File :-(, x, )
Teh Universe Mutiverse man
Okay, heres a wacky theory for ya; Since scientists have found black holes in a variety of sizes, from the "small" ones roaming freely througout space, to the supermassive black holes in the centres of galaxys, does it not seem logical that there are, or have been, bigger ones? I know some of you will totaly deny the fact that there COULD be socalled multiverses, and that there is a insanely big black hole at the centre of the universe, BUT to me it just makes more sense than any other explanation I've been given. Since we cannot get a "birds eye view" of the universe i guess we wont know within the next few years...

Because I just cannot wrap my head around this theory that "the big bang" was/is not a explosion IN space, but a expansion OF time and space. This I do not get.

But a weird theory I thought of could (in my mind, anyway..) explain this, sorta..

As we know, black holes keep pulling shit into themself, compressing matter, time and space. And we know BH come in different sizes. We also know BH merge, and become bigger, if I remember correctly. So if the Big Bang was the beginning of everything and our universe is the only one, was then the BB at one point a BH itself? Containing this universe itself? That the BB was the end of a universe and the birth of a new one, as BH has merged, gotten bigger and eventually even sucked up what we call time and space itself, before it collapse on itself and explode.

I know this may sound really far-fetched and fucked up, and I'm no scientist, but I have a imagination big enough to atleast consider this as a possible "fact". And I know this may not be the best explained, but you can get a general idea of what I'm thinking of here. Like Discovery Science says, question everything XD
>> Mutiverse man
I've heard a lot of theory's about what happens after the BB, but the creation OF the BB, what made it, why did it happen and so forth, I've yet to hear any theory's about. If nothing can be truly lost or destroyed, then there would have had to be something before the BB wouldnt it? You cant make something from nothingness, can you, therefore, in my mind, there must have been sumthing there before the BB.

My head hurts...

So, thats it, my weird thought of the day has been posted, so feel free to call me a idiot or flame away, or post your own thoughts about the matter and your own theory/s.

Also, HR space pics is reqired.
>> Anonymous
My proposition would be once the largest of black holes was formed, there was no matter left for it to consume and it tore its self apart creating something similar to a big bang but something drastically more sophisticated than a mere explosion
>> Anonymous
Your theory is plausible, but the really annoying part of this post is how often you apologetically, preemptively defend yourself. Just give the idea and be prepared for flaming, because lots of "hey, this is just my opinion"s isn't going to save you.

Having said that, the idea that our universe is within one of these blackhole process sounds interesting.
>> Anonymous
BLASPHEMERS, ALL OF YA!

GOD CREATED THE "UNIVERSE"!!!

(/sarcasm)
>> Mutiverse man
>>349405
Hehe, yeah I know, thats just the way i am ^^
But the main reason for it is because I simply do not know, and do not want this to be taken as "fact".

But I stand for what I have posted here and personally I think it seems in some funky way truly plausible.

>>349404
Exactly, I guess this is what I mean in one simple sentence, hehe.

>>349407
Dont even get me started on this one. If there is a "god" then I suppose the universe itself is "god". lol
>> Anonymous
all of you need bans

you are thinking to fucking much on 4chan
>> Anonymous
if god always existed how long did he wait b4 making the universe? what did he do b4 he made it whats he doin nao
>> Anonymous
supermassive black hole is a pretty cool song.
>> Anonymous
The tough part of trying to prove your theory would be identifying the limit at which at black hole would be too massive, and then it would dissipate into particles that comprised its core.

Since there is both matter and anti matter constantly being created it would be complicated just identifying one specific point where there would suddenly be more matter than antimatter in the universe so as to cause instability and thus induce the big crunch. Unless you were already taking into account the fact that there is dark matter being produced in the universe in the space between matter.

Never-the-less your theory sounds interesting.
>> Anonymous
this is the one reason i hate creationists and western religions. Look how many other, more interesting possibilities there are to our creation.

But i like your theory alot Multiverse man. It brings alot of thoughts into my head, if we are stuck inside, or the remnants of a black whole "explosion" whose to say that other black wholes dont create other universe.

This could bring into effect other theory's such as the parallel universe theory. (just a thought though)

But your 100% correct though, if we base all of our knowladge in science off of the law of conservation of mass and energy, then the big bang seems highly improbably against all of our modern day theorys, and throws them into question.

but there is no question in my mind that says there isnt a multiverse, since everything has a sub this, and sub that, smaller universes in our universe, or even our universe being part of a larger one, makes sense in a way. (I mean, we thought atoms were indivisible, whose to say we can be proven wrong about our universe)
>> Anonymous
>>349540
also, ignore my horrendous spelling, its very very late here, and im not really thinking. But my point got across somewhat. But this really has gotten me thinking.

If you want good high res space images, go here

http://www.google.com/sky/
>> Anonymous
>>349469
But they are not thinking *well*, so they fit right in.
>> Multiverse man
>>349499
It is. Muse is awsome.
>>349514
Okay, I got some of it, but not all. Like I said , Im not exactly a highly educated scientist. But I love pondering about things like this.
I guess the first thing to find out is wheter or not there acctualy is any bigger black holes than the SBH in galaxys. But seeing as they come in a variety of sizes, it seems plausible. Finding the limit, yeah, that could be pretty hard to figure out, heh..

If you wouldnt mind, could you explain the second part in a bit more detail while i google up myself on a little more info bout antimatter?
>>349540
Thank you, Im glad you enjoyed my little theory there.

Yes, exactly, there are a multitude of different possibilities. The law of conservation, yes, thats what it was called dammit. This law, if true, is why my puny logical brain says that there would have had to be something before teh BB.
I think this was a kinda cool quote: "It really is beautiful when you think that we in ourselves are universes, within a universe, within a universe." And its true, to a certain degree.

But do not totally discard religions, and theyre holy books. Let me just say, Im FAR from a religious man, but these books do contain a lot of references to what would seem to be celestial(?) happenings. IMO they can also, in likeness to Nostradamus's predictions, be studied by 100 different scholars, and you'll get 100 different answers. But this is gettin to offtopic, so I'll stop it there..

But, while we are into the subject of universes and black holes, what are your thoughts on black holes as these socalled wormholes? Plausible or not? I think not, I believe BH are something else. Unfortunately I aint got no theory on exactly WHAT BH are. What they "consist" of, why do they exist and what the hell makes them have that immense gravitational pull? Are they simply the universe's vacuum cleaner, keeping things tidy? lol
>> Ludwig van Beefoven !ITee6CUOAs
>>349741
Shit man, I wrote a goodamn novel and it was lost when i received "field too long" error =(

Maybe i'll come back later and post it again.
Anyhow to sum it up.
Black holes don't suck everything in.
You need to look up String Theory, and watch this show.

http://www.mininova.org/get/1300768
http://www.mininova.org/get/1300764

Keep being inquisitive. It's the only way you can expand your thinking.
>> Multiverse man
>>349783
Ahh sorry to hear it got fucked. I just go back one page when that happens. Dunno if it works with xplorer..

Hehe, yeah I know they dont suck everything in.
String theory I've read about before, but i cant remember it now so I shall refresh it.

"Keep being inquisitive. It's the only way you can expand your thinking."

So true! Though Ive heard about some cat that got to curious..... ^^
>> Ludwig van Beefoven !ITee6CUOAs
     File :-(, x)
>>349797
I was using Firefox, but whatever.

Cats have 9 lives.

This should fill your /hr/ universe needs for a while
http://antwrp.gsfc.nasa.gov/apod/archivepix.html
>> Princess Peach
I guess, you've firslty got to look at what BHs are and how they're formed before you can come to any conclusion. Firslty, BH are generally caused by dead stas collapsing in on themselves. Typically to form a BH you'd need a star that is >20 Solar Masses (20 x the mass of our sun), which would produce a stellar-black hole. Supermassive BH are said to form by many black holes coalescing, and merging into one shiny lovely BH. The important point is that a BH is a colossal mass compressed into a minute space.

I can't really discredit much that's been said, however; the fat of the universe is expected to be in 3 ways - The Big Crunch, The Big Freeze, and the Big Rip. These depend on the expansion of the universe, with the former arising if the expansion decelerates and eventually the universe retracts and causes a Big Bounce (ie. a new Big Bang). The Big Freeze will occur if the universe slows and becomes stationary, but does not collapse, eventually the stars will all burn out and the universe will be left at absolute 0, killing all life, and finally the big rip will occur if the universe never stops accelerating - matter will have insufficent energy to hold itself together, and will be torn apart. Really, it's a happy ending in every incidence.

Essentially, BHs will not pull our universe together - this is becasue if there is enough mass in our universe to form a BH big enough to halt expansion, it will happen anyway, without black holes. If there is not, then the universe will never 'Crunch'.
>> Princess Peach
It is entirely feasible to assume there was something before the BB, but we will never know. We will never really get to see it, and if we did, it may be in a form we couldn't comprehend. We can only interpret 4-dimensions as it is, and they may not have even exsisted before the BB. Which is a darn shame I say. But it can be postulated that the Universe was created from something, either a minute pocket of a massive space, containing a remarkable amount energy.

Although, there has been some speculation over the creation of a universe in a bubble of space time, using the new Particle Collider at CERN - the LHC.

Ehm, I think I've been pretty scattered, and entirely inarticulate... also I don't know how to quote so you'll have to try and find that out yourselves :3.

Finally, Black Hole and Worm Holes are totally unrelated. A black hole is a super dense singularity in space-time, a worm hole is a loop, or string connecting different 'points' of the space time continuum.

This is as honest, and as accurate as I know - by knows means 100% accurate. But I hope it clears a few things up. Not trying to curb creativity - merely direct it. :D
Enough ramblings.
>> Princess Peach
And by accurate - I do not mean my spelling or grammar.
Shit.
D:
>> Anonymous
>>349810
i prefer heat death to the big freeze, the terminology makes it seem more grim. i think that's how it's gonna end up, but it may turn into the big rip afterwards
>> goemon4
quite the interesting topic, im kind of into astronomy (a side thing aside from school) but never looked to much into black wholes. But if one thing i can gather up, is from what Peach said, something dosnt make sense.

If black holes are somewhat massive implosions of a TON of mass in a tiny amount of space, why would this cause such a massive suction of everything?

Though its good, cause as explained, the universe has to grow at a certain pace, these black holes keep that in check. But what causes such a huge "vacuum"?

It makes no sense to me, is it just the force of all that mass collapsing creating such a vast amount of energy going in?

If so (continued in next post)
>> goemon4
>>349840
Then wouldnt it be safe to say that nothing could be intact after being consumed by one? Or are they actually related to worm holes?

This is a question just tying into OP's theory os sorts. Cause lets say they are wormholes to "vacuum bags" of space that consume matter as we know it and store them. This could be probable (in a way) of the creation of a universe, or a big bang. Cause the big bang would have needed A TON of frickin matter to create all of what is in the universe, it had to come from somewhere.

(continued in next post)
>> goemon4
>>349841
Because the universe we live in, to me, couldn't have been the first, just going by the big bang that is. Since matter had to be present before to create any explosion. So if so, then its probably this matter may have come from stored matter from black holes.

Cause its a good guess on where this stuff went. Thinking about it now, nothing could be in tact after such an immense pull into a black hole. They technically absorb everything, but it has to go somewhere.

So i think (OP) your theory is very good, but not for what you intend, maybe on where the stuff goes after being absorbed by a black hole, and what its used for.

One thing I've learned about the universe, everything has a purpose for more than what we see. So the mystery behind the black hole isn't as to what it does, but where the stuff it absorbs goes and why i guess you can say...

Idk, just a random, and somewhat horribly written thought.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
The universe began with Galactus...

The universe will end with Galactus...
>> Anonymous
Quite frankly I think your theory has some serious flaws. What would cause a black hole to arbitrarily explode? Do you think the laws of physics are fundamentally different for a supermassive black hole than, say, a stellar black hole? What would trigger a big bang type event from said supermassive black hole?

The only thing that supposedly ever comes out of a black hole is Hawking Radiation, and that's just a theory. I believe that, if the universe were contained within a supermassive black hole, Hawking Radiation would be the only thing you'd ever see emitted, not matter in any state. What I'm trying to say is that there's no evidence that black holes can "explode," only slowly decay into cosmic radiation.

With this in mind, my assumption is that an entirely different event triggered the big bang. What set it in motion is something I cannot even begin to fathom. By all accounts the event bent or completely shattered known laws of quantum physics and mechanics (especially around Planck time,) so really I don't think you can try to explain or describe the event in terms of contemporary physics because they did not apply around the beginning of the universe.

Extremely interesting read and great topic - props to the OP and other posters in this thread.
>> Princess Peach
I think it's important to assess that while there may have been something before nothing, it could easily be in a form we can't recognize. I mean the highest energy concentrations in our universe, may simply pale in comparison to the energies Pre-BB. Or by counter argument - there may have been nothing before hand. The laws of Conservation apply in our universe as a representation of the consequence of force interactions. There is no evidence to support that Conservation exsists externally, or prior to the big bang. Thusly there is no necessity for absolute 'something-ness'. Although this is in danger of becoming metaphysical.
^_____^
>> PrinzEnrique
see string theory and branes. our universe might just be a form of string that is expanding in only 3 (the 3 dimensions we see) of the 11 dimensions with other strings on its surface so the BB wouldve been the beginning of the expanding and the universe might collapse with our brane "colliding" with another brane and merging into another totally different universe...

this is what i remember don't quote me though i might have gotten this wrong
>> Anonymous
We talked about black hole a while ago,
Stephen Hawking theorizes that all black hole's slowly
die off as they all release small amounts of radiation.
So a black hole can't create anything it's just matter
turning into energy.

The BB was not on an normal scale there was no "matter" as we know it around just forms of energy,
so the BB was energy exploding and changing into
another state of existence time and space.

We all have to be moving is something...

So how do we feel about the reason the universe does
not just collapse in upon it's self. Some scientists believe
there is a great constant that keeps the universe, and the space time we live in from collapsing.
Make the physics, we take for granted, possible.
>> Anonymous
>>349392
The horizontal dimension!

IT'S OVER 9000!!!!
>> Anonymous
Why the hell do the reason behind the exploding supermassive black hole have to be so complicated? Everything, EVERYTHING, has a limit, and when that limit is reached, well, things happen. In this case, it could very well be a Big Bang. Feed a water balloon enough water and it explodes. Same thing with a black hole. There's gotta be limit to how much matter it can suck up. Besides, if it starts sucking up anti-matter, then Mutual Annihilation should occur.
>> Black Shirt® !xH.DFB1pWI
ITT: ignorantfags making claims about things they have no idea about.

All you're doing is saying "maybe this, maybe that" based on some elementary school facts. This is not intelligent in the slightest.
>> Multiverse man
Heheheheh, I am glad to see my little theory has spawned this much discussion.

Now, before I start discussing whats been said, I just googled "Hawking Radiation" and I found this: http://uk.geocities.com/kevinharkess/wisp_ch_11/wisp_ch_11.html

The Wisp Theory, which in general as far as I can tell, say the same thing I have been saying: "Wisp theory proposes that the collapse of a spinning ultra-supermassive black hole created a big bang event that formed the current universe. And prior to that, the black hole had been steadily growing, feeding on an expired universe."

Now THIS I find interesting, couse I've never read about or heard about this Wisp theory, so the fact that my puny little brain which have no other schooling on the matter, could come up with this is rather amazing to me.

Im so badass ^^
>> Anonymous
you will be God in the next universe, when this one expires
>> Princess Peach !!TXp17IO0FCG
>>350256

And that should stop everybody? There are a handful of people that can accurately comment on any of these theories. And they do not hang about on 4chan. D: Well, only in /hc/ at any rate.

And in my personal defence, mine is based on a University level education, alas I have only done two modules on Astronomy and Cosmology, so it's still pretty limited.

>>350324

I will go and look this up - it sounds pretty interesting. Cheers. :D
>> Multiverse man
>>349810
Yes, I know how BH are created. For those that dont know, Peach has a good explanation for it.
And I'll read up on these three ways, couse its the first I've heard of them.

Now, about what was BEFORE the BB, my thoughts are that it was a universe like this one. From what I can tell about how things work, EVERYTHING goes in cycles, right? +-, 0-1, on-off, which is extremely simplified, but you get the point. And I remember reading somewhere that when the BB occured, it expanded from the size of, well sumthin really small, to what we know today in a fraction of a second. I guess this this also contributed to this thought I had about the BB.

Thanks for clearing up the wormhole/black hole thing. (someone make a thread about Wormholes and theorys about this, I find this subject quite intriguing too. Plausible or not?)

>>349840
Okay, as far as I can reason the implosion of a neutron star (thats right, right? Not all stars can become BH) creates a BH after exploding, then imploding (correct me if Im wrong my memory is a bit fussy on this one). As we know a star has a intense gravitational field, so if a star should collapse on it self it would have a immense double effect, wouldnt it? Gravi and the force of the implosion. And as a BH is a continual implosion, and just keep densifying whatever it "eats", and in a continuos way will just keep getting stronger, denser, more compact.

And as you say, nothing could be intact after going into a BH, as you'll get "spagettified" as Hawking says, this will also in my head clear up this fact that there were very few matter particles in the first aftermath of the BB. As we learned in science class, everything collides, grows, evolves, as energy becomes matter, and matter becomes energy.

This makin any sense?
>> Multiverse man
>>350098
Hmmm, interesting.. Metaphysical? Wee, learned a new word today too^^

>>350169
Will do dude. Ive heard about this String theory and the 11 dimension, but have not sat myself into the subject yet. I shall read up on it and disprove you XD

>>350202
Say what...?

>>350357
But offcourse, that was decided long ago.

>>350361
Glad to see we have some University astronomy level people here to help us figure out atleast a little bit about this shit ^^
>> Multiverse man
     File :-(, x)
And just for the kicks of it, here's a illustration I've made of what i can imagine a BB "could" look like. Not great, but I think its cool nontheless XD
>> Anonymous
Or you could just consider that the initial theory of the Big Bang is wrong instead of coming up with new theories trying to prove it.
>> Anonymous
>>350380
Then that theory would also have to take into account the Red Shift. Which points towards an outward expansion of all matter in our known universe.
>> goemon4
>>350177
isn't energy a form of matter? IIRC the physics definition is anything with mass, energy and particles. Or something

but anyways, this topic has gotten quite deep, for what its worth, I'm not that in check when it comes to this. But its always fun for "What Ifs"

Cause what people don't get (referring to assfag over here) is that all our known theories, are just as good as ours.

Cause a theory isn't fact, so we can technically pull things apart and decipher them as we will if they fit into the laws that are evident.

But, not to be completely useless in this post, it seems to me that it is impossible for a black whole to just consume so much, and just release radiation.

To me, that is like a trash compactor just giving off a stench, and completely obliterating the trash. What I'm curious to figure out, is what happens to this lost matter, if its just given off in radiation, it would have to be one hell of a conversion in the black hole itself.

These things are quite the mystery, ima defiantly do more research based upon what you all said, good to see this still alive.

(BTW, anyone who torrents, check out Azureus/Vuze, they have a lot of cool, free and legal, vids on space/astronomy, just a heads up)

and
>>350202
OMG!!!
>> Anonymous
>>350387
What do you think exploded anyway?
>> Anonymous
Black holes are massive objects that are near infinitely small, creating a massive source of gravity. The radiation they give off does not come from inside the black hole, it comes from the super-heating of the particles as they get pulled into the event horizon. It's like trying to shove a gallon of water into a shot glass, a lot of water is going to spill over the sides. The matter getting pulled in is added to the mass of the singularity and is trapped within the black until it's death.
>> Anonymous
Hawking Radiation is the energy that black holes sometimes produce at the event horizon. I don't know the specific math involved because it is crazy complicated, but from my understanding it is cause by tiny fractures in the Conservation of Energy Laws and new matter is created from nothing. But to uphold the Laws, antimatter is also created. The radiation is what is released when the new matter escapes the black hole. This also is a theory on black hole death. The antimatter falls into the event horizon and annihilates some of the matter inside, which lowers the mass of the black hole by the smallest of fractions. This process would inevitably lead to the black hole's death, and it also negates the theory that a black hole could "explode"
>> We really should have a science board. Anonymous
>>349392
1) There is no known center of the universe. The universe is homogenous and isotropic.
2) We know black holes merge and become bigger? Well I haven't studied black holes specifically, so... I guess? I seriously doubt it's been observed.
3) BB= BH? I guess what you're coming from here is that inside a black hole is like an infinately dense singularity, much like the start of the big bang.

I see where you're coming from here, a few years back a popular idea was that the universe would recollapse under it's own gravity, but new findings and scientific models pretty much disproved that theory. I used to think this too, except it wouldn't be a black hole, people tend to seriously misunderstand what a black hole is and how it works.

A black hole at the center of the universe... I don't think so... but we will never know, because we can only see a very small fraction of the entire universe-- that is, if inflation really happened. If it did, space-time is curved, but from what we observe, it seems flat, so if it IS curved, then we can only see a tiny tiny portion. Like when you're looking out at the horizon on the earth and the ground seems flat, but from farther away you see it curve.

>>349407
People joke about God creating the universe hur hur all the time, but hey, we don't know! Some kind of godly being could have created the universe! But that falls from science to philosophy.
>> Resident 4chan Astronomy Expert !PaaSYgVvtw
>>350437continued

>>349514
There's more matter than antimatter in most of the observable universe, one of the big questions is where did all the antimatter go. It doesn't like to react with normal matter, thats why we have such trouble studying it when we create it. And dark matter can't be in the spaces between matter, because it is matter in itself, and has mass.

>>349540
Well, matter and energy are the same thing (E=mc^2), so energy can be converted to matter, and vise-versa, at the moment the big bang happened, all matter-- as well as space-time itself-- was compressed to the size of a proton. All the matter/energy in the universe was there. But we can never really know what was before it or what really happened during it, but the big bang does account for all matter in the current universe.

>>349840
Black holes don't "suck", they work like anything else that has mass, they "dent" space-time, creating gravity, which is ungodly weak. A black hole will only pull in things near it. If our sun suddenly became a black hole (with the same mass as it has now), it would not suck us in, we'd continue to orbit it like normal.

>>350058
radiation is light, light cannot escape from a black hole, radiation cannot be emitted by the black hole itself, hawking radiation would simply cause the black hole to fall apart, but we wouldn't "see" it coming out of the black hole. It's just a theory and so far nothing has been shown to prove it to be true, it's one of the things the LHC would like to prove/disprove.
>> Resident 4chan Astronomy Expert !PaaSYgVvtw
>>350437
forgot my tripfagcode here, whoops.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
You all fail so hard at cosmology and that I'm throwing up here.

I'm sorry that I'm a fucking stuck-up prick, but I'm definately not drunk enough for this shit.
>> Resident 4chan Astronomy Expert !PaaSYgVvtw
>>350440
Awesome poster is awesome.
>> Resident 4chan Astronomy Expert !PaaSYgVvtw
>>350440
Oh, on the top right it talks about the rapid expansion of the universe, this would have had to happen MANY times faster than the speed of light. Think from the size of a proton to the size of our solar system in a fraction of a fraction of a second. This would explain why we can only see a portion of the universe, and why it seems flat to us, when most theories call for a curved space-time.

...which is way off topic of the black hole thing, but it's still cool, and I like to blab on about cosmic crap.
>> Princess Peach !!TXp17IO0FCG
>>350440
Serially, that is the best porn I've seen all day!

Well, before we go further I wanna mention that Black Holes are neither 'infinitely small' or 'infinitely dense'. I'm being picky I know, but as density is quantified as mass/volume. The mass is quantified, especially at the lower limits (~5-10 Solar Masses). The volume is also quantified - although a bit less obviously. The contents of a black hole is matter, and not energy - else it would be massless. Matter is not pointlike (having no dimension ie. being a 'point' in space). While quarks are considered pointlike, free quarks do not exsist in nature, they must form hadrons. Which DO have a volume. Thereby validating a quantified mass and volume.

This thread is creating more questions than it is answering lol. Darn it.

I will be back with more nitpicking later no doubt.!
>> Multiverse man
>>350380
No, to me it just seems the most logical that the BB theory is correct, but the circumstances AROUND the BB is what needs figuring out.

>>350403
Yes, as stated by Resident 4chan Astronomy Expert !PaaSYgVvtw, E=mc2, meaning energy is matter, and matter is energy. This is also something I've never really "got" in school, you have heard it soooooo many times, but never understood it, or the meaning of it. I have learned most of this shit from the net becouse of personal interest.

"Cause what people don't get (referring to assfag over here) is that all our known theories, are just as good as ours. "

EXACTLY, they are all theorys. Naturally some theorys makes more sense than others, but still, too many people take theorys as FACTS, and this is totally understandable. Humans seem to have the need to have something "firm" to hold on too. A universal "fact", if you will, that "This is the way things are, end of subject".

Now I'm not gonna start a war with thoose of you who carry religious beliefs, but like I just stated, people need something to hold on to. Even if they deep down know that this belief is, well, slightly FUCKED UP.

And as I said in one of the first posts; If there is a "god", then the universe itself could be considered "god". I have also thought about the idea that we ourself in this universe is part of something "bigger". That we are simply part of a greater beeing, a "god" if you will. Yes, I am aware this is a very on-the-edge kinda thing to say, but when you think about it, it does seem plausible. Though very far out.. But I think its a cool idea anyway, that we could take in another dicussion thread.

Regarding what BH's release, I know that atleast supermassive black holes, or quasars, (centres of galaxys) radiate, or let out a lot of material. Exactly what they emit I cannot remember now. If stellar BH's have the same kind of property, I'm not sure.
>> Multiverse man
>>350423
Yes, this is what I think too. "The matter getting pulled in is added to the mass of the singularity and is trapped within the black until it's death".

>>350428
Hmm, this is very interesting. And also plausible, if Hawking radiation is true. I seem to recall that the Hawking radiation is also "just" a theory, and not yet a proven fact?

>>350437
YES, WE NEED A SCIENCE BOARD! XD

Precisely, in the KNOWN universe. Our view of the universe is quite limited, well, just because of the fact that we are part of it, lol. This is also something I tried to state in another post I came over sometime, we just dont fuckin know yet. But it just seems to unlikely that the universe shouldnt work atleast in somewhat the same way the rest of it does. From the smallest particles to galaxys, they all revolve around something. If not a BH, then my logic would imply that there should be "something" there. Or am I clinging to a hay straw here?

If there is something called infinity, then the mandelbrot theory is correct. That we can go down in the infinite into, say, a quark. And inside a quark still find a new "universe". Same outwards, again "proving" that we in our universe could be part of f.ex a bigger beeing. Far fetched, I know, but hey..

>>350438
I-just-cant-wait-till-the-LHC-gets-activated! I hope they'll find those damn elusive "higgs".
>> Multiverse man
And for peeps that dont know about the Large Hadron Collider and "higgs", watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_fJ6PMfnz2E&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQNPpeVvZ9w&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XbKZwXK-3c&feature=related

And if you wanna feel reeeeeeeeeeaaaaaaaaaaaaally small, watch this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BBsOeLcUARw
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=b8zrlOGKI2E&feature=related
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bov9M2gEgcE&feature=related

First is Powers of Ten, same is the next, just a newer version, less info. Last is size comparison from our solar system to the largest stars known. I found all these vids extremly facinating.


And as a finishing touch, I've just sent a mail to one of Norway's (where I live) top astronomers, to hopefully get some cool answers, or atleast share some of his thoughts with us.

Now my head hurts from all this thinkin so I'm gonna call it a night. XD
>> Vatican says aliens could exist Furanku
What's really funny, not actually talking about the BB or BHs, But the fact that now the vatican say that "aliens" might exist..... What kind of fucked up and stupid thing for this ppl to do? it's like ABOUT FUCKING TIME! They know religion as it is is loosing validation, because now we (the new generation) question everything, and we like to find out more... and us with ANON to our side will rule everything lol, but for real, Read the link and laugh!

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/europe/7399661.stm
>> Anonymous
Even singularities will break down.
In the entropy end of the universe (different theories, obviously), at the distant end, beyond after stars have exhausted themselves, black holes will be the radiating bodies, and they too will eventually fade.

In the end, nothingness.

Black holes don't just suck in stuff, they also radiate.

Our physics break down at the point of a singularity anyways, thought experiments using them will just give you a headache.
>> Multiverse man
Ouh, I forgot this one, LHC countdown timer, for those it should interest:

http://www.lhcountdown.com/

Teh mysteries of teh universe/s shall soon be revealed, lol.
>> Princess Peach !!TXp17IO0FCG
>>350510
Yuh they hopefully will.

http://www.risk-evaluation-forum.org/anon1.htm

Or one of those could happen, and what you've got there is a count down till the end of the world. Nostrodamus would be so proud. :D

>>350502

I can see the headlines already:
Vaticans Says Aliens Could Exsist - God May Not.

Eventually they will succumb to the power of SCIENCE. Like girls. Drunk girls.
>> Princess Peach !!TXp17IO0FCG
>>350437
P.S.
SCIENCE BOARD SCIENCE BOARD SCIENCE BOARD
:3
>> Anonymous
BB being cited as the "creation" of the known universe, may not be quite accurate. Because that's just the furthest back in time we can extrapolate to.

Who knows if the "big bang" is a cyclical process that the "universe" goes through repeatedly throughout its existence.

Or perhaps it did just happen once. We have no way of knowing.

Just be glad you are alive, and can feel sensations (including thought). That much is for certain. :P
>> goemon4
>>350438
interesting post, i guess black wholes just somewhat consume what ever gets near it. Like if the sun were to become one, and our planets orbit it, nothing would happen, but if some form of space debris would come close it would get pulled into it? No? Idk

But, to>>350658you have a point, the big bang, if true, could have just been like a massive supernova, wouldn't it be weird of our universe is actually just part of a bigger universe and just the remnants of a MASSIVE supernova? Just a though.

But regarding what many said about the shape of the universe. Isn't it safe to say, we will never know? EVEN IF it grew at the speed of light, we would never ever be able to calculate it, or even if there is an end. Cause if its a 2/3d plane/prism of some sorts, which just gets bigger, we would never see the end. IMO the shape of the universe is not one of those things we can calculate.

But i have one question, what if the earths laws about matter and such are defied out there in the universe? What if the radiation, or antimatter let off by black wholes or w/e has different rules applying to it? Wouldn't that make more sense since we are unable to properly measure or calculate it? Cause whose to say the laws apply to everything in the universe? If its endless, and ever growing, there has to be a massive amount of different things out there with its own unique qualities we have yet to see. Thus even raising more questions?

Also, science board, nao! /sci/!
>> goemon4
>>350724
A lot of Buts there, but im just saying, whos to say everything we know is enough to calculate everythingout there. With all the supernovas happening, there could be tons of unknown elements and such. (just an example)

Makes you wonder if the assumptions we are making are correct, dont it?
>> Someone needs to be put in thier place
>>349392
OP please don't act like this was your Idea I've heard it plenty of times the old exploding black hole theory is old hat.Don't get me wrong I'm glad you brought it up it's very interesting to talk about just don't act like you thought it up one day while sitting at your desk Okay.
>> Ludwig van Beefoven !ITee6CUOAs
>>350738
Hate to break it to you but with exploration and comprehension of subjects, when mountains of materials are at ones disposal, people can come to similar conclusions. Op wasn't claiming to be somebody who came up with a unique and never before considered theory, just that he through his knowledge and understanding had come upon these questions and ideas, as many have before him.

You also completely missed the subject at hand. Op didn't claim to have created in any way shape or form the concept of exploding black holes. Far from it.

Your lack of comprehension on the subject of black holes, big bang, big crunch and string theory are no doubt at a very adolescent stage.
From your eagerness to condemn original thought it appears evident that your understanding will remain in it's infancy as well.

You are the one who needs to be put in his place, as you are being arrogant and very short sighted.
>> an_orange_hrfag
>>350510
Didn't a couple scientists somewhere think that because the LHC is so awesomesauce, think it would, like, rip a time warp in space here?
Totally retarded, but pretty lulzy nonetheless.
>> an_orange_hrfag
>>350814
Well Said.

Random Other note, technically 420chan has http://disc.420chan.org/chem/ /chem/, but, meh.
It's not /sci/.
>> Multiverse man
Hello again peeps, and yet again, I am pleased to see you find this topic so interesting, and keep thinking and post your thoughts.

>>349783
I have just watched these videos, and I gotta say FUCKIN WATCH EM!!! 93mb of .rar to Mr. Ludwig, thank you, and is there moar?

>>350440
Thank you, this is awsome. Though you yourself fail when saying we fail(if you ment that in a general "allofyou" fail...). Because when watching these vid's (which is about Hawking, and the theory of everything) it further acredit my theory, which I found out is called the Wisp Theory. Which is also depicted in your image, in the upper right. Also, Mr. Hawking himself is talking (lul...) about the universe beeing created from a BH, in above mentioned videos.

I lol'ed a little while I heard that, hehe..
>> Multiverse man
>>350738
ROFL!

>>350814
Exactly, mr. Ludwig XD

>>350947
Yeah, a lot of people are concerned about how it could create a BH and swallow up the earth. Like you said, totally retarded. The energy needed to create a BH, the LHC is nowhere near that.

But on a sidenote, is that not exactly in essence what the LHC is trying to do? Create a minute BH that will last for the fraction of a second so we can study its properties?

>>350658
Your quite right, there aint much we can "do", but relax, enjoy your existence, our beautifull universe and as you say, take joy in the fact that we can feel sensations ^^

>>350724
Hahahahaehehe, I've done it, I have converted you too my way of thinking, moahahha. "Now you are thinking in Portals..." lul.

Ahh crap, I should have gotten to bed when had the chance. Now I'm just overly tired and sleepy. Time to put on some strong coffee...

BTW, Anon requesting SCIENCE BOARD!
/sci//sci//sci//sci//sci//sci//sci/
/sci//sci//sci//sci//sci//sci//sci/

(to much...?)
>> Anonymous
There's speculation of what the universe was before the Big Bang. I wonder myself now, despite what it was, how did it come to be? Assuming 'nothingness' could have existed at some point, this creates a question without any possible answer (besides a simple 'creation' theory). Perhaps there was always matter. Even in a "God did it" arrangement, that simply brings up the same exact questions. In either case, "Something" has always existed, or manifested itself from pure nothingness. That just makes my head hurt...
>> Anonymous
>>351023
The problem with your statements is you assumption of an "always." If the fabric of spacetime is to be taken at face value (which it is,) without space there can be no time and vice versa. Therefore, before the big bang there was no time, because there was no space. The spacetime continuum is a direct consequence of the big bang, and therefore there wasn't a "before" the big bang, strictly speaking. I'm tired so sorry if this post is redundant or rambles, haha.
>> Princess Peach !!TXp17IO0FCG
>>351042

Intersting, but. While space, and time are both dimensions, and are required for the exsistence of much of our universe, it has never been proven if they are absolute. For example, there is a theory bouncing around called Hyper Time theory. Where there is a second dimension of time, used to try and explain some of the quirkyness of neutrinos.

The creation of space and time, at the big bang, meerely created the 4D world in a format we can read. If you delve into string theory, with it's 26 Bosonic dimensions, there is alot more space and time, than we could ever visualise, explain, or even relate to.

>>349392
And in relation to your earliest post, Multiverse Man, I am unsure whether BH can even explode at all (I think this has being pointed out earlier). However, I'm not saying they can't, I'm trying to imagine a way that they could. The 'hard and fast' rules do not apply to, still, undiscovered celestial objects.
>> Anonymous
Your picture crashed my computer.
>> Anonymous
>>351133
Okay, from what I can tell from the Hawking torrents, which is reqired by you ALL to see before we move on, is that the singularity that was the BB, was the universe as we know it, compacted to the size of a proton or sumthing. How big it was exactly doesnt really matter, the fact of the matter is that you could have put the entire universe that is compressed in this singularity in your pocket. Now thats dense...

Further, they talk about how this could be, in regards to how our known laws would affect it, I belive it was the 4 laws, general relativity, quantum mechanics, and the two nuclear forces (Im in bed with the laptop now so I dont have the vids available for crossrefrencing) and how they in this singularity have merged to become one "super-law". I am not even sure where Im going with this, but I guess some of this speculation could explain a few things, though also create a lot more questions.

I dont wanna come off as a besserwisser, but after watching these vids, I find that many of the ideas they have come up with, I have thought of before without any deep knowledge of the subject. And I find it funny that I have a relative closeness to how these people think about things. ^^

Like I said, in the first show they talk about how the BB could have came from a BH, like posted in the first post. I find this rather interesting. Some of the ideas I had has been shattered and cracked, and some of my thoughts need resructuring, but still.
>> Multiverse man
They also talk about this string theory. And this I found very interesting. Because this in essence merge Einsteins theory of relativity with quantum mechanics, something Hawking has been trying to figure out. In this they talked about 11 dimensions, not 26, so please explain further. Are there "infinite" dimensions?

Nomatter what though, I still find this subject extremly interesting. And I wish I could have a much deeper understanding of it.

http://www.mininova.org/get/1300768
http://www.mininova.org/get/1300764

They are well seeded. Did not take 10 min even, on 5mb line.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
I am currently reading this http://www.chapters.indigo.ca/books/WHOLE-SHEBANG-State-Universe-Report-Timothy-Ferris/9780684838618
-item.html?ref=Search+Books%3a+%2527the+whole+shebang%2527
it's awesome, I've learned a lot about the current beliefs on the origin of the university. I highly recommend it.
>> Anonymous
>>351473

which "university" my that be...
>> Princess Peach !!TXp17IO0FCG
>>351463

Chances are you would, most of the information about the Big Bang is pretty much hot-topic, and alot of the science is buzz-word, coupled with an ounce of logic and you've got a recipe for subliminal BB theories. Soft-Determinism my friend. :D Having said that, you're probably very analytical, to get that far. My advice: study Physics.

(I think I know what you're talking about: The laws are Quantum Chromodynamics, Quantum Electrodynamics, Electroweak and Special Relativity, I believe, which they are trying to merge in the Grand Unification Theory. Where the boundaries between the forces break down and everything exsists as elementary particles as they were approximately 10^-35 seconds after the Big Bang.)

>>351465

'String Theory' is still in it's infancy, and thusly there are many different takes, outlooks, and compatriots on and of the theory, for example Membrane Theory, and Supersymmetry. Bosonic String Theory is meerly another example, and contains many more dimensions than 'regular' String Theory - which has 11.

It is popssible there are infinite dimensions, I think. I'm not sure. I think it has something to do with Multiverse theory. But to put it causticly - the other 5 (or 20, or however many) dimensions exsist, to make the maths work - there theories come afterwards. God Love Theoretical Physicists.
>> Princess Peach !!TXp17IO0FCG
>>351473
>>351475

Epic luls.
>> Anonymous
     File :-(, x)
>>351477
Master Heim's selector calculus and take us to the stars.
>> Anonymous
>>351475
opps...i meant universe my bad
>> Anonymous
>>349392
well there are things called white holes too (theoretically), so my believe is that so many BH's in a previous universe combines that it reached a maximum capacity and it turned into a white hole, almost infinitely producing matter
>> Answer Anonymous
You are all correct, the Universe is everything and nothing.