Is the Universe a Spiral Cone Leading to a New Big Bang?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Wonderballs
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Universe
Wonderballs
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
So I stumbled upon a video on the internet which made an analogy of mass creating a curve in the blanket of spacetime in which objects of smaller mass rotated about it. Which lead me to believe this is gravity. But aren't there billions upon billions of things within the universe which have mass? The correct answer is yes. So it got me thinking that the whole universe is a downward cone towards it's center while the smaller masses create ripples along the sides of the cone while we are all spiraling towards its centre slowly and surely (over vast amounts of time... hence spacetime) and once all matter gets to the centre again, Big Bang again... now I'm not sure what would cause a "Big Bang" but this is what i trailed off towards when my proffesser started the lesson with "Work is equal the amo..." then i tuned out and started thinking of cooler things... I had to write that down somewhere.

Now I'm by no means master of math, but I think my theories are along the right lines.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's been thought of before. Observation disagrees.
 
Mkay,thanks i guess.
 
Wonderballs said:
So it got me thinking that the whole universe is a downward cone towards it's center
According to mainstream cosmological models and observations, the universe doesn't have a "center", at large scales the distribution of mass and energy is thought to be pretty uniform throughout space. Also, you shouldn't take the blanket analogy too literally, the analogy just represents the curvature of space but it's actually spacetime that's curved by mass/energy in general relativity (and it's just the curvature that determines the paths of objects, the fact that the curved region is represented as a depression that things fall 'down' into has nothing to do with the actual physics, you could represent the influence of gravity in terms of bumps rather than depressions and the analogy would be no less accurate).
 
Think in terms of a two dimensional universe - the surface of an expanding balloon - there is no center - so there is no reason for matter to collect at one place. Our three dimensional universe doesn't have a center either ...according to the cosmological principle it looks the same from any point
 
Thanks guys, I just call them as I see them.
 
OK, so this has bugged me for a while about the equivalence principle and the black hole information paradox. If black holes "evaporate" via Hawking radiation, then they cannot exist forever. So, from my external perspective, watching the person fall in, they slow down, freeze, and redshift to "nothing," but never cross the event horizon. Does the equivalence principle say my perspective is valid? If it does, is it possible that that person really never crossed the event horizon? The...
In this video I can see a person walking around lines of curvature on a sphere with an arrow strapped to his waist. His task is to keep the arrow pointed in the same direction How does he do this ? Does he use a reference point like the stars? (that only move very slowly) If that is how he keeps the arrow pointing in the same direction, is that equivalent to saying that he orients the arrow wrt the 3d space that the sphere is embedded in? So ,although one refers to intrinsic curvature...
So, to calculate a proper time of a worldline in SR using an inertial frame is quite easy. But I struggled a bit using a "rotating frame metric" and now I'm not sure whether I'll do it right. Couls someone point me in the right direction? "What have you tried?" Well, trying to help truly absolute layppl with some variation of a "Circular Twin Paradox" not using an inertial frame of reference for whatevere reason. I thought it would be a bit of a challenge so I made a derivation or...
Back
Top