The expansion of the Universe and analysis of our Universe

Jul 20, 2020
2
1
15
Greetings,

First of all, I am not a scientist. Nor do I work in the scientific field...If this is something that bothers you, you can leave right now if you wish to have insights only from experts.

However all I can say is that I think, analyze and read a lot about science, space, nuclear science, and technology since more than 30 years. And about computer science too.

I just read about the Sloan Digital Sky Survey (SDSS) release of the most precise and accurate 3D map of our Universe.

It is just amazing.

I can't help myself but compare the origin of the Universe (Big Bang?) and its expansion to a nuclear explosion....

I will structure my analysis on 2 aspects

1/ Similarity of the Big Bang and expansion of our Universe with a nuclear explosion

2/ Origins of this explosion



1/ leads to 2/, so if you wish to better understand my ideas, please read 1/ first!


1/ Similarity of the Big Bang and expansion of our Universe with a nuclear explosion

A nuclear explosion, whether it be from an atomic bomb or hydrogen bomb is very similar in nature: a very fast chain reaction that delivers an inconmensurable amount of energy, radiations , light . And on Earth, a shockwave.

It bursts in 360° degrees direction and loses of its kinetic energy and power exponentially with distance.

It can't keep expanding however due to our atmosphere and friction.

Now what is the Big Bang? We only know that it creates the Time dimension and was an extremely important "explosion" (if we can call it this way) that created space we have around us, and gravity.

Dark matter was also created, and it is stille a great topic and still a total mystery almost to us. (it is the key to understanding the origin of our Universe I believe).

I see an almost exact pattern between the Big Bang and a nuclear explosion.

That's it for the general idea

-> Explosion-> Release of a lot of energy with byproducts > Expansion in all directions > Eventually diminution of expansion speed-> Reaching 0 velocity and stop.



2/Origins of this explosion


That's where my ideas become less based on knowledge and more on theoretization and projections.


Amongst the possible origins of our Universe there are:

A/ Created by God
B/ Created by Aliens
C/ Created by a Random set of events (aha! Interesting!)
D/ A continuation of another Universe


I don't believe in A/, so I won't dwell into this

For B/, would it be possible that an advanced Alien species accidentally triggered a massive explosion that they couldn't control , and that it created the Big Band and our Universe? In that case we would be a byproduct, non intentional result of a failed experiment

Another possibility is a war between 2 Alien races , and something happened that resulted in our Universe...Put the black matter into the equation, and it may explain a few things...

Yet another possibility that has been explored by sci-fi authors is that our Universe is a virtual simulation created by Aliens and they are observing how we react and how the Universe unfolds...So the randomness induced would be artifical indeed...See "Interstellar" movie for more insights...

As for C/, it is possible...No probable cause, just random events....

D/ In a multiverse , there are billions of Universes next to each others on different dimensions. Maybe that 2 Universes collided, which resultest in the Big Band and our Universe.


Conclusion;

So that's it for today. I just wanted to make you think about phenomenons we observe and created on Earth that depict on a much smaller space what happens on a cosmological level....

I firmly believe without being able to demonstrate it, that a Big Crunch is possible: a rapid contraction of our Universe, that will lead to another Big Bang...Our ability to travel between Universes could be through wormholes..And also understanding all about dark matter could enable us to travel into the Universe at blazing speeds.
 
Last edited:
Jun 1, 2020
585
366
760
There are some differences between a nuclear explosion and the BB first event.
1) Space expansion -- bombs explode into space, BB was an explosion of space containing incredible amounts of energy.
2) Isotropy -- quantum events, and other things like bomb craftmanship, in an explosion will not produce a perfect or near perfect uniform wave of energy to propagate. BB is isotropic to about 1 part per 100,000, IIRC. Nuclear explosions are designed for destruction not to produce new matter.
3) A nuclear explosion is far too wimpy in comparison to the first instance.
4) Matter comes from BB, but a nuclear explosion eliminates some matter (converts to energy).
5) The BB event, somehow, gave us certain values for forces and parameters critical to allow stars to form, etc. Nuclear bombs won't change any one of them.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe
Nov 19, 2019
18
4
15
I am not a scientist either, but I have my opinion about the universe. In a nutshell, the universe is both something and nothing. The universe/nature has no time point of its existence. If there was only nothing, could we find out when nothing happened? It doesn't make sense, isn't it? It is the same with something, because Nothing cannot create Something, and Something cannot turn into Nothing. In a word, there was no big bang. So there was no beginning of the universe. The pre-material universe, about 14 billion years ago, consisted exclusively of ether (or pre-matter). Matter, on the other hand, was created as a result of the accidental condensation of the ether which initiated the avalanche formation of matter or the complex form of ether (which is structurally identical to what we call the magnetic field). The first element to emerge was hydrogen, and from it began to form countless thickening clouds that gave rise to the evolution of stars. The universe does not expand and is finite. The masses of ether and matter have balanced, proof of this is the existence of gravity.
 
Mar 19, 2020
433
479
560
Total unsupported todswaddle!
For those of you unfamiliar with the term, "todswaddle" is a highly technical, scientific description of notions, concepts or theories that have no foundation whatsoever in reality.

That does not mean they do not exist. It simply means they do not exist in reality.

Different dimensions and stuff like that may not be deterred by todswaddle, so you have to take that into consideration when evaluating simple and/or complex aspects of cosmology, and more importantly, the evolution of the dung beetle.
 
Jun 1, 2020
585
366
760
For those of you unfamiliar with the term, "todswaddle" is a highly technical, scientific description of notions, concepts or theories that have no foundation whatsoever in reality.

That does not mean they do not exist. It simply means they do not exist in reality.

Different dimensions and stuff like that may not be deterred by todswaddle, so you have to take that into consideration when evaluating simple and/or complex aspects of cosmology, and more importantly, the evolution of the dung beetle.
Thanks, I inferred its meaning as somewhere between horse feathers and word salad. I enjoy terms whose expressions match their meanings, not dissimilar to comic book expressions. :)
 
  • Like
Reactions: Catastrophe
D... void space had potential energy.
Void space potential energy = quantum fluctuation.
Quantum fluctuation E balance= mass/energy of big bang.
Interaction between other universes cannibalism/collision=big bang

Reason=no reason other than quirk of nature that void space had potential energy.

JMO
 
Feb 18, 2020
1,110
820
1,570
"The expansion of the Universe and analysis of our Universe"

Sadly the discussion did not include the (IMHO) totally unwarranted assumption that just because something grows larger in a non-linear fashion (vide inflation) then it is admissible to extrapolate it backwords in a totally linear manner.

Especially when that "something" is the Universe.

Cat :)
 

ASK THE COMMUNITY

Latest posts