Notices
Results 1 to 18 of 18

Thread: My Interesting Theory.....

  1. #1 My Interesting Theory..... 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    14
    Hello just joined so i thought i'd share this theory i've come up with. It combines chaos theory with the BB theory. To begin suppose the universe was created through the big bang. I believe that every action we take is part of a chain reaction that began at the start of the big bang. Everything we do - how many times we breath in a day, when we blink, which cup we choose out of the cupboard, is all part of a pre designed chain reaction caused by the intial conditions of the big bang.

    To look at it in another sense, - to hit 2 snooker balls, where ever the cue hits the white ball affects where the white ball hits the black ball. And the angle where the white ball goes is certain depending on where the cue hit it. This means our path in life is certain and pre designed depending on the initial state of the big bang.

    Now say the big crunch is going to happen. The universe will collapse on itself and all the matter will go back to the centre. If the big bang happens again, then the intial changes may be different and the events in the chain reaction of the big bang will be slightly different aswell, meaning the universe will be created again but all the planets and galaxies will be in a different position.

    Now as time is infinite, and according to einstein - if a ball is thrown at a wall forever one of the times it will pass through the wall. This means that anything is possible if it happens in a cycle forever. If the universe keeps cycling through this process of exploding then imploding and changing slightly each time to produce a different universe. One of those times will be identical to the way the universe has expanded today.

    This could mean two things- the first being that this could be the Nth time we have lived this course of events and existed in this universe.

    The second is the most interesting, it means that someday in the future it may be billions of years away, but someday we will live this life ( and the certain course of events) again. And maybe one time that the universe explodes again the initial conditions might be slightly different - so that we live this life again, but only a few changes are made to our lives, so the big bang caused a set of chain reactions of events that caused a tiny change in your life such as going to a different school, which can change the way you live the rest of your life.

    So basically, if my theory is true, we are going to at some point in time live this life again, and it may be identical or it may be slightly different depending on the intial conditions of the big bang.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    320

    Mod EDIT: Deleted - Please do not post empty pages again!
    MEGABRAIN


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3 Re: My Interesting Theory..... 
    Forum Sophomore bogie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    163
    Quote Originally Posted by slippy88
    Hello just joined so i thought i'd share this theory i've come up with. It combines chaos theory with the BB theory. To begin suppose the universe was created through the big bang. I believe that every action we take is part of a chain reaction that began at the start of the big bang. Everything we do - how many times we breath in a day, when we blink, which cup we choose out of the cupboard, is all part of a pre designed chain reaction caused by the intial conditions of the big bang.

    To look at it in another sense, - to hit 2 snooker balls, where ever the cue hits the white ball affects where the white ball hits the black ball. And the angle where the white ball goes is certain depending on where the cue hit it. This means our path in life is certain and pre designed depending on the initial state of the big bang.

    Now say the big crunch is going to happen. The universe will collapse on itself and all the matter will go back to the centre. If the big bang happens again, then the intial changes may be different and the events in the chain reaction of the big bang will be slightly different aswell, meaning the universe will be created again but all the planets and galaxies will be in a different position.

    Now as time is infinite, and according to einstein - if a ball is thrown at a wall forever one of the times it will pass through the wall. This means that anything is possible if it happens in a cycle forever. If the universe keeps cycling through this process of exploding then imploding and changing slightly each time to produce a different universe. One of those times will be identical to the way the universe has expanded today.

    This could mean two things- the first being that this could be the Nth time we have lived this course of events and existed in this universe.

    The second is the most interesting, it means that someday in the future it may be billions of years away, but someday we will live this life ( and the certain course of events) again. And maybe one time that the universe explodes again the initial conditions might be slightly different - so that we live this life again, but only a few changes are made to our lives, so the big bang caused a set of chain reactions of events that caused a tiny change in your life such as going to a different school, which can change the way you live the rest of your life.

    So basically, if my theory is true, we are going to at some point in time live this life again, and it may be identical or it may be slightly different depending on the intial conditions of the big bang.
    You have some interesting ideas. Philosophical and cosmological ideas that are wrapped together in a kind of quasi-deterministic way.

    The cosmological idea seems to be one of a cyclical universe that crunches and bangs over and over again.

    This idea has be debated for a long time and as near as I can tell, it is considered to be flawed by what they call entropy. You see, each time the universe bangs, there is theoretically a particle horizon that is sent out ahead of the expanding universe that would be impossible to reclaim through the gravity that supposedly draws everything back together after the bang. The photons are thought to be massless and wouldn't be attracted back by gravity. Also, even if they had a tiny mass, say 10^-51 grams, the momentum that they have, traveling at the speed of light, could not be reversed in time to bring them "home" for the next bang. Each bang would lose a tiny amount of energy and eventually the crunches wouldn't be able to bang, ending the scenario.

    The philosophical idea of determinism has been debated in may forums, i.e. religion, philosophy and physics, etc. One conclusion is that there is a an uncertainty principle that is often called more descriptively the "principle of indeterminacy." In other words, it is impossible to prove that determinism is true, and it likely that it is not true.

    There is another view of the universe that uses a principle that I call the "certainty principle". It says that in an infinite and eternal random universe, anything that has any possibility at all is a certainty to occur some how, some where, some time. In this theory, we are talking about the "ball through the wall" type of thing, and the almost idential universes that you mention would be so extremely complicated that the time frame to accomplish just one close replica would be a true test of the meaning of the word infinity. Try to imagine a whole series of similar renditions and you boggle even my pliable imagination.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    14
    Thanks for your views - i have just thought about that last thing you said. The time frame for something to happen in exactly the same way as it did before is beyond belief. I also agree with your view that photons won't be pulled in by gravity. But what about black holes, aren't they so dense that they pull in light aswell. If light is weightless how can a black hole attract it?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Forum Sophomore bogie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    163
    Quote Originally Posted by slippy88
    Thanks for your views - i have just thought about that last thing you said. The time frame for something to happen in exactly the same way as it did before is beyond belief. I also agree with your view that photons won't be pulled in by gravity. But what about black holes, aren't they so dense that they pull in light aswell. If light is weightless how can a black hole attract it?
    The black hole is sometimes a contentious issue for the very reason that we don't know much about them and there are different types that have different origins.

    I think that no matter how black holes form, they have the characteristic that light cannot escape from them, not that they pull in light.

    Light is curved by their warped space, but the light is traveling through curved space, it is not itself curving because of the gravity. I view it as a smooth defraction of light through the low energy density of space that surrounds matter, but then that is another story, lol.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    14
    So with the thing you said before, are you saying that the big crunch can't happen because even if the universe collapses at the speed of light all that will happen is it wil remain still because its expanding at the same time that it is collapsing?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    14
    Sorry correction in bold

    So with the thing you said before, are you saying that the big crunch can't happen because even if the universe collapses at the speed of light all that will happen is it wil remain still because its expanding at the same SPEED that it is collapsing?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Forum Sophomore bogie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    163
    Quote Originally Posted by slippy88
    Sorry correction in bold

    So with the thing you said before, are you saying that the big crunch can't happen because even if the universe collapses at the speed of light all that will happen is it wil remain still because its expanding at the same SPEED that it is collapsing?
    This is going to be way more than you care to know I bet, and it is my view which may differ from others.

    I have to explain first from the perspective of Big Bang Theory (BBT) and then I will explain from the perspective of an alternative idea that I like better.

    When THE big bang occurred in BBT it created space. Not only did it create space, but time started with the creation of space. The space-time that emerged from the big bang was the entire universe happening all at once. The concept of “before” or “beyond” the big bang is meaningless under BBT because there was no before and there is no beyond.

    This conclusion has been reached by observation and by theory, and has been peer reviewed and accepted as the best theory to fit the evidence, at least by the mainstream scientific community.

    So in the picoseconds after the big bang event (called a singularity because it cannot be explained) the entire universe existed, and was very small. It went through a period of “inflation” were the size of this tiny universe increased exponentially at speeds faster than the speed of light. This inflationary epoch took only picoseconds but it makes it possible for the observed even temperature of the cosmic background radiation. This temperature, about 2.7 degrees Kelvin, is smooth and quite consistent in all directions in space, as far out as we can measure. The only way that the background temperature can be so smooth is if it was causally connected to the big bang itself. Unfortunately, using the observed expansion rate, the universe would have to have expanded exponentially to account for the even temperature in all directions. So the standard cosmology today is the Big Bang with Inflation.

    To answer your question from this perspective, it is not possible to tell if the universe will expand forever or if it will stop expanding due to gravity, and collapse. Actually the latest observations seem to indicate an accelerating expansion so maybe a collapse is moot. But if it were to collapse, all of the matter that exists would be attracted back to a big crunch. However, some of the energy would be lost and so the resulting crunch would contain less energy than the original big bang.

    If your question concerns that energy that is lost, it is thought that it is radiation in the form of photons which are traveling at the speed of light. Now it is a little tricky but it is thought that this “light” energy, i.e. photon radiation, has no mass and wouldn't’t be attracted back into the crunch accept that it is said to have relativistic mass, mass based on its momentum. There is no evidence that it could be attracted back to the crunch, but infinity is a long time, and it is very patient.

    But it doesn't’t really matter in BBT, because there is no physics to predict that the big crunch will ever turn into another big bang.

    The two options with BBT are that the universe will expand forever, get colder and die what they call a “heat death”, or it will collapse into a hot crunch (also a third option that it will stop expanding and not collapese, but that is like standing a pencil on end, lol).

    Now my idea is that the universe has always existed and that the big bang occurred from a big crunch that did have the necessary physics to become a big bang. But instead of there being just the finite matter and energy to compose our visible universe that emerged from the big bang, there is an infinite amount of matter/energy and big crunches and big bangs occur here and there, now and then all over the greater universe.

    In this case, the big bangs would burst and expand right out into the greater universe and eventually the old cold remnants of our big bang will be attracted to various other crunches that are always forming somewhere out there in all directions.

    The energy of the photons from big bangs permeates the greater universe and makes the cosmic background temperature quite consistent throughout the universe.

    Everyone has to make up their own mind as to the particular cosmology that they endorse. Since I personally have trouble with the BBT singularity and inflationary epoch, I have developed the alternative that I have described and that I call the Infinite Spongy Universe (ISU). There is no proof that my view is correct and it is based on speculation and imagination, not science but if you run across my other posts you will know where I am coming from.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Freshman Kosta's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    86
    This idea has be debated for a long time and as near as I can tell, it is considered to be flawed by what they call entropy. You see, each time the universe bangs, there is theoretically a particle horizon that is sent out ahead of the expanding universe that would be impossible to reclaim through the gravity that supposedly draws everything back together after the bang. The photons are thought to be massless and wouldn't be attracted back by gravity. Also, even if they had a tiny mass, say 10^-51 grams, the momentum that they have, traveling at the speed of light, could not be reversed in time to bring them "home" for the next bang. Each bang would lose a tiny amount of energy and eventually the crunches wouldn't be able to bang, ending the scenario.


    Great point.

    However, perhaps all of those "lost particles" would form together and start the process over. So the universe is gradually transferred through those lost particles until enough are gathered to start a "big bang.?" Therefore, the cycle technically never ends?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    967
    You are on the right track Slippy88, your theory is correct, but you cannot prove it cause you are too young and know too little. Still, your way of looking at things is the right one. Think of it like this. Everything resided from dense objects. It expanded to form the universe. But look back in time. It couldn't have begun from dense objects. Cause then there was no energy that could make it explode, and if it exploded there was no force that kept it together, if there was no force that kept it together at that point, quite the opposit actually, then no one can tell you that that thingy can't turn cause it allready has. There is nothing that can make a black hole explode since there is no repelling power in extremely dense objects since there can't be, the particles are evenly distributed in the extremely dense objects, if the dense objects were made of photons "that don't have mass" and that's why they exploded then there wouldn't be any rest mass right now.

    So my thesis is that gravity is the timedifference between higgsparticles and mass, and that the timedifference (the integral of the timedilation) is caused by the speed of the masses, and that the speed of masses is caused by collision with higgsparticles and that the particles in the black holes stands still and hence the timedistance eventually becomes zero and they explode because of that.

    So the singularity exploding is just sci-fi, in real life it was a bunch of black holes exploding, and the light ain't gonna escape the universe cause it is neverending.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by Kosta
    This idea has be debated for a long time and as near as I can tell, it is considered to be flawed by what they call entropy. You see, each time the universe bangs, there is theoretically a particle horizon that is sent out ahead of the expanding universe that would be impossible to reclaim through the gravity that supposedly draws everything back together after the bang. The photons are thought to be massless and wouldn't be attracted back by gravity. Also, even if they had a tiny mass, say 10^-51 grams, the momentum that they have, traveling at the speed of light, could not be reversed in time to bring them "home" for the next bang. Each bang would lose a tiny amount of energy and eventually the crunches wouldn't be able to bang, ending the scenario.
    Great point.

    However, perhaps all of those "lost particles" would form together and start the process over. So the universe is gradually transferred through those lost particles until enough are gathered to start a "big bang.?" Therefore, the cycle technically never ends?
    I believe that your idea could work, but does it mean that the big bang could happen in exactly the same way as it has to create this universe and set of events? If the whole universe has been converted into lost particles that form together in their own big crunch to further create another big bang. I suppose it could as matter cannot be destroyed or created. All the matter in the universe would just be converted - so i think that the big bang could happen with all the existing matter in this universe to create an identical one in the future. What does everyone think about this?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    Ground Hog Day with a twist. very good. think your looking very hard for an after life, but a couple hundred billion years, may be a bit long for most folks to wait.

    keep that mind working though and some day it may produce a working model, you can prove.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    14
    Quote Originally Posted by jackson33
    Ground Hog Day with a twist. very good. think your looking very hard for an after life, but a couple hundred billion years, may be a bit long for most folks to wait.

    keep that mind working though and some day it may produce a working model, you can prove.
    Yes thats a really good way of looking at it lol groundhog day. What about this though- you say it is to long to wait, but for example when you sleep you dont feel time, it feels like you go to sleep then wake, you dont actualy feel the 8 or so hours go past you, so when you die you won't feel the billions of years fly by, because your not their to witness it.

    Similarly, when your born, your saying, that billions of years was really long to wait until we were born, but we didnt feel those billions of years fly past us.

    It will truely be the sensation of dying then being born again almost as soon as you die, because you can't feel the time between you dying, the big crunch, the 2nd big bang, and being born again.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Forum Professor
    Join Date
    Oct 2006
    Posts
    1,595
    thats certainly true. the time from when you die to rebirth, under that thought would not be determinable. nor would it be for those that consider reincarnation. the probability of identical circumstances to allow this may be a little low, going back to a perceived BB.

    i have thought our soul or could be a very small chip (no other word available) could go someplace after death and be recent later and this could take any form. a dog, fish or even a tree and when that dies, goes back to that place and so on...this was when they noticed a slight weight loss at moment of death. the logical cause would be the relaxing of muscle or mass content.

    personally i don't accept big bang and am in the "always was" camp. as for your idea though; its just as likely when our solar system dies and turns to debris, this floats around space for awhile and someday becomes part of something else. if that happens to be a planet, the process could start over as was on earth. even here though the process back to identical forms would seem unlikely. evolution seems to take very different path each time it has regenerated here on earth.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    967
    I'll put this post in mathematics instead, then I'll link to that page.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    Nov 2006
    Location
    London
    Posts
    14
    Jackson33 - you say that evolution will take a different path each time it occurs. But what i am trying to put across is, the path of everything is mapped out at the start of each time it happens. The thing that affects where these path leads depends on the initial conditions.

    I like your idea about how you made my theory work even if the big bang doesnt exist. If the universe is inifinite, with no start or end. The the same principles of infinite chance will happen. The solar system will turn to debris and a new one will form, and this process will happen forever. It might already be happening somewhere else now. A world exactly like this one has been created with the path of every event that happens from the beginning of the 2nd earth is mapped out in exactly the same way as ours.

    This idea does really test the word infinite. If it doesn't end the chances of this 2nd earth appearing are possible. This digs deeper into the more philosophical side of the theory - if there is a 2nd world with identical events to ours, then who is inside your body witnessing the 3d space we are in. Maybe we are sensing 2 identical earths but we cant tell the difference because were doing exactly the same thing in each earth.

    Thankyou for your point it has made me think about a few more things. I cannot be undermined with the argument that the universe will not have a big crunch - if it doesnt then an identical earth to ours can still be created because of the 1 in infinite chance it will happen in the static or constantly expanding universe.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    967
    Can you prove a Dotleak repeating? Would be awesome, cannot find a wormhole myself.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Guest
    Moved from cosmology/astronomy.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •