|Mar8-05, 01:17 PM||#1|
Why no 'Big Crunch' a femtosecond after "Big Bang"?
When the Universe was the size of a grapefruit, with the mass of 100 billion galaxies (actually, 20 times that mass, I suppose, given dark matter and dark energy), why did it not instantly suffer gravitational collapse into a megamega black hole?
After all, nothing (except Hawking radiation?) escapes from a puny black hole with the mass of only 100 million Suns or so.
|Mar8-05, 01:55 PM||#2|
The most honest answer is that is just not what the equations of cosmology predict will happen.
If you want to rationalize it, perhaps say that in the beginning the universe was expandind faster than gravity could catch up ( expansion has unlimited "velocity", gravity goes the speed of light).
|Mar8-05, 02:22 PM||#3|
As to how it got that initial kick, nobody knows. If the big bang theory is true, then we may never know.
|Similar Threads for: Why no 'Big Crunch' a femtosecond after "Big Bang"?|
|Do black holes "evaporate" or go "bang"?||General Astronomy||31|
|LQG in the mainstream press "Glimpse of Time Before Big Bang Possible"||Beyond the Standard Model||1|
|Black holes and the "Big Bang"||Special & General Relativity||4|
|Big-Bang Theory Modification "Real or Not"||Cosmology||6|
|Who created the "Crunch Theory" and the "Continual Expansion Theory"?||General Astronomy||3|