Big Bang Implosion: The Symmetry of Cosmic Expansion and Collapse

  • Thread starter Thread starter Loren Booda
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Big bang Implosion
AI Thread Summary
The discussion explores the concept of cosmic expansion and collapse, emphasizing that where there is an explosion, an implosion often accompanies it. The Planck length, L*, is proposed as a fundamental radius from which the universe expands, suggesting a symmetrical relationship between the Big Bang and a potential "Big Crush." Some participants argue against characterizing the Big Bang as an explosion, likening it instead to an inflationary process without ejection into pre-existing space. The conversation also touches on the implications of cosmic density and curvature, indicating that current evidence points towards perpetual expansion rather than a collapse. Overall, the thread delves into complex cosmological theories and their interpretations.
Loren Booda
Messages
3,108
Reaction score
4
Where there is explosion, there is usually a concomitant implosion. If the Planck length, L*, demarks an original radius for the cosmos, a collapse therefrom, symmetrical to the big bang expansion of spacetime occurs with the conservation of momentum. This "Big Crush" is omnipresent, sub-Planck length and suggests a connectiveness between all matter. Our reality may exist in mirror image, reflected through the primordial surface of separation, L*.
 
Astronomy news on Phys.org
I'm afraid that I don't really understand any of that. (My fault, not yours; it's not something that I've been exposed to before.) The aspect that strikes me as being maybe a little off is that I don't think that the BB can technically be considered an explosion. It's more like a balloon inflating, since it's not exploding into a pre-existing volume. No mass or energy is being ejected from the source; the source itself is just expanding.
 
Last edited:
Loren Booda said:
Where there is explosion, there is usually a concomitant implosion. If the Planck length, L*, demarks an original radius for the cosmos
The Planck length isn't supposed to be the original radius of the cosmos, if the universe has flat or open curvature (and the simplest topology) then the cosmos was infinite at all times past the Planck time, and even if the universe is finite in size, I think all you can say is that as you approach the Planck time the density of matter/energy approaches the Planck density. See this thread for more on the significance of the Planck density/Planck length, and the last section of my first post on this thread about why you shouldn't picture the Big Bang as an explosion of matter in a preexisting space, and the difference between closed, flat and open curvature.
Loren Booda said:
a collapse therefrom, symmetrical to the big bang expansion of spacetime occurs with the conservation of momentum. This "Big Crush" is omnipresent, sub-Planck length and suggests a connectiveness between all matter.
If the density of matter/energy is high enough the universe could collapse in a "Big Crunch" at the end of time, but current observational evidence suggests it will expand forever. See http://superstringtheory.com/cosmo/cosmo21.html for a little more info on how the density of matter/energy, as well as something called the "cosmological constant", determine the ultimate fate of the universe according to general relativity.
Loren Booda said:
Our reality may exist in mirror image, reflected through the primordial surface of separation, L*.
I don't understand this part at all--what is L*? What is it separating?
 
L.B. - If you're interested, you can submit this idea (with more details) to the Independent Research forum. Thanks.
 
TL;DR Summary: In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect alien signals, it will further expand the radius of the so-called silence (or rather, radio silence) of the Universe. Is there any sense in this or is blissful ignorance better? In 3 years, the Square Kilometre Array (SKA) telescope (or rather, a system of telescopes) should be put into operation. In case of failure to detect...
Thread 'Could gamma-ray bursts have an intragalactic origin?'
This is indirectly evidenced by a map of the distribution of gamma-ray bursts in the night sky, made in the form of an elongated globe. And also the weakening of gamma radiation by the disk and the center of the Milky Way, which leads to anisotropy in the possibilities of observing gamma-ray bursts. My line of reasoning is as follows: 1. Gamma radiation should be absorbed to some extent by dust and other components of the interstellar medium. As a result, with an extragalactic origin, fewer...
This hypothesis of scientists about the origin of the mysterious signal WOW seems plausible only on a superficial examination. In fact, such a strong coherent radiation requires a powerful initiating factor, and the hydrogen atoms in the cloud themselves must be in an overexcited state in order to respond instantly. If the density of the initiating radiation is insufficient, then the atoms of the cloud will not receive it at once, some will receive it earlier, and some later. But then there...
Back
Top