|
big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
|
mwhaaahaa im bored and sleepy while waiting for a download and i came with this theory: first of all the big bang may not represent the begining of the universe but that it might be an actual crash between a black hole and an antimatter(quite freaky isnt it) black hole; sice everybody knows that matter and antimatter cancels and produce electromagnetic waves the space in the zone would bounce back as the matter becomes energy and thus creating the expansion efect("the universe is always espanding") and the released light would acumulate itself again and produce new matter, thus creating not this universe but just this sector of it. what ya think? the only thing i couldnt predict is where antimatter went but i hadnt heard anyone explain this fact nor why it is so scarce since all matter is created by pairs ps sorry for poor gramar im sleepy |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
|
But where did the initial antimatter that collided with the black hole come from?
Everything about Gabriela Robin:
A Gabriela Robin Site
For everything Yoko Kanno: The Yoko Kanno DB Forum |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
| matter and antimatter is created by pairs, so its normal for it to exist if a matter black hole exist. what the whole idea means is that this a more or less ciclical event in which black holes are creted during long periods of time then matter and antimatter black holes colide producing light, then the light disipates and creates new matter that acumulates and produce matter and antimatter black holes which because of gravity colide ad infinitum ad nauseam. |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
| feedback onegaishimasu |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
| Do you mean that matter and anti-matter are created over and over again just as long as there is the black hole and the dissipation of light? Sorry, not really good in physics, but I have to agree with you that the Big Bang may not be the start of the universe. Correct me if I'm wrong but if the Big Bang started with the collision of particles (atoms?), then where did they come from, right? |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
|
indeed i find weird the fact that they said the univese started by a collision between particles, since to create that much matter they would have had an obcene amount of energy(thats why i think a black hole quite fits the gap) then again there must had existed a medium in wich the paticles were so that they could actually collide actually is quite simple about how matter is created from light, imagine a space limited by walls that reflect light with just one opening when you add light regardless its wavelenght the wavelenght of the light that comes out begins to go from red to violet to microwaves to xrays and finally creates a pair matter antimatter(this concept is called "space temperature" if i remember correctly it also states the hypotesis that matter exist in a latent state until it is activated by electromagnetic waves ) |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
Link |
by EricSoLazy
on 2005-05-26 22:21:09
|
|
String Thoery provides a unquie look into the Big Band.. though I am highy skepitcal of string thoery... There are thoerists who say that our universe exists on a membrane and there are many other membranes with more universes and Big Bang reactions occur when these membranes collide. Interesting, but no proof so its not really physics
WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
|
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
|
I have read an article about string theory, but please explain it to me in simpler words. Uhhmmm, can we account the "dark energy" for the creation of the universe? |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
Link |
by EricSoLazy
on 2005-05-27 08:57:25
|
|
string thoery is hard to do in simple terms... But ok, String Thoerists believe that all matter (talking quarks/leptons here) are vibrating strings that are super small.. Planks Lenght small, which is small, and the vibration of the string gives off the properties of the matter. That the most basic part, then it gets crazy, There are five different thoerys, and through trying to combine them together they started adding dimenisions to space that are "curled" up.. and it gets crazyier and crazyier such as the big bang thoery bellow, if you can understand physics books read Bryan Greene's books about it, they are written simply but go into alot more detail. Dark matter and Energy is just matter/energy that we cant see because it doesnt relect enough light, people speculate that its either stuff like planets/asteriods or proton floating around, so yeah its accounted
WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
|
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
|
Thanks. I'll read more about string theory but it's very interesting. I only know about the inflation theory and the more popular ones though I have to say I've been hearing about it (string theory) for a while now. I also read that some scientists consider the dark energy as one reason why the cosmos is accelerating at a very fast rate. |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
| if i remember correctly string theory just apeared cause if it were actually truth a lot of phenomena would be easier to understand all that acording to the razor principle that states that the most simple answer tends to be the correct one |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
Link |
by EricSoLazy
on 2005-05-28 08:51:34
|
|
well yes simple is better, but not always true. Also string thoery isnt simple, its massive complexity and open mathmatics lets it answer questions easily. There is no expertimental proof of string thoery, and it has a surprising lack of expertimental scientists trying at all to prove it. Thus its not even science, just philosophy. Time magazine screwed up by calling it the Thoery of Everything.
WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
|
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
|
from my point of view no many are trying to prove it is because it is too much inclusive so most ways to try to prove it would end up being ambiguous, sort of does god exits? that is because there are way too many reasons wich would explain those phenomena what i mean is that even if someone find some proof, it would also be evidence for other teory and you might(or will) even end up with a guy that says that this is just as god made it or something. if i remember correctly the search for a universal theory that would compress math and all formas of forces(electric gravitational magnetic kinetic etc ad nauseam(i love this phrase)) and mater began about 60 years ago then again in this time about zero experiments had been conclusive, the last one was i think the one of eintein of the particle-wave nature of light and matter at high speed (matter behave like waves at high speeds) then again it just were able to mix a small part of the problem. so trying to explain all phenomena with a theory of the kind of strings would be a real pain in the ass plus we have to deal with the problem of what the heck are strings made of and then we would have to made a theory to explain of its behavior |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
Link |
by EricSoLazy
on 2005-05-28 17:54:32
|
|
pretty much true, though the strings are thoerized to be nothing but energy thus being the smallest particle out there, but why strings. Can you think of anything like a string in the natural world? Besides protien strands.. but thats not a "string"
WHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO
|
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
|
Hi, They call them strings because they are tiny little things which are ultra thin yet have length (essentially, or some say actually, 1 dimentional). They apparently have found connections between the math that describes harmonics, when applied to these strings, and the properties of quarks, leptons, and so on. At least, that's how I've heard it. Some people have conjectured that the strings are tiny 'cracks' in the universe, whatever that makes the universe. I'm with those of you who say it seems really funky. I'm all for thinking 'out of the box', as it were, but I'm not holding my breath just yet! |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
|
in rough therms the version i herd says that theyre infinit lenght strings that form the time space weave and its oscilations produce matter(all particles) light and even gravitons. then again it fails to explain what are strings made of, saying its the building block of everything sounds too far fetched to me, you must remember that atom(mwahahah) means it cant be divided. and finally stating my oficial position lets say i have more confidence in my half asleep theory below. |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
| I hear often in shows, magazines, and books that the universe is expanding everyday. What do they mean by expanding? Is there a barrier somewhere which will stop everything? Whats beyond that barrier? |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
|
its only a theory plus the barrier is unreachable if there is any
I'm gonna tell you now, I wanna show you how, You can't imagine power like, You're making me hot
With your desire...
|
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
|
From what I know, the expansion of the universe was proven by Einstein's calculations. He even said that the biggest lie he ever committed was when he created a constant that would keep the universe from expanding based on his calculations. About the expansion of the universe, I'm still thinking of an easier way to explain it. Am finding difficulty understanding it either. >.< |
|
Re: big bang, creation of the universe n'stuff
|
|
Lemme try to explain that theory: Everything in the universe is said to have an opposite. Even matter itself (what everything is made of. The opposite of matter is called anti-matter. Now if a huge volume of matter and antimatter collides, there is a great combustion (big bang). Which results to new things.. The universe... That's how i see it. But, the Big Bang also proved the existence of a greater force. Coz nothing can be made out of nothing. That's one of the laws of one of the ancient smart scientists (i forgot the name and the law). Thus, God must be true. ^_^ Hihihi... ^_^ Sorry! I'm only 13! |