Perhaps you need to listen to it again. I respect any hypothesis that conceptualizes the continuous creation of evolving universes via natural selection. It agrees with my understanding of the evolution via natural selection process within this universe.Not really , Interested . Heard about it before . Nonsense .
Perhaps you need to listen to it again. I respect any hypothesis that conceptualizes the continuous creation of evolving universes via natural selection. It agrees with my understanding of the evolution via natural selection process within this universe.
The assumption of a multiverse itself is outside my scope of knowledge.
Evolving universes? That is suggested in the concept of a multiverse where black holes are responsible for the birth of new universes and each universe has a slightly different configuration, some of which may be hospitable to the formation of life.Highlighted
What about these Universes " evolves " ?
Evolving universes? That is suggested in the concept of a multiverse where black holes are responsible for the birth of new universes and each universe has a slightly different configuration, some of which may be hospitable to the formation of life.
Don't forget that life is made up of the nucleosynthesis of the earliest and most abundant fundamental cosmic stuff, like;
I am sure you recognize several elements required in the formation of biological molecules.
- Hydrogen - H
- Helium - He
- Lithium - Li
- Beryllium - Be
- Boron - B
- Carbon - C
- Nitrogen - N
- Oxygen - O
- Fluorine - F
- Neon - Ne
- Sodium - Na
- Magnesium - Mg
- Aluminum (or Aluminium) - Al
- Silicon - Si
- Phosphorus - P
- Sulfur - S
- Chlorine - Cl
- Argon - Ar
- Potassium - K
- Calcium - Ca
As each new universe begins in chaos, each universe will have a slightly different evolutionary trajectory, some of which may result in the proper chemical balance to allow for biochemistry to emerge and evolve.
Universal evolution! That concept sounds entirely reasonable.
Explain why not..?To your last statement , but its not reasonable , at all .
It would be interesting to see a three dimension energy flow of a galaxy taking energy from another
We have pictures from Hubble Telescope;
![]()
![]()
Hubble Telescope spots ‘ghostly face’ in colliding galaxies
![]()
Hubble Telescope spots ‘ghostly face’ in colliding galaxies (nypost.com)
Gravitational exchanges alone will cause energy flow from one galaxy to another during a galactic collision.
These galaxies are rotating all by themselves.The streaming of matter is caused by the gravitational pull of the larger galaxy and it is not just plasma, but all massive objects as well.Straight Plasma Connections . Current Plasma flow .
You mean rotational exchanges . Not gravity .
These galaxies are rotating all by themselves.The streaming of matter is caused by the gravitational pull of the larger galaxy and it is not just plasma, but all massive objects as well.
Yes, either a multiverse where black holes create new and slightly altered universes (evolved via natural selection), some of which are suitable for life.Therefore the Universe should be based on something , the Physical three dimensional Universe , Something , which is for infinity existent .
Yes, either a multiverse where black holes create new and slightly altered universes (evolved via natural selection), some of which are suitable for life.
Or a single recycling toroidal universe where a single black hole is causal to a constant regeneration (beyond our event horizons) of slightly a slightly altered universe (evolved via natural selection), while maintaining the same volume and energy of the original.
I like that concept the best as it solves almost all complications that can be imagined.![]()
The Toroidal Universe: A geometric theory of space-time (evolvingsouls.com)
If we existed at the equator both holes (black and white) would be obscured by the event horizon, but it would account for an accelerating expanding and contracting universe, and account for all tha matter that is sucked up by a central black hole.
We know that large black holes can "eat" whole galaxies , why not a central black hole eating the universe and spitting it out at the other side. That is how life uses energy,
Input --> function --> output
As compared to what ? You have a better idea?Nonsense .
As compared to what ? You have a better idea?
You are not reading anything I have posted. I provided a perfect description of the existence of black holes and how they all feed the "black box" singularity from the outside in and how the "white hole" singularity regenerates spacetime from the inside out.Of course .
And black-holes don't even come into the picture .
Pg. 4 . Bottom of the Pg. In this thread , " My Cosmology " . Give it a read . Then tell me what you think . Anybody for that matter .
You are not reading anything I have posted. I provided a perfect description of the existence of black holes and how they all feed the "black box" singularity from the outside in and how the "white hole" singularity regenerates spacetime from the inside out.
You'll have to do better than that. There is nothing on page 4 name "My Cosmology" and in a search about 6 links to articles called "My Cosmology " show up. I'm not going to read them all.
So far you haven't countered with anything substantial. Try again!
"When I’m working on a problem, I never think about beauty. I think only how to solve the problem. But when I have finished, if the solution is not beautiful, I know it is wrong."
Buckminster Fuller
You are not reading anything I have posted. I provided a perfect description of the existence of black holes and how they all feed the "black box" singularity from the outside in and how the "white hole" singularity regenerates spacetime from the inside out.
No, I am trying to make sense of a mystery.I read it , its nonsense .
No, I am making sense of a mystery.
You are making NON-SENSE, understand?
Yes I am I am making a perfectly reasonable and elegant case for an evolving toroidal universe.Highlighted
No your not .