Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Big Bang, adropout?

  1. Sep 11, 2003 #1
    During the last few years I have read a number of books on The Big Bang including recently one By John Gibbin; "In the Beginning." Most if not all of the books mentioned the precision with which the initial values of some important parameters had to be for the universe to have formed as it has. Such thing as the amount of mass present had to be precisely the amount it apparently was for space to be closed and that the cosmological constant had to be its precise value of 1. There may have been others but those two stick out in my mind. It was apparently such a big deal that they wondered if any particular model could account for it or the universe existing as it does at all. Thinking about this I came up with the following model that I think would cover this with the precision necessary.

    There was another universe from which a black hole formed and eventually grew massive enough to warp its local space enough that it became closed. It would then be cut off from its parent universe and no longer part of it's spacetime. At the exact instant that its space time closed all of those parameters mention would by necessity at the precise value necessary to just close spacetime have the exact mass and gravity to do so and the Universal Constant would be exactly 1.
    At that exact instant it would drop out of existence relative to it's parent universe of origin and into non- spacetime, a dimensionless void where nothing existed not even space itself. The singularity would then be able to expand without restraint including without the restraint of the speed of light as in inflation because there would be no spacetime dimensions outside the universe itself in which velocity or C would have any meaning or could exist. From this the universe would inflate and cool and coalesce into matter and it's own spacetime dimensions as has been described in all of those books.
    This would mean that the universe is still a singularity and still inflating into the dimensionless void. Within the universe, of course the events that have happened would not be effect by the nothing that was outside it's event horizon. This I think would account for everything being at such necessarily precise values. (Another thought came to me as I was proof reading this. Any and every black hole or singularity would and could not be effected by anything what-so-ever outside of its event horizon. Just as we cannot see anything inside it, it can't see anything outside of it.)
    I welcome any and all discussions on these thoughts. If you are able to show me completely wrong and off base and explain why or how to me I would appreciate just as much as any support. If I'm wrong or uninformed I want to know just as much as I want to know if any of this makes any sense or has any validity. Either way I can forget about it and go on to something else instead of being plagued by these thoughts all the time.
  2. jcsd
  3. Nov 7, 2003 #2

    Does it mean the the universe is a singularity (= a black hole ?) and we are living in it ?
    When you say inflating in the dimensionless, what does it mean : I never understood what is really expending into what ? Of course there is nothing that can influence outside the frontier of the universe.
    My understanding, in the case of a black hole, it that it becomes more massive because it absorbs matter from outisde. In the case of a universe, is there something outiside ? If yes, then this is not the fulll universe.If no, there how could it expend ?

    With Best Regards Jean-Louis
Share this great discussion with others via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook