Why is this theory simply ignored?

[MathJakob]

When we 'look' at black holes, we see matter being sucked into it and compressed to an infinitely dense point, a singularity. Our universe was a singularity with temperature and density (maybe infinitely small volume is the correct phrase) going to infinity.

Why is the theory that our universe itself came from a black hole in another universe so easily dismissed? Or that our universe is eternal and soon enough a black hole will get so large it will create another big bang, spitting out all the matter it swallowed. I'm not sure if I'm getting this right but black holes eventually disperse, but the matter that it swallowed up is nowhere to be seen.

Is it stupid to suggest that maybe our universe was created when the matter from another universe was sucked into it? If not can you please explain why this theory either doesn't work or is proven to be false?

Thanks.

 

[mfb]

Why is the theory that our universe itself came from a black hole in another universe so easily dismissed?

This is not a theory, it is a collection of words.
What can you calculate based on that "theory"? What does this "theory" predict? Are there any deviations from the usual models for the big bang? Is it easier than those models?

How would black holes in our universe have anything like "other universes" inside?

Or that our universe is eternal and soon enough a black hole will get so large it will create another big bang, spitting out all the matter it swallowed.

The big bang was not an explosion in space.


There is a real hypothesis (not a theory) which sounds similar - Lee Smolin proposed it. It might be true, but we cannot test it.