03 UTC - in response to Message 1925790.  
Last modified: 22 Mar 2018, 15:19:02 UTC

It doesn't have to be "added" unless it is actually accelerating.


Expansion of a balloons surface is how they used to teach us expansion is working. Who is blowing up the balloon? I have to much hot air, but not enough for that;)

We still need to account for why galaxies form without enough gravity to for the simulations.

Yes, I am basing my hyp on an accelerating expansion.
ID: 1925791 · Report as offensive
Profile Mark + Rita Hadley (earthbilly)
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Dec 16
Posts: 30
Credit: 28,355,726
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1925795 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 15:27:07 UTC

When we look at a black hole formation, some stuff is expelled and most falls back in. Why not exactly the same physics on a larger scale?
ID: 1925795 · Report as offensive
Profile Mark + Rita Hadley (earthbilly)
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Dec 16
Posts: 30
Credit: 28,355,726
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1925809 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 16:20:27 UTC - in response to Message 1925801.  
Last modified: 22 Mar 2018, 16:30:01 UTC

No evidence for any of it, sorry![/quote]
I want to understand your POV. You say there is no evidence for black holes, formation of galaxies, our repeatable observations of the universe around us? It's all a trick of the devil? I thought I was quoting relativity and Einstein's theory's but adding the single formula that eluded him. I never heard anyone say the big bang left most of the energy back at the source.

Acceleration means work has been added. Force. It is quantifiable.
ID: 1925809 · Report as offensive
Profile Mark + Rita Hadley (earthbilly)
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Dec 16
Posts: 30
Credit: 28,355,726
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1925813 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 16:30:43 UTC - in response to Message 1925812.  

Yes sir.
ID: 1925813 · Report as offensive
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1925815 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 16:51:34 UTC
Last modified: 22 Mar 2018, 16:54:00 UTC

Should we make it a hypothesis here, a theory, or perhaps a summary of facts, by means of known science?

From an astronomical point of view, perhaps not much more I could add, except that some of the previous being mentioned are quite recent stuff,
while my books could be almost 20 years old.

Perhaps we should forget both ourselves here, and also the Earth, in that Black Holes could be the finishing end for that of massive objects which met their death,
because of a gravitational collapse, and not any early start in the morning for also the beginning.

For one thing perhaps the solar wind of the solar system, and next also the walls and filaments of galaxies and galaxy clusters, and also the empty voids in between.

I think that there should be room for both speculation and thought, if not any ideas, but next that hypothesizing by next also making it a "hype" for short, is wrong.

Both astronomy and also Cosmology should be about the existing Universe and also the reason for why it also exists, if not also any reason behind,
which next either leads us back to speculation, if perhaps not the initial moment itself.

My guess is that Both Dark Matter and Dark Energy could be telling about both behavior and also properties for the Universe as it is known,
but also that it could be a relic from the past, only because of its age.

For that of knowledge, we rely on both facts, and also Models as well, which could also explain why it all happened to be so for its initial moment of Creation,
meaning start, which next again translates into that of Instantiation for much the same.

Given both Matter, Energy, and also gravity, we could also make it physical Laws for much the same, which next is translated into the elementary particles which are known to
be making up the Universe.

But next that time is both now, and also that of the past, for that of at least a beginning, when we next are unable to see the end for that of the finish of it all.

Sad to say, but the Universe happens to be a lifeless place, except for the little place known as Earth, and for the same reason, life should also be such a thing as well,
except for no significance or value when it comes to the big spinning wheel making for the meaning of everything.

For this still a heaven full of stars, of course, but next what is the point of the whole discussion?

Some people could end up making this a scientific debate, which next also could go wrong.

You ask the question, and next also it becomes an answer, and the answer could be already known.

So what is the point here, except for still the continuous debate, in that both astronomy, and next also science could be giving all the answers?

Answers still in the air, of course.
ID: 1925815 · Report as offensive
moomin
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Oct 17
Posts: 6204
Credit: 38,420
RAC: 0
Sweden
Message 1925817 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 17:09:23 UTC - in response to Message 1925801.  

...In space there is no overall gravity....
What?
There is very much overall gravity in space from all the matter that was created in the Big Bang. Gravity that is reaching more than 13 billion lightyears across our universe.
The problem is that it's enough to explain observations done by scientists.
ID: 1925817 · Report as offensive
Profile Mark + Rita Hadley (earthbilly)
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Dec 16
Posts: 30
Credit: 28,355,726
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1925820 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 17:26:51 UTC - in response to Message 1925817.  

There is very much overall gravity in space from all the matter that was created in the Big Bang. Gravity that is reaching more than 13 billion lightyears across our universe.
The problem is that it's enough to explain observations done by scientists.[/quote]

Most of the stuff stayed behind in the big bang. That is where eventually it can be accounted for.

But let me make it perfectly clear. I am very stupid. I once embarrassed my university chemistry professor in front of the whole lecture hall and was rewarded with F's for the rest of the year.
ID: 1925820 · Report as offensive
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1925822 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 17:31:46 UTC - in response to Message 1925820.  
Last modified: 22 Mar 2018, 17:34:14 UTC

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino

Here for perhaps a start, except for still not guessing.
ID: 1925822 · Report as offensive
Profile Mark + Rita Hadley (earthbilly)
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Dec 16
Posts: 30
Credit: 28,355,726
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1925849 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 19:47:55 UTC - in response to Message 1925822.  

Bluestar, I love your pros. Beautiful. There is poetry to the verse.

Am waiting for our A.I.explorers to find the truth to life. They may be the first. Life.
ID: 1925849 · Report as offensive
moomin
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Oct 17
Posts: 6204
Credit: 38,420
RAC: 0
Sweden
Message 1925852 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 20:07:10 UTC - in response to Message 1925820.  
Last modified: 22 Mar 2018, 20:11:09 UTC

The problem is that it's enough to explain observations done by scientists.

Most of the stuff stayed behind in the big bang. That is where eventually it can be accounted for.
But let me make it perfectly clear. I am very stupid. I once embarrassed my university chemistry professor in front of the whole lecture hall and was rewarded with F's for the rest of the year.

Some of us even have problem typing:)
Sorry. It should be "The problem is that it's [gravity] not enough to explain observations done by scientists".
Anyway. As for the lost gravity (lack of matter) even scientists are "stupid" since they don't where the matter are or what it is.
Hence the names Dark Matter and Dark Energy.
At very least they admit that they are "stupid":)
They have some clues what Dark Matter is and they will find it eventually.
Dr. Katherine Freese, the Queen of Dark Matter, said in about a couple of years.
http://www-personal.umich.edu/~ktfreese/pressCoverage.html

Dark Energy however is more tricky.
Perhaps it's only a property of the fabric "Space-Time" and doesn't involve matter.
ID: 1925852 · Report as offensive
bluestar

Send message
Joined: 5 Sep 12
Posts: 6995
Credit: 2,084,789
RAC: 3
Message 1925867 - Posted: 22 Mar 2018, 21:27:28 UTC
Last modified: 22 Mar 2018, 21:36:55 UTC

Moomin, or anyone else.

Should we still make it only matter here, or should we rather be more concerned about gravity, because it could be a Fundamental Force of nature?

I could get back to the rest or other things after the cup of coffee, but because of not keeping track with recent events, it could be a diversion.

Make it both the proton, and next also the electron, and these could be repulsive particles, and next also repulsive forces as well, because of their corresponding energy.

The proton is a composite particle, consisting of two up quarks and one down quark, which we could regard as being subatomic, but except perhaps not the most important in the big picture,
energy is known to be present in two different states, of which one is kinetic, the other is potential when it comes to energy.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_energy

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Potential_energy

Again, either a summary here for what we already know, or it could once again become the scientific debate which could be present almost all the time.

Before reading, you perhaps know it here, and just in the door, I notice the striking difference here as well.

Is this supposed to be the Three Laws of gravity, by Newton, or does it happen to be a more compulsory subject for that of its explanation?

Next of course still both Physics and Mathematics, but also a sense that this perhaps is not all.

Or rather the dish for next also being prepared and finished, and next also served.

I get it to roughly 6,550,000 in total credit here, perhaps a little more, when adding the decimals, and for this, I also think I could make it what I wish for
what I could be seeing, incuding the fact that we most likely are not alone.

But are next any numbers supposed to be narrowband signals, only because they are the product of radio waves being part of emission.

In a similar way, could we have both gods and angels, only because we also could make it Heaven for a couple of things?

Or perhaps still rather only the singularity, because it could be a product of space.

But also that I do not find it appropriate to make it any Empirical evidence either, because this rather should be the quest for like, by next looking for such.

Listen to Michio Kaku as being a scientist, and he next could make it the Fabric of space, for that of the Universe.

But next that our daily lives are only part of the big thing we could call Existence, for the lack of fact for that of life anywhere else, or at other places.

Next both light and darkness, if not any shadows either, and we could be looking around, and next also in vain, for at least that of our knowledge.

Make it still the easy and simple way, and next the way scientists do not not prefer, or choose to be making.

This perhaps the reason why knowledge could be about facts, except for still in the dark for a couple of things.

Make it a search, and next also still research, except for living in old memory for that of both bias and preconception for a couple of things.

You perhaps could make it yet a new or another day, but next no hurry on for that of the Universe either, in that it could be such a thing for real,
and also those things we could wish it to be.

Guess it still could be that of science for that of proven facts as well, except for any ideas, speculation and wild guesses,
which next could make for a bit of hypothesing as well.

Next we also could make it a bit unfair debate as well, in that we also could be speaking of ourselves, except for not making it anyone else.

This because it also could be the subject of Cosmology here, and next also the forgotten issue as well, for that of its possible meaning.

Regardless of it being any Uncertainty, for that of the Principle for such, or perhaps rather infinity, we also could make it that of Probability for making it at least a guess.

Next a guess about whether we are alone or not, because apparently such a thing will never become a proven fact.

Like the long rope, also that of pulling at both ends, next for that of both speculation, and also Proof at times, except for never meeting at the middle.

Never cut it short when you rather could make it long, and next for a story as well, which could go on forever, and next also be perhaps unfounded.
ID: 1925867 · Report as offensive
Profile Mark + Rita Hadley (earthbilly)
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Dec 16
Posts: 30
Credit: 28,355,726
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1925915 - Posted: 23 Mar 2018, 2:44:50 UTC - in response to Message 1925822.  

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Neutrino

Here for perhaps a start, except for still not guessing.


Thank you Bluestar. Searching for part of dark matter effect from neutrinos.

Guessing. I guess we may never know what goes on inside a black hole. Guessing is grounds for research if guessing is concurrent with the math. Guessing is power. A strange word and a strange ability. Guess it's different in there. The math exists for more than the known can account. I guess a big bang has similar physics to black hole formation in the explosion of formation. Exponentially larger though. Unseen firsthand. Extrapolate a guess and see if it works. Look at what we can see and guess what else is there to look for. I guess if there is no time, whatever is there is there yet. No time to move. Unless attracted. But how and maybe why. We see more that we can see. That is odd. I guess. Never trained in highest math. I guess was more interested in my tutor. Darned hormones. Mechanics is another story. No guessing there. Gave an incredible life. And disappointments others are so blind to how a wheel goes round when round. So the simple guess is there is here and there is there. That being said they are not the same. Two different places. Two different worlds. Two different universes due to guessing physics is the difference.
ID: 1925915 · Report as offensive
Profile Mark + Rita Hadley (earthbilly)
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Dec 16
Posts: 30
Credit: 28,355,726
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1925963 - Posted: 23 Mar 2018, 7:17:45 UTC
Last modified: 23 Mar 2018, 7:18:42 UTC

No guessing. Envisioning balance. This thread is about me. My vision. I want it to be somewhere others can ponder it. This is my only outlet. In April they check my healing from 7 skull and brain surgeries repairing what can be compared to two 22 caliber shorts fired into my ear by an MRI. Long story. Not for here.
ID: 1925963 · Report as offensive
moomin
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 21 Oct 17
Posts: 6204
Credit: 38,420
RAC: 0
Sweden
Message 1925998 - Posted: 23 Mar 2018, 13:54:59 UTC - in response to Message 1925867.  
Last modified: 23 Mar 2018, 13:55:25 UTC

Moomin, or anyone else.
Should we still make it only matter here, or should we rather be more concerned about gravity, because it could be a Fundamental Force of nature?
Gravity is a Fundamental Force of nature together with electromagnetism, the strong force and the weak force. Where there are gravity there are matter. In order to understand gravity you also have to understand matter and energy.
But where is all matter and energy? Scientists can only find a small fraction of it, less then 5%.
If Dark Matter can be found then it will 28%, the rest is supposed to be Dark Energy that is reponsible for the expansion of the universe.
ID: 1925998 · Report as offensive
Profile Mark + Rita Hadley (earthbilly)
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 18 Dec 16
Posts: 30
Credit: 28,355,726
RAC: 0
United States
Message 1926022 - Posted: 23 Mar 2018, 16:00:07 UTC - in response to Message 1925998.  
Last modified: 23 Mar 2018, 16:20:02 UTC

[quote]Where there are gravity there are matter. In order to understand gravity you also have to understand matter and energy.
But where is all matter and energy? Scientists can only find a small fraction of it, less then 5%.
If Dark Matter can be found then it will 28%, the rest is supposed to be Dark Energy that is reponsible for the expansion of the universe.



Is it really 5% seen? I have read 4/5ths more is needed to create galaxy formation as we see. I would like to read that too.
ID: 1926022 · Report as offensive
1 · 2 · Next

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : A brief hypothesis of space/time universe and non time microverse to find a meaning for the BIG BOUNCE BANG and ALL MATTER ENERGY.


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.