Big Crunch and not a Big Bang.

[deltarho[1859]]

Many of us have interests apart from coding and one of mine is cosmology.

One issue bugging me was why are the galaxies Andromeda and the Milky Way on a collision course when the universe is supposed to be expanding. It turns out quite simply because their gravitational attraction is stronger than the expansion. The collision will occur in about four billion years close to when our sun has burnt off all its hydrogen and is expanding at a pace burning off its helium, rendering our piece of rock into toast.

The other thing bugging me was the expansion itself. It appears that there are some events which we will never see because the light from them will never reach us—the expansion is accelerating to the point where it is faster than the speed of light. This contradicts Special Relativity but not General Relativity when gravity is considered.

We have than a Cosmological Horizon where the observable universe is bounded. So what is the distance between the Cosmological Horizon and the actual edge of the universe. We cannot answer that. To estimate the age of the universe we take the Cosmological Horizon and extrapolate backwards. This has resulted in an estimate of about 13.8 billion years.

I then had a barmy idea that the Big Bang did not occur. That is a 'singularity' seeming dong nothing suddenly decided to go 'Bang'.

Suppose, on the other hand, there existed one gigantic gas cloud which formed into a massive star. A star's life expectancy depends upon its size. Large stars 'burn up' faster tan smaller stars. A supernova is likely to occur with stars greater than five solar masses. So our sun will not collapse into a supernova.

Given a massive star may see a supernova occur only millions of years after its formation. A star with a mass of 150 solar masses with probably go supernova in only 0.036 million years [Calculate Lifespan of a Star]. So our massive star will not 'live' that long. I am going to call the resulting 'black hole' a Big Bruiser; BB for short.

With a supernova, we get another horizon—the event horizon. “In astrophysics, an event horizon is a boundary beyond which events cannot affect an observer. Wolfgang Rindler coined the term in the 1950s.”.

So read BB's Event Horizon as a Cosmological Horizon. The galaxies and other supernovas will stem from BB. The outcome will be BB and nothing else. It may take a while. It has been argued that all black holes eventually evaporate due to Hawking Radiation. Into what? Perhaps a massive gas cloud.

The universe is not expanding—it is now collapsing. Dark Energy and Dark Matter were conjured to explain the 'expansion'. If the universe is collapsing into itself, then perhaps Dark Energy and Dark Matter do not exist after all.

We have than a Big Crunch and not a Big Bang.

With this Big Crunch idea, we have a similar problem as with the Big Bang. Where did the original gigantic gas clod come from?

Answers on a post card to …

[srvaldez]

hi deltarho[1859]
perhaps you may find some of the ideas of sadhguru amusing/entertaining https://www.youtube.com/results?search_ ... t+universe
disclaimer: I watched some his videos in the past but I refrain from watching them now because of clear indications of his affiliation with the dark side of spiritual matters

[Berkeley]

Currently, the Big Rip hypothesis is favoured. Because the universe is expanding and the expansion seems to accelerate. This expansion means that the spacetime is expanding, like inflating a balloon. It does not mean, that all matter inside is blown apart like with a big central explosion. The Big Bang happend everywhere in the universe simultanously. Just like the inflation of a balloon happens ideally on its whole surface everywhere identically, so there is no centre where the inflation comes from - at least not inside the two dimensions of the balloon's surface.

[deltarho[1859]]

@srvaldez

I have watched some of sadhguru's videos, but he is not 'my cup of tea'. I could explain what is my 'cup of tea' but this thread is not about me but about my barmy ideas.

[dodicat]

IMHO it is all pie in the sky.
We create physics to rationalize Earthly events so we can use them to make our lives easier.
We used to say "the laws of physics apply everywhere", so we ludicrously look into the cosmos and apply our physics there.
Because our maths system is basically a counting mechanism, we have no idea what infinity is, and our Maths does not cope with it.
We have some really wild ideas about stars, we can even conjure up a life cycle for them.
Black holes are great for collecting physics garbage, along with other stuff? I understand the concept of a one way ticket, but thats as far as I can stretch to.
I find cosmology as fascinating as anybody else, but Big Bangs, Dark matter, Dark energy, . . . Come on!
"All our earthly elements originated in a Super Nova", maybe they have, but to write a thesis on it and ask folk to believe the it, sublime indeed!
I believe what I see from planetary probes on the TV, really fascinating, and not too far fetched (if these broadcasts are a truth).

[srvaldez]

I agree with dodicat, our lifespan relative to that of the universe is almost zero and the universe is way too complex for any human to understand, that said, in the past I was interested in the subject and particularly was very interested in the Hindu cosmology, that's why I suggested the YouTube videos, please ignore the deity related stuff and consider the cycles
for example see https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manvantara
in a nutshell, according to Hindu cosmology the universe is created from the breath of Brahma and though the lifespan of the universe is very long it does come to an end
also a quote from AI

The period of Brahma's rest is called maha-pralaya, which means "full dissolution". It occurs after the 100-year life of Brahma, also known as a maha-kalpa, and lasts for an equal amount of time.
Here's some more information about Brahma's life and the Hindu cosmology of time:

Brahma's day
A day of Brahma, or kalpa, is made up of a thousand cycles of four ages, or yugas: Satya Yuga, Treta Yuga, Dvapara Yuga, and Kali Yuga.

Brahma's lifespan
Brahma's lifespan is 311.04 trillion solar years, which is equivalent to 311 trillion 40 billion Earth years.
Brahma's wake-up
When Brahma wakes up, creation begins again and all beings come into existence.

[Lothar Schirm]

It's rather complex for me to understand deltarhof[1859] in detail, but I find Berkeley's explanation of the Big Bang and the expansion very simple and clear. I believe that cosmology and also the modern physics are stuck in a lot of assumptions and theories (parallel universes, multiverses expanding and crunching like bubbles in a foam, dark matter and dark energy, string theory etc.) without finding a way to find solutions - may be some day? Many things look very speculative. I think that we can approach to understand the universe only very asymptotic, as far as our brain allows (or will allow in future?). I think dodicat has right so far regarding our limited capabilities.

[deltarho[1859]]

Easy to understand differences between the Big Bang and the opening post:

Big Bang:

Imagine a white circle inside a black circle.

The white circle is the observable universe bounded by the Cosmological Horizon, beyond which everything is being 'pushed away' from us faster than the speed of light; we cannot observe anything beyond the Cosmological Horizon.

Opening post:

Imagine a black circle inside a white circle. We have then a 'negative' of the Big Bang.

The black circle is a black hole and everything 'this side' of the black hole's Event Horizon is the observable universe beyond which everything is being 'pulled away' from us faster than the speed of light; we cannot observe anything beyond the Event Horizon.

So Hubble sees the 'pushed away' as an expansion, whereas the opening post sees the 'pulled away' as a compression.

Both the expansion and the compression are accelerating from their observable universe towards their respective horizons.

Someone may chip in with: "How does the opening post explain the Cosmic microwave background radiation (CMBR). This is effectively the 'heat glow' following the Big Bang. It could equally be the 'heat glow' following the creation of BB.

Presently, I cannot explain the Inflationary epoch supposedly experienced by the Big Bang. That in itself may scupper the opening post.

Of course, we still have the problem of what created the initial conditions of any theory.

[Lothar Schirm]

Big Bang and Big Crunch - oscillating universe (roughly simplified, just for fun):

Code: Select all

Dim As Integer i, n = 10000
Dim As Single a, r, phi, x(n), y(n), dt = 0.01, t
Const pi = 4 * Atn(1)

ScreenRes 600, 600

Randomize Timer

For i = 0 To n
	r = Rnd
	phi = 2 * pi * Rnd
	x(i) = r * Cos(phi)
	y(i) = r * Sin(phi)
Next

ScreenRes 600, 600
Window (-1, -1) - (1, 1)
t = 0
Do
	Cls
	ScreenLock
	a = 1.5 * Sin(t)
	For  i = 0 To n
		Pset (a * x(i), a * y(i)), 11
	Next
	ScreenUnLock
	Sleep 10
	t = t + dt
Loop Until InKey <> ""

End

[deltarho[1859]]

Using Big Crunch was a bad choice of words for the opening post.

Big Crunch is usually used in the context of the cycle Big Bang, Big Crunch. Big Bang, Big Crunch and so on as illustrated by Lothar's graphics.

With the opening post we have a gigantic gas cloud as the initial conditions collapsing/crunching into a massive star which collapses/crunches into BB.