could there be a giga black hole?

[mott]

when powerful stars go super nova they leave behind black holes or pulsars or some other super gravitational body. could the big band have left such a theing behind only much much more powerful?? if it did wouldnt it be beyond were hubble can see. in the blackness beyond the most distant galaxys. <br /> also could we be seeing only half our universe through hubble. when something explodes it normally goes in all directions, and what ive seen from the hubble pictures we see a spot where they think the big bang may have started (earliest parts of the universe) what is beyond it? the other half???

 

[alokmohan]

At least hubble cant go upto that point.Whether theoritically giga black hole is possible is another thing.

 

[nexium]

Giga means 1000 times 1000 times 1000 = one thousand times a million. Black holes are measured in solar mass = the mass of our sun. It is thought that the center of some galaxys, including the one we live in, have a black hole with about that much mass. It is thought that these black holes formed after the Universe cooled enough to become transparent to photons, but tiny low mass black holes may have formed earlier in the big bang. Low mass black holes evaporate rapidly, but some of them may have eaten enough mass to become big inspite of the loss. The great attractor could be many giga solar mass, and others may be beyond the visable Universe which may have lots more volume than what we can see due to the expansion which occured occured early in the big bang. Please embellish, comment and/or refute. Neil

 

[mott]

what im kinda wondering is: when the big bang occured what in theory was left behind?? when there is a inplosion isnt some of the matter compessed in the center i know when the big bang occured it was unlike any explosion/inplosion know but in theory could there be a super sized black hole left behind or did all the matter get expelled??

 

[meteo]

Your thinking three dimensionally. The big bang has no three-dimensional center. Imagine we lived in a two dimensional universe on the surface of a balloon; as that balloon expands there is no center from the view of someone in that two dimensional universe, as the balloon expands in a third dimension (outward). Now add a dimension to everything in this scenario. Now we are a three dimensional universe on a three dimensional "surface" for lack of a better term expanding into a higher dimension, there is no center of the explosion from someone in the threedimensional universes point of view. This is why you couldn't hop in a spaceship and fly to ground-zero of the big bang; there is no ground-zero from a three-dimensional point of view.

 

[mott]

but there is a center somewhere we just dont know where??

 

[meteo]

Nope no center, using the ballon analogy where is the center of a baloon's surface? The balloon analogy is inacurate because I think the consensus now is the universe is flat. The balloon helps to visualize the higher dimensions. If there was a center the background radiation wouldn't be uniform.

 

[mott]

what if??? we are looking at this the wrong way? what if the big bang is in reverse but we are traveling through time backwards?? im just pulling this out of what little i know about time, and a bit on thermodynamics... kinda a big crunch in reverse and the universe started in super deep space. and the way we see time is reversed so we are heading to the begining?? seems weird but just somthing i just thought of??

 

[nexium]

There may be a trillion explanations of how our Univese came to be. Generally you need letters after your name to get a hearing from the the main stream astronomers. Some expert may be offering an explaination similar to yours. The fact I have not heard it is almost irrelevent as I learned half of what I know about astronomy on space.com, so I am not a leading expert on any subject. Neil