Residue heat due to Big Bang?

Discussion in 'Pseudoscience Archive' started by albertchong1999, Aug 2, 2010.

  1. albertchong1999 The truth is out there Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    233
    I came out with the HYPOTHESIS that the residue heat of the universe is not caused by the big bang aftermath. It is due to the intense gravitational forces that burn the element in the universe and the heat is leftover forever in the universe as the conservation of energy theory mentioned energy cannot be destroyed. Without gravity existence, all the substances will possess no thermal energy and it will remain in absolute zero temperature, equal to −273.15°C, or −459.67°F. So the universe is getting hotter everytime a substances is burning and given off heat until the substances had reach its 'unburnable element state', then it will stop burning.

    For further explanation on how gravity given off energy, please visit my other thread "Conservation of Energy?"
     
    Last edited: Aug 2, 2010
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. albertchong1999 The truth is out there Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    233
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. AlphaNumeric Fully ionized Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    6,702
    Have you done any calculations to see what the average photon density in the universe would be if only the stars were the source? If you haven't then you have no reason to think the stars produce sufficient heat to get the 2.7K needed.

    Other than how they interact with the other forces as well as the fact nothing can be at absolute zero.

    And getting cooler as it expands.
     
  8. albertchong1999 The truth is out there Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    233
    Thanks for your interest in this thread.

    There are just too many scientists immersed in available heat sources theory seconds after Big Bang that is not scientifically proven because it simply can't deduced where is the enormous heat sources came from in the first place of Big Bang occured, in which make the theory more complicated and confusing, and lead to the scare of universe heat death in the future.

    Of course it getting cooler as it expands because the energy is distributed to a larger area,but the energy will never destroyed as conservation of energy stated. Just only galaxies got plenty of stars have a higher temperature environment than the surrounding empty space.
     
  9. albertchong1999 The truth is out there Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    233

    As time goes by, there is a possibility that all the previous stars produce enough heat source in the universe to attain the average temperature of 2.7K of the universe since the universe is 13.6 billions years old or even more. Many of the stars is dead long time ago and we will never have the chance to observe it because the explosion rays already pass through our earth long time ago before we have the instrument to observe it in ancient times. You can see this because there are plenty of heavy elements scattered in the universe made from the death of the stars. Even our earth carbon element came from the death of the stars due to the fusion process of the lighter element. you can check the heat scattered NOT uniformly in the universe in WMAP, the map of infrared universe. If Big Bang is the culprit of the residue heat, the residue heat will be scattered uniformly in the universe when it expand. But this is not the case because the surrounding galaxies given off more heat energy
     
    Last edited: Aug 3, 2010
  10. albertchong1999 The truth is out there Registered Senior Member

    Messages:
    233
    Yeah, you are true. But if all matter has no gravity, then all will be non-existence and stay in deep freeze forever, 'perhaps' at absolute zero.
     
  11. phlogistician Banned Banned

    Messages:
    10,342
    Your mechanism doesn't account for the near uniformity of the CMB. nor it's wavelength.
     
  12. Green Destiny Banned Banned

    Messages:
    1,211
    Let me be frank - your theory would run into fatal problems.

    In fact, it runs into - inconsistency - you fail to determine ''element'' - i hope you are not falling into some old alchemist madhatter-discipline. Also, you do not specify empiracle reasoning why the gravitational force would interact in the way it does in your model with this unamed ''element''.

    ''the heat is leftover forever in the universe as the conservation of energy theory mentioned energy cannot be destroyed.''

    This part alone is consistent, because we have observational reasoning to make such theories on the way the universe works. But raddling it on the end of a sentence because you have failed to see the complexities of the model, will surely fail.

    '' Without gravity existence, all the substances will possess no thermal energy and it will remain in absolute zero temperature, equal to −273.15°C, or −459.67°F. So the universe is getting hotter everytime a substances is burning and given off heat until the substances had reach its 'unburnable element state', then it will stop burning.''

    Without gravity sir, the standard model would be inconsistent, and thus negates the rest of your theory. Assuming something to not exist, when it can't, is like expecting ants to carry electrons to their collective.
     

Share This Page