There's a Black Hole at the Cosmic Core

Yes

Yes

I am say that on the surface of the sun the ions and electrons are essentally at zero velocity relative to earth and acclerate to around 10^6 MPH towards earth.

The number of particles / m^3 decreases.

You said, "There's no such thing as a Big-Bang, neither does Dark Energy exist. We're [speeding] up because we're falling, falling into a Black hole". So you are saying as we falling into a blackhole the celestial bodies are getting farther apart?

I would tell you to smarten up, but you don't appear capabile of that, so it would be unkind. So I will just say continue with your arm waving absurdities there are a couple of very confused people who will be quite enamored with your confused drivel. Oh my, that seemed unkind also.

These are not the 'Laws of Physics', you are citing the 'Law of You don't know WTF you are talking about'.

I never adressed anything about nozzels, I'm a ChemE I think I have a tad better handle on mass flows than you do.

Ignorant AND arrogant - nice. It is not that I 'don't want to get it', the problem is that your idea has about as much merit as a cat turd.

Well maybe you come up with one of your whiz-bang 'theories' on how charged particles can go from ~0 mph to ~10^6 mph without accelerating.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I don't think antigravity exist either. I have toyed with the idea if relativistic effects are causing us to "fall" outward outside the visible universe, but I ran into a big problem. Galaxies do not appear to undergo relativistic effects! So then since the explosion of the Big Bang was evenly distributed mostly everywhere, there is no reason why outside of the visable universe would be more massive than inside the visable universe.

This lead me to another crackpot theory, yay for pseudoscience! I think the expansion of the universe itself was caused by the first creation of mass at the beginning of the universe. It is basically SR in reverse. All the energy of the Big Bang started out traveling at the speed of light. So then when mass is created from this energy, it no longer travels at the speed of light. If it no longer travels at the speed of light but a slower speed, space will expand in its frame of reference. This would allow space to expand faster than the speed of light, and the objects in that space to move away from each other FTL. It is like everything hit warp drive but instead of folding the space, the space was just expanded away from everything else. And viola, that is the scenario that more closely fits in to what has been found with observation. Then to prove the theory, one would have to show that the burst of inflation of the Big Bang occured at times where mass was created/annihilated.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

A Cathode Ray Tube, or Television, this is simply a gun that shoots cathode rays - one at a time. So the electrons accelerate on their way to the screne? Fascinating (Yawn).

An ion engine? I don't know much about such engines - do they shoot a stream of ions, and that's how they gain propulsion? That's an outward expansion that accelerates? You'll have to explain that one.

Meantime, did you read my initial post yet? I'm only going with the evidence you see. The expansion of the observable Universe is accerating - can we agree on that?

That means it was once going slower. The Big-Wheeze comes to mind. Now, origin, if I say the expansion started at one-mile-per-hour you can't say I'm wrong, much as you would like to. Also, the only kind of expansion that speeds up is Inward.

Your Universe is run by all these repulsive forces, fighting Gravity, and in total ignorance of all the Laws of Science. Outward expansions all slow down and stop - that's simply the nature of the beast. If we're accelerating that means we're going in.

Going in, in harmony with Gravity and all the Laws of Science, speeding up as all Inward Expansions do (but isn't that just the nature of the beast) and like everything else in the Universe.

Sure, there's nothing going 'out' in the Universe - well maybe your Solar Flare or exploding nebula - nothing of any duration. Everything else is going in, galaxies are votices you know?

We're going in, I've pretty well shown that - too bad you can't see it, but that's your business. It's the ever increasing Rate of Acceleration that proves it's a black hole we're falling into - Mable!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

You keep repeating this piece of nonsense as though repitition would make it so.

 

Newsflash, origin,

On Dec.13, 2010, Voyager 1 determined that the velocity of the solar wind had slowed to 0 mph, 1.88 billion miles from Earth.

 

Look, origin,
I wasn't talking to you about nozzles per se, but the gas flow on the way to the nozzle - the Inward Expansion, the only kind of expansion that speeds up, and because I say the expansion of the Observable Universe is speeding up we must be going in also - and that makes this equal to a 'cat turd?' And then, WTF! I think I know well enough what the 'F' stands for.

I don't want that kind of talk in my thread. Do I have to put up with it? We'll see.

So you're a chemist. That's okay, but you're not going to know much about Physics, that's for sure. You might be an expert in your field, but I find you full of hot air! Solar winds don't speed up - they slow down! You're full of it. A CRT shoots electrons at an electically charged glass - one squirt at a time! An ion engine? You know about ion engines? Like I said, chemist - as far as Physics goes - you're full of it.

 

:wtf:

BTW, my cat resents the comparison.

 

I know that you do not have any scientific training so this stuff is a bit hard for you to understand so let me help you.

From wiki

On December 13, 2010, it was confirmed that Voyager 1 passed the reach of the solar wind emanating from the Sun.

This means that V1 was no long detecting the solar wind, it does not mean that the solar winds velocity went to 0.

It is suspected that solar wind at this distance turns sideways due to interstellar wind pushing against the heliosphere.

This means that the solar wind is no longer in the area of V1 it has changed direction. Do you know what is needed for a particle to change direction? A force is needed. Do you know what a change in direction is called? It is acceleration. So you have given ANOTHER example of acceleration that is not 'inward' as you say. Rather ironic, I think!

Since June 2010, detection of solar wind has been consistently at zero, providing conclusive evidence of the event.

Again we are talking about detection not velocity!

The meridional (north-south) speed of the solar wind, which is suspected to have increased, cannot be inferred in Voyager 1's current configuration. On this date, the spacecraft was approximately 17.3 billion kilometers (116 AU or 10.8 billion miles) from the Sun.

Did you read that? The speed of the solar wind increased? Isn't that acceleration?

I guess you will have to ignore all of this just like you are ignoring everything else that doesn't support your little fantasy. That is the big difference between pseudoscience and real science; in science all the data is taken into account even the stuff that disproves theories, in pseudoscience your cherry pick the data to only support your outlandish conjectures.

 

I don't know with any certainty, anything beyond the fact that the Voyager 1 can no longer detect the solar wind...

The Wiki article would have been more accurate, to have said that and that they don't really know anything more, than to have interjected the word, suspected in the two critical places it did. (You should read those portions as, "we think".)

Yes we assume or suspect, that the galaxy has a similar relationship to our solar system, as does our sun to the planets.., and sattelites we launch. That, as far as I have heard, has not yet been confirmed. But would suggest that at some point any charged particle moving out of the solar system's influence would be influenced by the "galactic wind", which would if detectable be measured as a change in direction or an acceleration. We just can not prove that at this time.

Was not there also a release that suggested that the heliosphere, seemed to actually be spherical, rather than deformed by its motion through the galactic or interstellar wind? This might also suggest that the solar wind could slow down uniformly, rather than change directions as it transitions between the heliosphere and interstellar space.

Since the solar wind includes high velocity charged particles, it would be interesting to know how the data the Voyager(s) have been able to collect, matches up with the predictions of quantum explanations of inertia, as in the interaction of a charged particle moving through the ZPF. Though, those models I have looked at involve acceleration, over the distances involved they should apply equally to a charged particle with a constant velocity. Which through the inertial interaction could become a diminishing velocity.

However, the point I meant to be making is that other than the fact that the Voyager can no longer detect the solar wind, what is actually ocurring is speculation, it is unknown. It could be that it has stopped, or as you suggested change direction.., or perhaps it has just reached the point where the particle density is below the Voyager's ability to detect...

 

Yes, AlexG - The only kind of expansion that speeds up (accelerates) is inward - unless, of course, you can tell me of a speedi g up expansion that isn't Inward... And I don't mean your backward Universe.

Solar winds slow down. I read that in Wiki. 'Origin' is full of it. Are you a friend of his?

Do you really not understand this Inward Expansion, the kind that speeds up - do you still have no clue about what I'm saying?

I don't know why I'm even talking to you.

This site, for whatever reason, only allows me one (1) answer per day. I can't afford to waste it on you.

 

Do you have a clue what you are talking about?

It sounds to me like your are trying to compare galaxies, galactic clusters and the universe, with what you see when you flush the toilet.

Just because both spin or swirl around, as the case maybe, does not mean they are caused by the same mechanics.

There is good evidence that suggests that the universe is experiencing an accelerating expansion. Things on cosmological scales, seem to be moving away from each other.

There is liitle evidence to suggest that the universe is going down the drain, so to speak...

As far as Origin's comments and his Wiki reference is concerned, I am pretty sure the difference in prespective between he and I, is far less than either of us and what it appears to me your understanding is. Origin and I, as far as I am concerned, differ only on where the line between what is known as in proven, and what is yet our best guess or theory, of what lies beyond that point where we can obtain direct observations and evidence.

 

OnlyMe: It takes a fertile, creative, OOB intellect to visualize a model in which the universe is expanding inward . . . OR imploding . . . keep trying! It might help to presume a pre, proto-universe (perhaps infinite?) from which the matter universe (portion) is 'growing' at the expense of energy in the proto-universe . . . a net energy loss in proto-universe is (continuously?) 'creating mass' from within the proto-universe . . . .presenting the 'apperance' of an expanding matter universe. The proto-universe is >>>> energy-only, existing at subplanck scales . . . therefore NOT otherwise detectible. (Foregoing is IMPO)

 

Usual nonsensical garbage.

 

Agreed. However, I do not think it has been proven that the solar wind has changed directions due to interstellar winds. The solar winds velocity sure as hell didn't go to zero though!

 

You are really a hoot. If there is evidence and mathematics to back up a theory you don't believe it. If a layman with zero knowledge and ability makes and absurd proposal you are all for it the more absurd and ignorant the the better you like it.

By the way I think you should say, "it takes a fertilizer mind to come up this this stuff....".

 

Again your unfarmiliarity of science has lead you to make statements that are false. I am a chemical engineer, I am not a chemist, there is a great difference. As an engineer I have taken 3 semester of pure calculus based physics. My courses on mass transfer, thermodynamics and fluid dynamics were certainly physics based.

I assume your physics education amounted to browsing wiki.

Edited to add: I am permited to use terms like WTF, particularly to your ideas - what else can you say about such out landish ideas? You don't own this goddamn thread - you just started it. I said a naughty word on purpose, tee hee.

 

Prof.Layman,
Thanks for your theory. Does it have a name? Mine's the 'Mable Theory', Mable being the Mother of All Black hoLEs, the black hole at the center of the Universe.

You see, Prof.Layman, and you seem pretty smart to me, the expansion is speeding up. Any Outward Expansion will slow down and stop, That's just the nature of the beast. Yes, even the ions that make up the solar winds slow down and lose their effect. There's not really much you or I can do about it.

But what kind of expansion tho' - starts slowly and speeds up. Well that's Inward, you see. Still air will near the nozzle of a working Central-Vac and this air will accelerate and lose pressure as it goes. Losing Pressure is the same as Gaining Expansion, as I'm sure you know.
Note; a) the slow start b) the speeding up expansion and c) the Inward Direction (into the nozzle.)

Inward Expansions all speed up because they are responding to an attractive force, in the case of the central-vac, an electric motor. This attractive force could be Gravity or a host of other Effects. A low air pressure, is one.

Every time a bird flaps its wing, it makes a (free) vortex. The outside air moves only slowly, but it moves inward, speeding up and losing pressure (expanding) all the way to the center - the point of lowest pressure and highest expansion.
Note a) the slow start b) the speeding up expansion and c) the Inward Direction (toward the center).

I can give you hundreds of examples of this Inward expansion - all of them caused by an attractive force causing a system to speed up and therby lose pressure and expand.

Yes, the only kind of expansion that speeds up is Inward. The expansion of the Observable Universe is accelerating - there can be no doubt about it - we're going in.

That means there's just Gravity. There was no Big-Bang, no Dark Energy.... It's Gravity that keeps the Moon orbiting Earth, and it's Gravity that runs the Universe - not Anti-Gravity.

One more thing! Everything I read says that the Rate of Acceleration is increasing. Correct me if I'm wrong.
You see, if we were falling into the Center of Mass of the Cosmos, and there was nothing there, our Rate of Acceleration would decline all the way to the center. As a matter of fact, as soon as we passed the center we'd be decelerating.

But if our Rate of Acceleration is increasing, it would take a black hole to cause this, the black hole at the center of the Universe - Mable.

It also means the Universe evolved slowly from a huge, loose Original Cloud of Hydrogen that went critical in the center, rather in the manner of our sun, Sol, only on a bigger scale. So's Mable, by the way - on a bigger scale to anything we know.

Where is Mable? The other side of our Galaxy, the Milky Way, in the 'Zone of Avoidance' - towards Super-Cluster in Hydra-Centaurus but off to one side or the other at a 45 degree angle.

Prof.Layman - what do you think of this? You must tell me.

 

This kind of nonsense gives pseudoscience a bad name.

 

Oh, man, AlexG you are on a roll!

 

@ Peter,
You may need to consider that you are talking about a level of understanding that is not commonly available on the net. I feel the concept you are trying to establlish considers the universe in oneness and not the dualism that is commonly used to view it with. You have stated that it is all gravity for example [which is the clue I am working with here.]
Let me ask you a question to help clarify the context.

If an object is in freefall towards a gravitational source does it accellerate as it gets closer to the source?
eg.
If I jump out of an aeroplane at 30,000 feet am I going to accellerate before I go splat on the ground..?
I'd be real interested in Alex G's answer as well..[no cheating allowed]. [chuckle]

*note. the question has at least two possible answers depending on context.