# In the beginning

Status
Not open for further replies.
F

#### Fallingstar1971

##### Guest
Thoughts about the big bang

First, most of us are familar with the example of resting a bowling ball on a trampoline or rubber sheet to demonstrate the examples of massive objects and there impact on spacetime. This is the setting for one of my questions.

Now, with no object on the surface, it is flat.

If I put a heavy enough object on the surface it will stretch to the ground. The surface stretches because the outside edges are anchored to springs. What force acts as these springs in the actual universe. What force prevents everything from being pulled into black holes? Since I do not know the name of this force, for now I will call it "force X"

Now, for the rest of it.

For this, lets think of the trampoline again as the surface of space. Space separate from time. Just a flat smooth surface.

Now, take all the matter in our universe and condense it to one point. The primeval "particle".

Now take that one tiny superdense object and place it on the surface of space. What happens to the fabric?

If there truly is a "force X" anchoring space, then the object should pull the fabric, change the fabric (time is born, time is change) and warp it into a funnel shape in the same way a black hole would. If you picture a grid on this "fabric" the grid would be stretched (or inflated)

Now accelerate this "particle" to the speed of light.

If it were moving at lightspeed and impacted space then the area of the funnel would have instantly appeared and stretched (expanded) to a very big size at nearly the speed of light (some energy would be absorbed I would think during the impact with space)

So the particle slows down a bit. Perhaps "stuff" (quarks, elementary particles, ect) get shaken loose from the impact and fall onto "space" anchoring to it due to its own minute (in comparison to the primeval particle) gravity. Or perhaps everything we know is simply residue from the "evaporation" of this particle with the visible Universe trailing behind it like the tail of a 15 billion year old comet. As galaxies begin to form, their central black holes counteract the gravity of the primeval particle and holds them stationary in space. The primeval particle continues to race away at nearly lightspeed dragging space along behind it dragging that grid into bigger and bigger squares. So in a sense its not the galaxies themselves that are moving away, the very fabric of space is being stretched. So as long as this particle is moving, space will continue to "grow" or "expand" as it stretches. All the missing matter was never missing. It still bunched up in the primeval particle. We wont even be able to see "most" of it since its all accelerating away at nearly light speed.

However, at some point this primeval particle should evaporate to the point where it is no longer able to warp space. The funnel would then get shallower and shallower until it dissipated all together. This could cause the now severely stretched out space to "rebound" shrinking in size as the grid gets smaller and smaller. As the area gets smaller, the center accelerates due to conserving momentum and once it reaches a certain mass and speed the process starts up again.

Could force X be anti-gravity? (Anti-Graviton?) Could that be enough to anchor space itself?

Comments?

Star

O

#### origin

##### Guest
Comments?
This is just idle conjecture that gets you no where. It is kind of fun to let your mind "free float" and come up with ideas based on half understood principles of physics but it just doesn't really get you anywhere. Your efforts would be much more fruitful if you were to take some actual physics courses.

M

#### MeteorWayne

##### Guest
Yeah, this doesn't seem destined to hang out long in Physics. We shall see.

Q

#### quantumnumber

##### Guest
"What force prevents everything from being pulled into black holes?"

The gravitational pull of a black hole is not strong enough to pull everything into it.

"Now, take all the matter in our universe and condense it to one point. The primeval "particle".

Now take that one tiny superdense object and place it on the surface of space. What happens to the fabric?"

How can you have all the matter in our universe condensed into one point if you put it on the surface of space? The surface of space would contain matter which would be a part of our universe, wouldn't it? No offense but I am quite confused :? or maybe it is just me, I honestly have much to learn about space and physics.

S

#### SpeedFreek

##### Guest
Fallingstar1971":l84yfzh2 said:
For this, lets think of the trampoline again as the surface of space. Space separate from time. Just a flat smooth surface.

Now, take all the matter in our universe and condense it to one point. The primeval "particle".

Now take that one tiny superdense object and place it on the surface of space. What happens to the fabric?
All the fabric is inside that superdense object, at that time.

P

#### PhantomMenace

##### Guest
It is an interesting thought, but I agree with SpeedFreak
SpeedFreek":3buv6vjd said:
Fallingstar1971":3buv6vjd said:
For this, lets think of the trampoline again as the surface of space. Space separate from time. Just a flat smooth surface.

Now, take all the matter in our universe and condense it to one point. The primeval "particle".

Now take that one tiny superdense object and place it on the surface of space. What happens to the fabric?
All the fabric is inside that superdense object, at that time.
and if, for whatever crazy reason, the fabric was previously in existance before the superdense object was somehow placed on the surface (i think) the question would rest more on why the fabric was there to begin with, rather than if the said senario could explain anti-gravity and such. Just some thoughts! :idea:

C

#### cloud018

##### Guest
Nice thread to learn more on forces. Is there any thread to learn on biology.

S

#### SpeedFreek

##### Guest
cloud018":1vix76wr said:
Nice thread to learn more on forces. Is there any thread to learn on biology.
You want the LiveScience forums, which are all part of the same Imaginova group as Space.com, so you can use the same login there as you do here - you are already a member!

http://www.livescience.com/common/forums/

R

#### ramparts

##### Guest
One thing: you're taking the bowling ball/rubber sheet analogy a bit too far. That's just a helpful image used to explain how gravity works in general relativity, not an exact model. So there is no "Force X" that holds spacetime up - just spacetime, and it can curve. The rubber sheet (which serves as a 2D analogy to 4D spacetime) just shows you what curvature looks like.

More advanced treatment : the bowling ball analogy has a 2-dimensional rubber sheet embedded in our regular 3-dimensional space (or 4-dimensional spacetime), but mathematically our 4D spacetime doesn't need to be embedded in a similar higher-dimensional space. The springs that the OP was talking about are part of that higher dimensional embedding, since rubber sheets can't really possess so-called "intrinsic curvature" the same way spacetime does. So that's probably the best reason the analogy fails in the OP's question: the springs, as part of the higher dimensional embedding, are part of the "backstory" of the analogy that actually doesn't map in any way to GR.

G

#### Giulio

##### Guest
As I understand it, all the matter in the universe and space was condensed into a single point. The "big bang" was not so much a bang as it was an expansion. And it was space (the fabric) that expanded, and is still expanding today. So in essence, the OP's premise that all of space should get sucked into a black hole is actually the beginning point when everything was condensed into one "singularity".

At a certain distance from a singularity, the escape velocity drops to the speed of light. This distance is known as the Schwarzschild radius, in honor of Karl Schwarzschild, who first defined it. This radius depends on the mass of the black hole. For a black hole as massive as the Sun, the radius is about two miles (3 km). For every extra solar mass, the radius increases by two miles. So even a one billion solar mass black hole would have a Schwarzschild radius of about 2 billion miles. Just one light year is 5,865,696,000,000 miles! Granted everything doesn't travel at the speed of light. But I would think that beyond a couple light years or so from even a very large singularity, space and matter would hardly even feel its presence, (gravitationally speaking) let alone get sucked into it.

For this purpose, instead of thinking of space as a fabric, think of a black hole as the mouth or nozzle of a shop vac. If you put your hand close to it, it grabs you readily. But if you keep your hand away just a little bit, you hardly feel it's suction. And it certainly isn't going to suck up the house and all the air on the planet!

O

#### OmegaOm

##### Guest
We all know space time is a complicated subject to understand whole heartedly in the mind. I am no physics expert, and I assume that no one here is either. If you were, you would not be wasting your time here, unless it was your destiny to teach the ignorant. I do not think even the physicists understand it, or else we would have a unified theory.
That said, I do not see anything wrong in idle speculation of ideas that do not make sense with modern physics. This is where maverick ideas can break through. Revolutions in science happen with ideas that are against the norm. What is important is that everybody keeps thinking and debating and keeping an open mind.

I think the OP had a good point. Basically, what is space time? Newton explained the force of gravity. Einstein told us what gravity was (matter/energy and space-time). But what is space-time literally, not mathematically? If matter can curve space-time, space-time must have a restrictive force X, like the Op said or else matter should just fall through or not effect it at all. If matter is curving space-time, what is this space-time that matter is curving? Space-time does show the effects of anti-gravity. Either space-time exists and has physical properties more than what relativity tells us or gravity is caused by the theoretical partical of mass, the graviton and space-time does not curve.

One of my most accepted models of our universe is that, our universe is like a bubble in a glass of ginger ale. There are many bubbles in this multiverse. The galaxies we see float on top of one of these bubbles. We can not go into the bubble or leave it. At least not yet. They are other dimensions. IF this model of the multiverse is true. Then the bubble is our space-time, and has a force of repulsion to the mass that rest on it. The OP's force X can be a property of the bubble.

PS for (Giulio)--- remember are debate about God, about the Big-Bang- you said it is contradictory in physics of getting something from nothing. If the bubble theory is true, then that nothing is in the Ginger-Ale, We just have to find out where the Ginger-Ale came from and so on and so on and so on. The meaning of Life is to Understand the Universe or Mutliverse. We will never understand it completely. But if we do,, then we will know God. Only Then.

G

#### Giulio

##### Guest
If matter is curving space-time, what is this space-time that matter is curving?
Yes, but i think you are all taking the analogies used by scientists and confusing them with reality.
Space is a void filled to varying degrees with matter and energy.
Time is a measure of the decay of that matter and energy.
Gravity bends light and our "perception" of space-time. Space-time is not "really" a fabric or a medium of any sort. There is nothing there to bend. Space and time are merely coordinates. Spacial and temporal, respectively. Without matter and energy, space would be a void. It would be a "nothing". You could still point to a place in space, but there would be nothing there. But you can't curve nothing. You all get the concept of nothing right? Gravity is a force, an energy, which acts upon other forces and energies. When scientists speak of gravity wells, they don't really mean that there is a "well" or a hole in space. All of space is one giant hole if you want to look at it that way. They are refering to the attractive force of gravity on other matter/energies. There was another thread on this: How can a black hole form if time stops before it gets a chance to become a black hole? or something like that. But the answer is simple if we look at it like this. Time isn't really stopping it is just our perception of it that has been effected or else there would be no black holes. Because gravity cannot touch time or space. It is just an illusion. It is the light that is being effected creating the illusion. Remember that we are creatures of just a certain set of senses. Even the sensors we create are just an extention of those senses. There is no other side of a black hole, because ther is no hole. Or else there would be white "holes" spewing matter all over the universe. A black hole is just a strong gravity field/force bending/distorting or capturing light-energy and matter. The big bang was an expansion of this void(space) which contains our universe(matter and energy). The question remains - What is it expanding into? What is the medium within which this void resides? Here is where M-theory begins. But I am way too tired to get into that right now! Suffice it to say that the big bang was the beginning of our universe as we know it today, but not the "beginning" of existance as far as the rest of existance is concerned. I know that I have strayed far from main stream theory here, but I'm really tired and I have to get some sleep now :lol: I will post again tomorrow after I read all the jokes about what I've said.

Status
Not open for further replies.