only one big bang?

[L]

hey guys, i haven't been active on VT for a while but i recently came up with an idea and i wanted to see what you think of it.

this is just a hypothesis, so i'd be happy to be proven wrong, but my idea is that our big bang is only a tiny speck in the universe, and there could be many (possibly even an infinite number of) similar big bangs that have occurred or are occurring all around the universe. i mean come on people, don't be so closed minded as to think that ours was the ONLY big bang... this is like the earth being the center of the universe all over again!

thoughts? :D

(just btw, sorry for being lazy and copy pasting this from when i wrote it on youtube :P)

[embers]

That doesn't seem very likely - there can't be other big bangs in the universe because the Big Bang was event of the universe's creation. I can't explain it too well, so I'll just give you this (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/showpost.php?p=1132618&postcount=1701).

[Magus]

Big Bang never happened:

http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/picture.php?albumid=1487&pictureid=16061

[dead]

I was too lazy to explain so here is google
http://s4.zetaboards.com/science/topic/7833854/1/

[L]

Big Bang never happened:

image (http://www.virtualteen.org/forums/picture.php?albumid=1487&pictureid=16061)

although i lack any in depth understanding, i think i can help with this. there is no 'wall' that separates the universe from the void, the hypothetical wall is the rate which light is expanding, and because nothing can go faster than the speed of light, this wall can never be crossed. beyond this wall, i would assume, is infinite empty space.

[Magus]

although i lack any in depth understanding, i think i can help with this. there is no 'wall' that separates the universe from the void, the hypothetical wall is the rate which light is expanding, and because nothing can go faster than the speed of light, this wall can never be crossed. beyond this wall, i would assume, is infinite empty space.When the wall. But, how do you know it's infinite? I would be bold and say indefinite or innumerable, but not infinite.

[bobby1273]

ok so to the original poster. Many big bangs in the same universe would be impossible. Why, because a big bang would start off with a singularity (a point with no dimensions and infinite mass [and so energy since mass is a form of energy]). Also if there was a singularity in the universe, the singularity would also be in time and space.Since it has an infinite mass it also has an infinite density and so would have an infinite time dilation, meaning that it would basically be frozen in time and so wouldn't be able to expand. Also since it has infinite mass it would have an infinite gravity, causing all the universe to collapse in on it; which the universe is not doing but instead is expanding (shown by the red shift). Oh and finally for a singularity to have infinite mass the entire universe would have to be part of it.

Its a nice idea even though it couldn't happen.

@L Theoretically (mathematically only) you can get particles that travel faster than the speed of light (but can never travel below it) called Tachions (i think that's spelt right).

@Electric Nomad I would agree with you that the universe is not infinite, since its shape is not linear and flat. I go by the theory that it is a donut shape (though is gonna be more complex than that because of other dimensions) which would mean as the universe expanded it would expand into its self and so cannot be infinite.

[MykeSoBe]

This subject has been on my mind for years. I've always thought, there could be more universes outside of our own. What would happen to an organism if it ever bothered to sneak beyond the "limits" of our universe, neverminding that would never be possible because we couldn't attain beyond light speed? So many questions!

[Magus]

ok so to the original poster. Many big bangs in the same universe would be impossible. Why, because a big bang would start off with a singularity (a point with no dimensions and infinite mass [and so energy since mass is a form of energy])Mass is a unit and relates to gravity; not a form of energy.

And do you know what actually that(singularity) means? It means it was nothing. Yes, it was a point, but it was nothing at all.

@Electric Nomad I would agree with you that the universe is not infinite, since its shape is not linear and flat. I go by the theory that it is a donut shape (though is gonna be more complex than that because of other dimensions) which would mean as the universe expanded it would expand into its self and so cannot be infinite.This is beyond our scope of understanding, as it is still a debate among Mathematicians, Cosmologist and Astrophysicist on what the shape the universe actually have.

[RoseyCadaver]

I'm not all into astronomy and space time continuum thingy,but I like the Crunch theory,it has its flaws,but seems to make the most sense to me.

[bobby1273]

Mass is a unit and relates to gravity; not a form of energy.

Mass is not a unit, it has many units, the SI unit is for it is the kg. Mass relates to energy and space-time (and so also gravity) Mass is a form of energy, if it wasn't then nuclear power would not work. In fission and fusion some mass is converted into energy. For it to be able to be converted into energy it must firstly be a form of energy (you know how heat energy can be converted into electrical energy etc). So nuclear power and bombs are proof of this as is the very existance of stars, the wave-particle duality of every particle ever in existance (shown by the De Broglie wavelength theory and equation, the fact that when you speed up a particle to relitivistic speeds you in put energy and the particle gains mass (the energy has to in to mass by conservation laws) and because you can create particles by an input of energy (energy conservation again). Oh and finally the famous mass energy equivelence equation e=mc^2


And do you know what actually that(singularity) means? It means it was nothing. Yes, it was a point, but it was nothing at all.


A singularity is a point which has no dimensions but infinite energy and mass, which means it has to be something, and that is what a university lecturer has said in a talk iv been in before (she was Queen Mary in England). I know its hard to imagine


This is beyond our scope of understanding, as it is still a debate among Mathematicians, Cosmologist and Astrophysicist on what the shape the universe actually have.


It is generally accepted that if you travel in one direction and keep going for ever you will end up where you began. If you use this and some thought (its hard to explain for me especially when not in person so i won't explain but you can Google it) you end up with a donut shaped universe. This only applies to the 3 length dimensions (x y and z) which is why it is more complex than that because other dimensions would most likely have a different shape.

[Commander Thor]

Mass is not a unit, it has many units, the SI unit is for it is the kg. Mass relates to energy and space-time (and so also gravity) Mass is a form of energy, if it wasn't then nuclear power would not work. In fission and fusion some mass is converted into energy. For it to be able to be converted into energy it must firstly be a form of energy (you know how heat energy can be converted into electrical energy etc). So nuclear power and bombs are proof of this as is the very existance of stars, the wave-particle duality of every particle ever in existance (shown by the De Broglie wavelength theory and equation, the fact that when you speed up a particle to relitivistic speeds you in put energy and the particle gains mass (the energy has to in to mass by conservation laws) and because you can create particles by an input of energy (energy conservation again). Oh and finally the famous mass energy equivelence equation e=mc^2

Mass is not a form of energy.
Matter is a form of energy.
Mass simply describes an object (Made of matter). Mass itself is not a form of anything. Mass is a measurement, nothing more.

Get your terms straight yo. ;)

From Encarta Dictionary:
Mass: the property of an object that is a measure of its inertia, the amount of matter it contains, and its influence in a gravitational field.
Matter: the material substance of the universe that has mass, occupies space, and is convertible to energy

[Magus]

Mass is not a form of energy.
Matter is a form of energy.
Mass simply describes an object (Made of matter). Mass itself is not a form of anything. Mass is a measurement, nothing more.

Get your terms straight yo. ;)

From Encarta Dictionary:Thank you. :yeah:
A singularity is a point which has no dimensions but infinite energy and mass, which means it has to be something, and that is what a university lecturer has said in a talk iv been in before (she was Queen Mary in England). I know its hard to imagineHas no dimension but an infinite mass. That's very hard to the mind.

It is generally accepted that if you travel in one direction and keep going for ever you will end up where you began. If you use this and some thought (its hard to explain for me especially when not in person so i won't explain but you can Google it) you end up with a donut shaped universe. This only applies to the 3 length dimensions (x y and z) which is why it is more complex than that because other dimensions would most likely have a different shape.
Agreed playah. It's so easily digested after I have googled it.

http://www.daviddarling.info/images/Banach-Tarski_paradox.png

[Dogrules23]

The Many Worlds Theory explains this.

[ImCoolBeans]

Please don't bump old threads :locked: