The Great Attractor - Mutiverse Theory

[kmarinas86]

Image Coming Up. Explanation later. <br /><br />/* image approved -- Leovinus */

 

[kmarinas86]

The Great Attractor of our universe could be one of many which together with the galaxies that revolve around them, are the composition of a particle of a larger mutiverse. In the picture above, the Great Attactor is within the black area called a quark, while outside the quark is a green layer, the shell of this round quark. Beyond that is space outside this quark which is highlighted by the sky blue color on the top. The Big Bang itself, could be a "mass ejection" of matter from the Great Attractor. These Great Mass Ejections occur over billions and trillions of years. Matter that comes back to the Great Attractor is broken down into smaller particles which can form new hydrogen atoms. The recycling of matter would enable for this tiny universe within a universe to give birth to many stars over many millions and billions of eons.

 

[nacnud]

That all very nice but the latest studies of the rate of expansion of the universe show that the current expansion is accelerating. In order for there to be a big crunch the rate of expansion should be decelerating. Invoking a larger multiverse and great attractors is no more than speculation, are there any testable predictions of this model that are different from current theories? <br /><br />The study of extra galactic supernova is documented in Supernovae, Dark Energy, and the Accelerating Universe, an article from Physics Today.

 

[Leovinus]

Maybe time is expanding along with space so it only *seems* that space expansion is accelerating. After all, time is a component of accelleration. <div class="Discussion_UserSignature"> </div>

 

[kmarinas86]

<font color="yellow">The latest studies of the rate of expansion of the universe show that the current expansion is accelerating. In order for there to be a big crunch the rate of expansion should be decelerating. </font><br /><br />Even the blue galaxies of the young universe have a redshift. What maybe causing this is the "Gravitational" redshift as the photons move away from these young galaxies and towards the Milky Way. The rate of expansion is accelerating. If that's true, then the galaxies beyond our local cluster(s) are being pulled more by the Great Attractor... possibly in either direction (towards the point of the Big Bang or the Big Crunch). All other redshift could be explained by the expansion between between congregations of superclusters (and the "axons" between the "neuron" like clusters). As time goes by, the galaxies are attracted to the axons and "neurons", and therefore, are increasing the space beween the neuron and the size of the "neurons" themselves.<br /><br /><font color="yellow">Invoking a larger multiverse and great attractors is no more than speculation, are there any testable predictions of this model that are different from current theories?</font><br /><br />A bigger telescope and more reliable tests would come in handy. Though we cannot detect this Great Attractor directly, continued measurement of the cosmos will enable us to better understand the flow and change of the universe and to theorize what kind of forces may be acting upon them.

 

[kmarinas86]

<font color="yellow">The Great Attractor of our universe could be one of many which together with the galaxies that revolve around them, are the composition of a particle of a larger mutiverse. In the picture above, the Great Attactor is within the black area called a quark, while outside the quark is a green layer, the shell of this round quark. Beyond that is space outside this quark which is highlighted by the sky blue color on the top. The Big Bang itself, could be a "mass ejection" of matter from the Great Attractor. These Great Mass Ejections occur over billions and trillions of years. Matter that comes back to the Great Attractor is broken down into smaller particles which can form new hydrogen atoms. The recycling of matter would enable for this tiny universe within a universe to give birth to many stars over many millions and billions of eons.</font><br /><br />New galaxy matter moves from the Great Attractor at greater speeds than older matter. After ejections, the galaxy matter decelerates. The redshift of these old galaxies is explained by the graviational pull of the Great Attractor. Without a Gravitational Redshift greater than the Doppler Blueshift, the sum would be a blueshift "which has not been observed". Galaxies moving parallel with the Milky Way and tangent to the Great Attractor are red shifted. The closer a galaxy, which is moving tangent to the Great Attractor, is to the Great Attractor itself - the more it accelerates towards the Great Attractor (which explains the redshift of galaxies which were formed at the same time). Galaxies which are composed of older matter are later attracted by the Great Attractor on the "Big Crunch" side. The acceleration force towards the Great Attractor is always positive, and where the youngest and oldest galaxies are, there is a greater decceleration of the velocity from the Great Attractor. At the mass ejection (Big Bang) the velocity (from the Great Attractor) is greatest. This veloci

 

[kmarinas86]

I just realized that I spelled Mutiverse instead of Multiverse.

 

[kmarinas86]

New graphic of the Cyclical Multiverse Theory

 

[5stone10]

I've never really heard any legitimate arguments in which 'The Great Attractor' would be a precursor to a form of 'Multiple Universes'.

 

[kmarinas86]

Another new graphic with stars showing how much the light has shifted by the time it reaches certain points of the universe.