Big Bang theory

Where did the matter come from in the first place to create the Big Bang?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Some people say the universe is cyclic. That there was never a beginning and will be no end. That the matter explodes outward, then implodes, and that big crunch results in another big bang, et cetera. Maybe. I think that sometimes people need to envision an beginning, middle, and end simply because all our stories have been so for millennia.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

My guess has always been that the matter was compressed into a fairly small space (in universal terms). Who knows what actually started it, we can only guess and may well continue to guess for the rest of our lifes

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I'll try and simplify the way I see it:

people see time like this:

B---------------------M------------------------E

The thing is the universe has some effects that means time isn't so straight, in fact what ever length you define, it's only from your point of reference and in what ever measurement your use to.

Due to the universe having all these differences, it's not just one singular line, but a multiple number of them.

Most people would percieve these as parallel lines:



B---------------------M------------------------E
B---------------------M------------------------E
B---------------------M------------------------E

Now this is all very well, but there is still a beginning, and a middle and an end, and they all exist at the same point.
In all due respects if this was the case, nothing would exist.

The way I perceive it, is these parallel instances don't align.

Some people might have seen a trace at some point when they move their arm, well I believe thats a universal give-away as to how time lines are comprised. (A mantra)

[EDIT: Had to use (.)'s instead of spaces.]

.....................B---------------------M------------------------E
B---------------------M------------------------E
.........................................B---------------------M------------------------E

The understanding here is that the (B)eginning can occur at different points throughout the time layers, which means that it would be theoretically possible to communicate/interact with a future or past point.

(BTW, I mentioned that there are "Timing differences" throughout the universe caused by Gravitational distortions, which means my lines which are all the same length, could quite easily be of different lengths.)

But what has this to do with the Big Bang?

The universe is moving, which means if a Bang was to occur at a beginning point, and it occured with the layers like I've explained, then Lesser bangs would occur at different points in the universe at exactly the same time.

As for this whole Big Crunch reasoning, I would really be too bothered with it. It's just a theory, like the Big Bang, and I really do think that it has a few inaccuracies.

For instance there is a point that Dark Matter, might only exist within our reality to stop a Crunch. Dark matter would be matter transposed through the layers of time, and would exist fully elsewhere.

If dark matter (or the fully matter it would be) is pulled through the layers to one space it would create parallels in the sense that the universes that are now created would greatly differ.

I say this all theoretics though, so don't hold it as true, and yes, I suppose you could say this is my understanding of it.

[I appologise if this is untangible as a text, but there are many things I have left out because the details would be emense]

 

Isn't that theory just like the multiverse theory or am I intrepretting it wrong?

Are the layers of time in the same "world" (just like a layer cake) or in a different place (each layer of the cake being in a different cooking pan)?

When you say parallel it could mean different things.

 

Well, my thoery is that anything that confuses me is either a good idea or the person doesn't know himself

 

Grazzhopper (and others),

I intend to make it a bit mre explainable in the future, I'm going to have to make a Flash animation though to explain it properly, and try to keep it short and sweet.

I believe that I've encompassed a small amount (if not greater) of multiworlds theory, this is because of an evolution of thought in how the way things are, thats why presently some of my posts might seem a little confusing (and possibly conflicting if you look back at some of the older ones).

As for "Cake layers", lets says it's a mixture between the two.

A "multiworld" has an object with a value of '1', how it got this value is because of it's layers, these layers are a portion of that multiworld, but they too have the same value within then from a relative position. (namely a can of beans in a layer would have the same dimensions and mass as the one in the multiworld)

There are two points though, one is if an inconsistancy occurs in the layers, where the value changes. For instance a 0.

Multiworld = LayerA + LayerB + LayerC

1 = 0 + 1 + 1
1 = 1 + 1 + 0
1 = 1 + 0 + 1
0 = 1 + 0 + 0
0 = 0 + 0 + 1
0 = 0 + 1 + 0
1>= 1 + 1 + 1
0<= 0 + 0 + 0

Okay the above is meant to be aligned like the small calc at the top (a nice and simple one)
The idea is that the first number (the equation's answer) represents the multiworld, while the others are three layers that make the answer up.

As you can see most are 1's or 0's, that work to a value where 2/3 makes the greater. There are two calcs though were you have a Whole multiworld (3/3), and I've added (< and >) to just give a representation (although inaccurate to the meanings).

If an object achieved 1>, then it's quanta would be greatly increased (in fact it's natural radioactive decay would be sped up, so you could say it's being turned radioactive).

If an object achieved 0<, then yes it would no longer exist, and the motions to make it exist would probably have a similar release of energy.

(Notice 1> is Fission while 0< is Fusion, but only in the context of multiworlds.)

The way the universe is though (according to string theory as well), there are probably infinite layers in a multiworld, and each of those infinite layers has their own infinite layers making them up (so they are multiworlds too).

Each of the layers does have differences between them, because there are universal interactions (namely it's not really natural for a 1> and a 0< to occur.)

The universe could look like this:

Layer 1= 1 + 0 + 1 + 1 + 0 + 1 + 0 + 0 + 1 + 1
Layer 2= 0 + 1 + 0 + 0 + 1 + 0 + 0 + 1 + 0 + 0
Layer 3= 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 0 + 1 + 0 + 1 + 1 + 0
=================================
Multiwld= 1 + 1 + 1 + 1 + 0 + 1 + 0<+ 1 + 1 + 0

(This is where the array continues to enlarge, Layer1 is a "Parallel" or layer of a multiworld, but it has it's own "Sub layers". My explanation here has the multiworld at the bottom tallying the differences. The idea is that the layers interact with each other to cause the differences creating a natural balance (and equillibrium), you'll notice that I've place a 0< into the multiworlds build, the idea is here that at that point the universe's layer can collapse back to one. so:

+ 0 +
+ 0 +
+ 0 +

should look more:

+\ /+
+ 0 +
+/ \+

(That just represents that all the 0's would collapse together.
This would mean that if the 0 represented SPACE that you would end up with a possible Negative vacuum, which is where most people base the assumption of "The Big Crunch". My point here is that it's a Layer negative vacuum, it would naturally try to pull from the other layers to replace whats missing to make the vacuum negative.

This is where I mentioned the possibility that parallels (layers) don't align in straight lines but diagonal, because it would mean that there can never really be a 0<, because if it got to that point, it would pull a 1 from before or after that position. (creation of dark matter ?)

namely:

v
1 + 0 + 1
.............^


It's this assumption that makes my understanding that "Parallels" can't be "Created", but only "Junctioned to", this means I could junction to one tomorrow [that would originally have been perceived as created] but it would have already existed as a layer right up to that point previously.)

Okay, I think this is enough waffle, it would be better with an animation lol.

 

I don't have the Branes to understand you. I'd go with the Ekpyrotic model myself.

 

Thanks for the details Stryder.

 

Whoa... :bugeye:

Based upon your model, why not join all the 'Es together into one and all the 'B's together into one? Then join the (super) 'E' to the (super) 'B'.

That would suggest that the Universe has no beginning or end -- it merely goes through cycles. And that would also answer the initial question (ie. the matter came from the last cycle).

 

Exactly

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

This is what is probably known as the "Cyclic Universe Theory" which I've heard about, but after I got this understanding.

 

Here's a question for you:

What are the implications of bringing all the 'B's and (particularly) all the 'E's together with respect to your "layers"?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I believe the big bang thoery for the fact that if the universe began then it has to end. Which would make the most amount of sense. Imagine the universe as a giant heartbeat and that everytime the Big Crunch happens the Big Bang follows after it. Its a repeating cycle that will go on forever.

That would suggest that the Universe has no beginning or end -- it merely goes through cycles.

Yeah thats what Im talking about. Crap I thought I was being original.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

B's = Beginning's
M's = Middle's
E's = End's

That's just a recap for those that have no clue as to what they stand for.

The implication is this, a B or E = infinite layers, those infinite layers are woven, for instance a B could comprise of a Majority of B's, but have M's and E's woven into whats left over.

This makes sure that there are no problems with quanta changes within the layers because there is room for allowance (afterall as I mentioned before if all layers aligned apart from one that managed to push the quanta over the limit from the multiworlds perspective it would cause it to increase in energy, creating a possible fission effect.)

If this is truly proven to be the case, there would be a few other possibilities open, for instance Time travel. If you could open a Gateway between two different universes, which are aligned at different time intervals, you could just walk through into a different time period, or a different space because the universe moves. (Of course this is just Scifi hypothesis until someone proves otherwise)

Other implications would occur if the layers were to distort causing anyone that's apart of them to feel the effect, this could prove that possible illnesses might have something to do with physics more than mental or physical state.
(For instance you might see someone talking to an imaginery friend, or talking to the television just to point out a few "Mentally" tagged occurances that could have physics explanations, like they might be attuned to a different broadcast etc.)

The list of things that can be explained is virtually boundless.

 

If B is the beginning (the big bang) and E is the end (the big crunch) then whats M (the middle)? What happens at M?

 

Why, the Big Expansion, of course.

Another question for you all:

We know that "gravity" will be the ultimate cause of the Big Crunch, but is there enough gravity in this Universe to cause the Big Crunch to come about?

Perhaps it's not a cycle after all...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I believe that the fate of the universe is in the hands of a substance called dark matter (yet to be proven but some scientist believe it). By its nature dark matter is virtually unobservable, it is thought to account for the 90 percent of the mass in the universe. Dark matter is considered the "cosmic glue" that holds galaxies and clusters of galaxies together, thereby controlling the rate of universal expansion. Scientists have calculated, as a theoretical limit, that dark matter cannot account for more than 99 percent of the mass of the universe. If it were to exceed this amount, there would be so much gravity that matter would begin to move back together. Then it would only be a matter of time before everything ended with a big crunch.

 

Now you're getting over my head...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

What I was going for was the notion of parallel universes that differ at the quantum level. In other words, whenever a decision is made and that decision has (say) two possible directions, then the Universe forks into two to explore both directions. Also, whenever those two directions lead to the same results, the two parallel Universes collapse into one.

By joining all the 'B's together, it suggests that it all began with one Universe. By joining all the 'E's together, it suggests that "entropy" will cause everything to lead to one final result (the Big Crunch).

In other words, maybe there is no purpose to the Universe in the end...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I still disagree with the big crunch, you see as I mentioned before your aligning all the B's, the B's aren't aligned in parallels, they could appear at any point throughout the timeline.

I explain it like this, if you have a piece of string, it's made from many threads, how you see it is you could get a knife and cut straight across the threads all at the same time, if this was to happen, in all due respects there would be no fabric of matter or the universe, the universe would never exist.

My explanation is the string is cut diagonally, so although one thread might be cut at one point, the other threads aren't cut at the same time. This gives the universe fabric and strength in thread numbers, it can even explain the stabilities in entropy that have been noted, and as I mentioned before even explain why dark matter "evens pressure".

Which is why I say if a blackhole was formed, it would only exist for so long until the universe re-pressurises/polarises the layers that have collapsed. This is why I really don't think there will ever be a big crunch.