weird theory about singularities

[j_rankin]

The universe is a singularity.

Black holes are singularities.

If a black hole is like a gravity well that becomes so dense that it is a singularity, then perhaps it is like a well that reaches down to a vast reservoir of space.

if you were to pump water into a well, then usually once enough water was pumped in, the well would overflow (comparable to a supernova). But if water was pumped into the well hard enough and fast enough, then the bottom of the well would keep getting deeper and deeper until it reached the centre of the earth. Any water being further pumped into the well would then add to the overall mass of earth's core, and if water kept getting pumped in, then the earth would expand, quicker and quicker as more and more water got pumped in.

Perhaps black holes do the same but with space.

Everyone take your hats off cos i think i've solved it =P

 

[MeteorWayne]

The universe is a singularity.

Black holes are singularities.

No, and no reason to thins so. Giime a "U"

If a black hole is like a gravity well that becomes so dense that it is a singularity, then perhaps it is like a well that reaches down to a vast reservoir of space.

if you were to pump water into a well, then usually once enough water was pumped in, the well would overflow (comparable to a supernova). But if water was pumped into the well hard enough and fast enough, then the bottom of the well would keep getting deeper and deeper until it reached the centre of the earth. Any water being further pumped into the well would then add to the overall mass of earth's core, and if water kept getting pumped in, then the earth would expand, quicker and quicker as more and more water got pumped in.

Perhaps black holes do the same but with space.

Everyone take your hats off cos i think i've solved it =P

Gimme an "N"

 

[origin]

And an 'E', oh heck this deserves a full - just gimme an "UNEXPLAINED"! :roll:

 

[j_rankin]

I'm making a few assumptions, but trying to make sense of something.

If an object was smaller, but heavier, than the earth, would that object work its way towards earth's core if placed on the surface?

Since black holes possibly have infinite density at their cores, would that make them as heavy as the universe?

If black holes are as heavy as the universe, then perhaps at the point at which they become infinitely dense, they could somehow be feeding the expansion of the universe.


Let's forget that for now and ask some more questions:

If you took a spherical metre of space and measured that it had say 1million joules of energy evenly distributed within that sphere, and then you added 1 more joule of energy, what would happen? Would the sphere have to expand to accomodate that extra joule, or would all the energy within the sphere become more dense?
If the latter, then that means ALL the energy would get squashed as the extra joule was added, thus moving all the energy within and creating kinetics.
Perhaps as large amounts of energy (such as matter) pass through space, all the rest of the energy within an area of space (including matter) gets squashed to accomodate. This would explain gravity.

Now...what would happen if some of the energy that had been condensed was suddenly splurted out at near the speed of light? (black hole jets). Would the energy that had been condensed suddenly get released, causing any previously squashed energy to expand? Having the opposite effect to gravity.
This would not have a noticeable affect at interstellar distances because of the speed of the expanding energy and the vast amounts of energy wrapped up in matter, thus it would only affect things on an intergalactic scale.

 

[MeteorWayne]

I'm making a few assumptions, but trying to make sense of something.

If an object was smaller, but heavier, than the earth, would that object work its way towards earth's core if placed on the surface?

No, the other way around. The earth's core would move toward the denser object.

Since black holes possibly have infinite density at their cores, would that make them as heavy as the universe?

No, that's just silly, since black holes are but a tiny (very tiny in the big picture) part of the mass of the Universe.

If black holes are as heavy as the universe, then perhaps at the point at which they become infinitely dense, they could somehow be feeding the expansion of the universe.

Since they aren't, who cares?

Let's forget that for now and ask some more questions:

If you took a spherical metre of space and measured that it had say 1million joules of energy evenly distributed within that sphere, and then you added 1 more joule of energy, what would happen? Would the sphere have to expand to accomodate that extra joule, or would all the energy within the sphere become more dense?
If the latter, then that means ALL the energy would get squashed as the extra joule was added, thus moving all the energy within and creating kinetics.
Perhaps as large amounts of energy (such as matter) pass through space, all the rest of the energy within an area of space (including matter) gets squashed to accomodate. This would explain gravity.

Now...what would happen if some of the energy that had been condensed was suddenly splurted out at near the speed of light? (black hole jets). Would the energy that had been condensed suddenly get released, causing any previously squashed energy to expand? Having the opposite effect to gravity.
This would not have a noticeable affect at interstellar distances because of the speed of the expanding energy and the vast amounts of energy wrapped up in matter, thus it would only affect things on an intergalactic scale.

Gimme a "U"

 

[j_rankin]

Ok let me try to make a better analogy.

If you made a hollow ball out of an extremely tough material and pumped water directly into the centre of the ball, then eventually all the water would become ice. If you then kept pumping even more water into the ball, then eventually there would be as much pressure inside the ball as there was toughness at the edges. If you then added even more water, the ball would have no choice but to expand, despite the fact that it is made of an extremely tough material.

If at the point where there was only water inside the ball, you put a free floating pellet inside, just by the centre, then any further water pumped into the ball would cause the pellet to get closer and closer to the edge.

Now, imagine the universe is infinitely vast and all energy within it is uniformly distributed (this energy is to be considered as the fabric of space). Then imagine an object that is made out of concentrated energy (matter). In order for that object to exist, the overall distribution of energy in the entire universe would have to change, mostly so in proximity to the object.
If you then created another object out of some of the energy in the universe, then once again the energy distribution of the entire universe would change, and the original object would move closer to the new one.
This rate of change would be limited by the speed of light and thus the illusion of gravity would be created.

As matter gets converted to energy, the distribution of energy once again changes, but in the other direction. But since matter is so heavy compared to highly energetic particles, the reverse affect is only noticed at vast, intergalactic distances.

Older objects have had more time to affect energy distribution, and thus the the illusion of an accelerated expansion.

 

[origin]

Ok let me try to make a better analogy.

If you made a hollow ball out of an extremely tough material and pumped water directly into the centre of the ball, then eventually all the water would become ice. If you then kept pumping even more water into the ball, then eventually there would be as much pressure inside the ball as there was toughness at the edges. If you then added even more water, the ball would have no choice but to expand, despite the fact that it is made of an extremely tough material.

If at the point where there was only water inside the ball, you put a free floating pellet inside, just by the centre, then any further water pumped into the ball would cause the pellet to get closer and closer to the edge.

The there would be no reason for the pellet to move.

Now, imagine the universe is infinitely vast and all energy within it is uniformly distributed (this energy is to be considered as the fabric of space). Then imagine an object that is made out of concentrated energy (matter). In order for that object to exist, the overall distribution of energy in the entire universe would have to change, mostly so in proximity to the object.
If you then created another object out of some of the energy in the universe, then once again the energy distribution of the entire universe would change, and the original object would move closer to the new one.
This rate of change would be limited by the speed of light and thus the illusion of gravity would be created.

Huh? So I am standing on earth becasue the energy density of the earth is less than the rest of space so I am moving towards the center fo the earth. But when the earth formed it was not matter that formed from energy it was matter that had preexisted the formation of the solar system - so for that reason and about a bazillion other reasons your idea does not work.

 

[j_rankin]

The there would be no reason for the pellet to move.

I don't see why the pellet wouldn't move. As more water gets pumped in from the centre, then surely the water density would increase, starting off at the centre and working its way out, thus moving the pellet.

Huh? So I am standing on earth becasue the energy density of the earth is less than the rest of space so I am moving towards the center fo the earth. But when the earth formed it was not matter that formed from energy it was matter that had preexisted the formation of the solar system - so for that reason and about a bazillion other reasons your idea does not work.

no...the energy density of matter is higher than the rest of space. My suggestion is that for matter to exist within a finite space, it stretches the energy density of any local space, being denser in the middle of the object.
The elastic sheet analogy of gravity always shows an object sitting on the elastic sheet. What im saying is that the object is made out of the elastic sheet itself. in other words, matter is made out of twisted space. As matter moves, it is like a knot in the elastic that can freely move around, but as it moves it consists of a different part of the elastic sheet.
Like if you were to tie a knot in a piece of string, you could push the knot up and down along the string, and although it would remain the same knot, it would physically consist of a different part of the string.

If you suspended a piece of elastic between two fixed points and then somehow made a knot in the elastic, then the overall tension would increase. If you then made a second knot, then the first knot would be pulled towards the second one. Once the knot is made, if it then continued twisting, then the original knot would keep getting closer and closer and the tension would keep getting greater and greater, until it snapped and all the potential energy of the elastic was released.
Matter could be considered like an ever twisting knot in the fabric of space, and the orbiting of electrons and similar particles are what is causing the twisting, thus meaning that the more twisting electrons there is, the more gravity created, and also that the nuclear forces cause space to knot and create gravity.

 

[origin]

The there would be no reason for the pellet to move.

I don't see why the pellet wouldn't move. As more water gets pumped in from the centre, then surely the water density would increase, starting off at the centre and working its way out, thus moving the pellet.

Water is essentially uncompressible so there would be almost no flow what-so-ever and the pressure and density increase would propagate through the fluid at the speed of sound. The density changes would be rather small due to the uncompressibility of water - unless your talking about thousands of Bar or something. If the pellet is less dense than the water it will float to the top of course and if it is less dense than water it will sink. If the pellet is compressible it may start out floating and then sink. Increasing the pressure by dead head pumping into a close volume will not move things around in the container, except for materials that are less or more compressible than the liquid, and then they will just float or sink.

Huh? So I am standing on earth becasue the energy density of the earth is less than the rest of space so I am moving towards the center fo the earth. But when the earth formed it was not matter that formed from energy it was matter that had preexisted the formation of the solar system - so for that reason and about a bazillion other reasons your idea does not work.

no...the energy density of matter is higher than the rest of space. My suggestion is that for matter to exist within a finite space, it stretches the energy density of any local space, being denser in the middle of the object.

I would simply say the mass of matter is more dense than space. Saying the energy density of matter is not correct. Sure E=mc^2 is true but that does not mean matter is energy. The whole energy differences just seems like the wrong track, it is pretty obvious that matter is the source of gravity...

 

[j_rankin]

Water is essentially uncompressible so there would be almost no flow what-so-ever and the pressure and density increase would propagate through the fluid at the speed of sound. The density changes would be rather small due to the uncompressibility of water - unless your talking about thousands of Bar or something. If the pellet is less dense than the water it will float to the top of course and if it is less dense than water it will sink. If the pellet is compressible it may start out floating and then sink. Increasing the pressure by dead head pumping into a close volume will not move things around in the container, except for materials that are less or more compressible than the liquid, and then they will just float or sink.

That would only happen if the ball and the pellet and the water were subject to gravity. I made no mention of gravity being involved. I should have stated that this should be done in a zero G environment. As far as i can tell, in zero G, the pellet would not sink nor rise, but would merely be affected by pressure density.

I would simply say the mass of matter is more dense than space. Saying the energy density of matter is not correct. Sure E=mc^2 is true but that does not mean matter is energy. The whole energy differences just seems like the wrong track, it is pretty obvious that matter is the source of gravity...

I never said matter wasn't the source of gravity, only that matter itself created the twisted knots as the atoms in the universe re-ionised after the big bang, and that the twisted knots form gravity.