What Caused the Small Flash in the New Bang Theory?

  • Thread starter mephestopheles
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Theory
In summary, the conversation is about the "Big Bang" theory and the speaker's belief that it does not work due to their understanding of a massive black hole consuming the entire universe and then exploding. The conversation also mentions the theory of conservation of energy and the role of Einstein in physics. However, the moderator reminds the speaker that personal theories are not allowed in the forum and redirects them to read more about the standard cosmological model. The speaker then apologizes and asks about the fate of gravity in the Big Bang theory.
  • #1
mephestopheles
3
0
New "Bang" Theory

First, I have to say that I am not a Physicist, at least not in the classic sense. I don't have training in higher mathematics and I'm not a college graduate.

What I am is intelligent. I read, I think about what I have read and try to picture the idea behind it in my mind. Einstein did this as well, he called this thought experiments.
So, I read about the "Big Bang" theory and for me it just doesn't work. It is based on something that seems like a black hole that is SO massive it has literally consumed an entire Universe and compacted it to such a small dense area that it cannot compress further and due to the pressure of gravity (like if you considered Earth's gravity as a quantity of 1 , it would be like a googol to the googolth power and multiplied by that same number in intensity). Which leads to heat and pressure of the same kind of intensity to the point it cannot be constrained by the force of gravity and "explodes" spreading hot plasma into a new "universe" size area.
My first problem with this is a principle the Einstein came up with which states that all the energy that has ever been in this "Universe" is still here and can't be destroyed. So, the Big Bang doesn't work because the energy form the Gravity of Universe eating black hole was still there after the "Bang". Considering the unimaginable force that some say condensed the universe into an area the size of the head of a pin. It would have immediately imploded like a supernova. That's problem number one - where did the Gravitational energy go during this "Big Bang" ?

More to follow - My theory "The Small Flash"
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #3
You seem to have some serious misconceptions about the standard cosmological model. I suggest you do a lot more reading -- as mentioned above, the cosmology FAQs are a good place to start.

And let me take this opportunity to remind you that, as per the forum rules to which you agreed on registration, personal theories are not permitted. I will allow this thread, since the main issue is your misunderstanding of cosmology, but you are not permitted to post about your own "theory".
 
  • #4
mephestopheles said:
So, I read about the "Big Bang" theory and for me it just doesn't work. It is based on something that seems like a black hole that is SO massive it has literally consumed an entire Universe and compacted it to such a small dense area that it cannot compress further and due to the pressure of gravity (like if you considered Earth's gravity as a quantity of 1 , it would be like a googol to the googolth power and multiplied by that same number in intensity). Which leads to heat and pressure of the same kind of intensity to the point it cannot be constrained by the force of gravity and "explodes" spreading hot plasma into a new "universe" size area.

This is not the way it works. First and foremost, the singularity that is said to be at t=0, when the Big Bang happened, it likely to have never existed at all. It is very likely the result of our math breaking down, since we don't really know how physics works at the extreme energy and density at that time. Also, the math that gives us a black hole only works for static spacetime. When we get into the very early universe it is believed that spacetime was not static. Inflation and expansion are two results of this non-static spacetime.

My first problem with this is a principle the Einstein came up with which states that all the energy that has ever been in this "Universe" is still here and can't be destroyed. So, the Big Bang doesn't work because the energy form the Gravity of Universe eating black hole was still there after the "Bang". Considering the unimaginable force that some say condensed the universe into an area the size of the head of a pin. It would have immediately imploded like a supernova. That's problem number one - where did the Gravitational energy go during this "Big Bang" ?

Energy cannot be defined very well, if at all, in General Relativity, so the law of conservation of energy doesn't even apply when we get to the scale of the universe as a whole. One of the examples of this is the CMB, the cosmic microwave background. The photons that used to be in the visible range have been redshifted into the microwave range, which means they've lost most of their energy. Where did this energy go? Nowhere. It is gone.
 
  • #5
In addition to the good posts above, I would like to add that Einstein was a physicist. He had a college degree and a university diploma. In fact, every new theory in science was developed by professionals who knew the previous theories very well.
 
  • #6
Enigman,
as I have to assume that you are the moderator of this Forum it is to you that I have to apologize and regretfully bid farewell to this forum.
When I found it I (apparently erroneously) assumed it was a place for open discussion of theory and a place where those who were of like mindedness would be able to discuss things of which the implications could lead to the furtherance or discarding of Ideas, Theories, Assumptions, etc. I formally apologize to you Mr. E and will discuss no further any "Theories" I might have myself.
Before I leave though I must beg indulgence to put in repetition the question I asked, "What happened to the Gravity?" as I feel this is an important point that in the volumes of information I was directed to has not been addressed adequately.
I say this because as I read I saw the same "theory" discussed repeatedly concerning how an initially "hot" universe cooled as it grew and in many other theories it is deemed necessary for it to eventually stop "growing and collapse in upon itself whereupon the process starts all over again.
This would not be possible if the Gravity as well as the Light as Drakkith so eloquently expressed it were "just gone".
In all of the equations, theories, speculations, assumptions and other forms of inquiry where is the answer to the question I asked - What happened to the Gravity.
Which by the way has virtually nothing to do with what I would truly like to discuss because at the point in the development of the "universe" as we know it there was no "gravity" as such.
And with that I bid you adieu .
 
  • #7
mephestopheles said:
Enigman,
as I have to assume that you are the moderator of this Forum
cristo and I are moderators (called mentors here) that posted in the thread, you can find a full list here.

When I found it I (apparently erroneously) assumed it was a place for open discussion of theory and a place where those who were of like mindedness would be able to discuss things of which the implications could lead to the furtherance or discarding of Ideas, Theories, Assumptions, etc.
It is not. Such a place would lead to nothing interesting apart from a large playground for crackpots. We tried this in the past with a forum "independent research" and it failed.

Before I leave though I must beg indulgence to put in repetition the question I asked, "What happened to the Gravity?" as I feel this is an important point that in the volumes of information I was directed to has not been addressed adequately.
I say this because as I read I saw the same "theory" discussed repeatedly concerning how an initially "hot" universe cooled as it grew and in many other theories it is deemed necessary for it to eventually stop "growing and collapse in upon itself whereupon the process starts all over again.
This would not be possible if the Gravity as well as the Light as Drakkith so eloquently expressed it were "just gone".
Gravity was not "gone" (read Drakkith's post again, he just speaks of energy of radiation that is "gone"). Gravity was always there. The evolution of the universe starting a very short moment after the big bang is well-described with known physics, including gravity.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
  • #8
mephestopheles said:
Enigman,
as I have to assume that you are the moderator of this Forum
I am not a Mentor (moderator).*
mephestopheles said:
it is to you that I have to apologize
You have to do no such thing.
mephestopheles said:
and regretfully bid farewell to this forum.
And certainly not that! PF is a great place to learn about physics and that too we get to learn from all the absolutely brilliant people here.

:blushing:*Not that I wasn't flattered to read it...our PF staff is brilliant!
 
  • #9
Sorry, someone hijacked the thread with an off topic post, unfortunately responses to the hijack also were deleted to bring the thread back on topic.
 

What is "The Small Flash" Theory?

"The Small Flash" Theory is a scientific theory that proposes a new explanation for the origin of the universe. It suggests that the Big Bang was triggered by a small burst of energy, rather than a singularity.

What evidence supports "The Small Flash" Theory?

"The Small Flash" Theory is supported by various pieces of observational and theoretical evidence. This includes the observed expansion of the universe, the distribution of cosmic microwave background radiation, and the successful predictions made by the theory.

How does "The Small Flash" Theory differ from the Big Bang Theory?

"The Small Flash" Theory differs from the Big Bang Theory in that it proposes a different mechanism for the initial expansion of the universe. While the Big Bang Theory suggests a singularity as the starting point, "The Small Flash" Theory suggests a small burst of energy.

What implications does "The Small Flash" Theory have for our understanding of the universe?

"The Small Flash" Theory challenges some of the existing ideas about the origin of the universe and could potentially lead to new insights and discoveries. It also opens up new avenues for research and could potentially help us better understand the nature of dark matter and dark energy.

Has "The Small Flash" Theory been widely accepted by the scientific community?

"The Small Flash" Theory is a relatively new and still developing idea, so it has not yet been widely accepted by the scientific community. However, it has gained some interest and support from researchers and has sparked further discussion and investigation into the origins of the universe.

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
819
Replies
15
Views
1K
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • Cosmology
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • Cosmology
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
10
Views
2K
Back
Top