A leap of faith to describe something you don’t even know what is...
Or worse to think you know what isn’t..
No, man. Every universe is a marble in a locket on a cat’s collar.
Didn’t you see Men In Black?
The universe is everything.
How can there be many universes?
There’s nothing like the universe to bring you down to earth again.
Interesting. The problem is that most of the theories put forth in astrophysics are difficult if not impossible to test.
Sounds like government to me.
In real life, there is no such thing as a black hole, there is only the one universe which we observe, gravity does not bind cosmic objects together, and there was never such a thing as a “big bang(TM)”. The desire for multiple universe arises from the evolosers understanding what the odds against evolution are in the one universe we actually have.
If such is the case, how does one account for being able to measure the mass of a black hole? I find Chandrasakahr’s (sp?) view of how black holes are formed more plausible.
Wouldn’t each child universe have less matter and energy than its parent universe?
It wouldn’t take too long for the succeeding generation of child universes to get too light-weight for black holes to form.
I give this theory an F.
Unhunh. Ever more complex theories to preen ones ego with.
Pingity
I'm putting my own theory forward called the Snack Cake Paradox; that every black hole contains a Ring Ding Jr. at the center.
Inflation is basically a concoction to explain away several serious problems with the Big Bang Theory, namely...
1. The Horizon Problem
2. The Flatness Problem
3. The Galaxy Formation Problem
4. The Antimatter Problem
Here is an excellent source which explains in layman terms what these problems are:
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/astro/cosmo.html#c5
And here are some things I found some time ago on inflation theory...
Alan Guth [inventor of Inflation theory]: "Those 'little creatures'[cosmic microwave background photons], however, would have to communicate at roughly 100 times the speed of light if they are to achieve their goal of creating a uniform temperature across the visible Universe by 300,000 years after the Big Bang." http://nedwww.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/Guth/Guth2.html
As Albrecht, now at the University of California at Davis, puts it, inflation is not yet a theory: "It is more of a nice idea at this point."...
"The model in Guth's original paper, published in Physical Review D in 1980, admittedly did not work. Michael Turner of the University of Chicago, who took part in Bardeen's calculation of the density perturbations, says Guth had been brave. "One of the striking things about [Guth's] paper," Turner says, "was that he said: 'Look, guys, the model I am putting forward does not work. I can prove it doesn't work. But I think the basic idea is really important.' "
In fact, Guth's "old" inflation ended too soon, and too messily. A "graceful exit" was needed to make the universe look remotely similar to ours. In 1982 Paul Steinhardt, another co-author of Bardeen's calculation, solved the graceful exit problem together with Andreas Albrecht; Linde also found a solution independently. Their "new" inflation worked by adjusting the shape of the potential function, a sort of mathematical roller-coaster that defines the properties of the inflation.
Most of the mechanisms proposed ever since rely on carefully adjusting the shape of the hypothetical potential function. None, it seems, has been too convincing. "All these models seem so awkward, and so finely tuned," says Mark Wise, a cosmologist at the California Institute of Technology.
Physicists would like a theory that avoids such gimmicks, one that shows how things ought to be from first principles—or at least with the smallest possible number of assumptions. "Fine tuning" is the opposite.
It was two fine-tuning problems, two such implausible balancing acts, that inflation was supposed to have solved. "You're trying to explain away certain features of the universe that seem fine-tuned—like its homogeneity, or its flatness," says Steinhardt, now at Princeton University, "but you do it by a mechanism that itself requires fine tuning. And that concern, which was there from the beginning, remains now." As Albrecht, now at the University of California at Davis, puts it, inflation is not yet a theory: "It is more of a nice idea at this point." "
http://www.symmetrymag.org/cms/?pid=1000045
And we have here a great example of why I’m a life scientist, and not a physicist. Physics is just plain weird, once you get outside of the human scale (”classical physics”) that we are all familiar with.
It’s probably naive to think this, but if one is thinking about ways to test the hypothesis that the universe is inside a black hole, could one start with the observation that we look out at night and see a black universe? All those stars out there generate a LOT of light—light doesn’t just disappear. But if the universe is inside a black hole, which by definition absorbs light, doesn’t that explain where the light goes?
Any physicists out there are welcome to critique my idea (and tell me where I went horribly astray).
Right. If we could only find the right balance of matter and anti-matter and channel it into our impulse engines we could go back in time, travel to other, less progressive, universes and uphold the prime directive.
Cut the funding.
At the heart of the Big Bang theory is the premise that compressed matter reaches critical mass and explodes. OK.
But its an enormous stretch to think that the exact amount of matter required to reach critical mass is equal to the amount of matter in the theorized universe.
If there was a big bang, it is logical to assume that it occurred before the universe had completely collapsed on itself. This might also explain the existing problems with the intitial expansion without the “special faster than light” rules created to explain super fast expansion followed by rapid deceleration, followed by constant acceleration.
It would also then stand to reason the actual universe, far greater in size than the observed universe, is a series of expanding and contracting pockets of matter.
The Democrats will tell you: Bush started the big bang; Obama's policies caused inflation to end...
So, microblackholes are little universes only a few parsecs wide?
The universe is in a black hole.
A black hole is always condensing.
Those galaxies that are "farther down" the black hole are moving faster toward the singularity than those "farther up."
Thus every galaxy appears to be accelerating from every other galaxy except for those few nearby galaxies which happen to be on the same geodesic and thus are nearing one another.