The Origin

[ShAiOnEi]

I want to create a topic about pretty much the start of our vast space or universe. I am interested in everyones thoughts and ideas of how you think it all started. Whether you believe it to be created by a God or by something scientific as the big bang. I will start off by sharing my thoughts of how our world came to be.

In theory I think that we have two different sides to the universe like an inverse equation in which there is everything><nothing. Now scientists have discovered at the heart of most galaxies there is a black hole. I don't know the truth of the reason but I came to thinking that maybe it could be the start of everything spilling into nothing?

Think about if for a second one side is just black nothingness and on the other side it's everything. What if one moment in time this perfect balance became unstable and started inversely opening up holes in which we had a bonding of the two elements?

I know this sounds very theoretical in nature but that's the point of this thread, to let out some of our inner thoughts and theories of what we think started this place we call the universe.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

I believe in a mix of two theories: the Big Splat theory, and the antimatter vs matter theory. I call it the bi-universal theory.

I believe that all black holes are worm holes. Worm holes have the energy (if that's what it is at this point... it may just be exotic dark energy for all we know) to convert matter into antimatter and vice versa. Therefore, an equilibrium between the two universes are maintained.

The Big Splat theory explains how the energy of the big bang was released due to a collision of universal planes (planes in this case are 7th dimension or higher, assuming that spacial dimensions and time dimensions are subdimensions of the string/universal realm of dimensions). In my theory, there are two universal planes bound by wormholes. The wormholes constrict and expand at random rates of acceleration (once again, in high dimensions) to cause a collision between the planes, releasing the energy of such a phenomenon known as the Big Bang. Usually, the randomness of the wormhole motion doesn't allow for such a thing to occur, but there is a possibility at all times.

In speaking of the origin of these two planes, that is the same thing as asking the origin of nothing or the origin of everything. Basically, it is another Moebius Ring. =)

The theory of antimatter vs matter state that during the Big Bang, antimatter was created in the same way matter was created, except there was a greater volume of matter, which in turn split into baryonic (normal everyday matter) and exotic (spacial void matter) as well as dark (the matter responsible for providing the energy of the Background Microwave Radiation) and light (the matter responsible for providing the everyday energy we witness today).

The Big Splat theory explains that the Big Bang was caused by multiple collisions of various universal planes at extremely high accelrations in high dimensions (I do not fully understand the concept of dimensions above 6, and I do not have too much information about the string theory, or gravitrons.).

I hope this is some insightful input. =)

EDIT: My comments on ShAiOnEi's theory.
I didn't know that scientists had discovered that there were blackholes in the center of almost every galaxy. =)
Concerning the everything nothing stability idea: I think the presence of the BMR supports this statement in many ways. If beyond the BMR was really just void, the maintenance of the compressed "everything" inside the barrier of the BMR would be extremely unstable. It would be curious as to how such a balance is maintained for such a long time by such a low energy wave barrier. A problem I see in this idea is that presuming that outside the BMR was void now, but was everything before (as in the Big Bang energy release occured when the position of void and everything interchanged with the BMR as the semi-permeable membrane), how come the transfusion process didn't stop when everything and nothing were equally satiated on both sides of the membrane?

I love theories. Discussing my own, gaining new ideas, conglomerating, rejecting, negotiating. This thread is awesome. =)

[ShAiOnEi]

Originally Posted by Xx{Midday}xX

I believe in a mix of two theories: the Big Splat theory, and the antimatter vs matter theory. I call it the bi-universal theory.

I believe that all black holes are worm holes. Worm holes have the energy (if that's what it is at this point... it may just be exotic dark energy for all we know) to convert matter into antimatter and vice versa. Therefore, an equilibrium between the two universes are maintained.

The Big Splat theory explains how the energy of the big bang was released due to a collision of universal planes (planes in this case are 7th dimension or higher, assuming that spacial dimensions and time dimensions are subdimensions of the string/universal realm of dimensions). In my theory, there are two universal planes bound by wormholes. The wormholes constrict and expand at random rates of acceleration (once again, in high dimensions) to cause a collision between the planes, releasing the energy of such a phenomenon known as the Big Bang. Usually, the randomness of the wormhole motion doesn't allow for such a thing to occur, but there is a possibility at all times.

In speaking of the origin of these two planes, that is the same thing as asking the origin of nothing or the origin of everything. Basically, it is another Moebius Ring. =)

The theory of antimatter vs matter state that during the Big Bang, antimatter was created in the same way matter was created, except there was a greater volume of matter, which in turn split into baryonic (normal everyday matter) and exotic (spacial void matter) as well as dark (the matter responsible for providing the energy of the Background Microwave Radiation) and light (the matter responsible for providing the everyday energy we witness today).

The Big Splat theory explains that the Big Bang was caused by multiple collisions of various universal planes at extremely high accelrations in high dimensions (I do not fully understand the concept of dimensions above 6, and I do not have too much information about the string theory, or gravitrons.).

I hope this is some insightful input. =)

Wow that really is interesting man I never even thought of putting the actual fact of matter vs antimatter case in there although my everything and nothing theory seem to correlate with your belief in some ways.

[UberMario]

What? What two "elements"? Black holes are just super condensed matter - for a lack of word. It's a star that is so giant that its own gravity holds the light reflected to itself, theoretically. Or so I believe, since I haven't indulged into Astronomy yet. Anyways, big bang is what happened, and at a very low temperature, clusters of matter (planets) form around stars that give off energy constantly, which causes us to appear. In the end, matter condenses and pulls all matter together and causes the big bang to happen again. Woo.

Even after 14 billion years, a remnant of the Big Bang's beyond-astronomical levels of heat exists in the cosmic background radiation (CBR), which has cooled to just three degrees above absolute zero. Here, the CBR is "seen" in a NASA image.

[ShAiOnEi]

Originally Posted by UberMario

What? What two "elements"? Black holes are just super condensed matter - for a lack of word. It's a star that is so giant that its own gravity holds the light reflected to itself, theoretically. Or so I believe, since I haven't indulged into Astronomy yet. Anyways, big bang is what happened, and at a very low temperature, clusters of matter (planets) form around stars that give off energy constantly, which causes us to appear. In the end, matter condenses and pulls all matter together and causes the big bang to happen again. Woo.

Even after 14 billion years, a remnant of the Big Bang's beyond-astronomical levels of heat exists in the cosmic background radiation (CBR), which has cooled to just three degrees above absolute zero. Here, the CBR is "seen" in a NASA image.

Yeah well yeah that is only a theory on how black holes are formed it's not concrete fact. So I could call a black hole anything and not be right nor wrong since the explanation of the phenomenon hasn't been proven yet.

I don't want to really argue in this thread I just want everyone to trade thoughts and ideas and open your mind up to new possible theories.

Think of this like a social networking information thread, not an argument.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

Originally Posted by UberMario

What? What two "elements"? Black holes are just super condensed matter - for a lack of word. It's a star that is so giant that its own gravity holds the light reflected to itself, theoretically. Or so I believe, since I haven't indulged into Astronomy yet. Anyways, big bang is what happened, and at a very low temperature, clusters of matter (planets) form around stars that give off energy constantly, which causes us to appear. In the end, matter condenses and pulls all matter together and causes the big bang to happen again. Woo.

Even after 14 billion years, a remnant of the Big Bang's beyond-astronomical levels of heat exists in the cosmic background radiation (CBR), which has cooled to just three degrees above absolute zero. Here, the CBR is "seen" in a NASA image.

The Big Crunch Omega theory of the universe was rejected. The expansion of the universe is accelerating at a further rapid pace than when the Big Bang energy release first started the expansion of the CBR (which is the same as my BMR). Many scientists believe this to be the work of Lambda, which signifies the dark energy potential emitted by the 99% of the matter (dark exotic matter) that dominates this universe. The end of the universe is for all of the stars to die out. Gravity is not strong enough to pull them all back together. The reason that the CBR is cooling is because the wave membrane is becoming extremely thin.

In case if you were wondering, my information comes from "The Elegant Universe" and "The Fabric of Cosmos" both by Charles Greene and "Alpha and Omega" and "Zero" both by Charles Seife. I started reading these books in 3rd grade, and every single time something new popped up that could get feedback from the factual information, I checked these books out again to see if I could make sense of this new idea. That's how i resolved to my bi-universal theory.

EDIT: Also, the universe is not regarded as a giant star. Stars are self-resuscitating energy cycles formed by baryonic energy and matter. The universe is the boundary between existence and void.

[reuben_tate]

As for the origin of the universe I do believe in the Big Bang therory. As for black holes I think that matter does not just disapear so I think that after it goes through a black hole in goes to an universe parrelell to ours and comes out of an white hole (if thats what you want to call it). As for the end of the universe, it is true that the universe it expanding so I think all the stars are going to die, all the large stars will turn it black holes and suck up all the matter, then those black holes will eventually diminish into nothingness and the universe will just be a cold empty place.

[Izzy]

I know there is evidence that supports the big bang theory but i don't personally believe it in that manner. It could be evidence for something else to and we just aren't looking for it or thinking of it in a different possibility. Really i don't see why the universe couldnt have just been here. Why did it have to be created by anything.

[inflames07]

Originally Posted by reuben_tate

As for the origin of the universe I do believe in the Big Bang therory. As for black holes I think that matter does not just disapear so I think that after it goes through a black hole in goes to an universe parrelell to ours and comes out of an white hole (if thats what you want to call it). As for the end of the universe, it is true that the universe it expanding so I think all the stars are going to die, all the large stars will turn it black holes and suck up all the matter, then those black holes will eventually diminish into nothingness and the universe will just be a cold empty place.

Black holes aren't actually holes.. Someone above explained what they are. They got the "hole" label because the gravity is so strong that it seems to suck everything into it.

[OMG its HIM]

Originally Posted by inflames07

Black holes aren't actually holes.. Someone above explained what they are. They got the "hole" label because the gravity is so strong that it seems to suck everything into it.

it does suck everything in it,including light,as for the theory i believe of how the universe came about, it was the big bang.it happened some 15 billion years ago, and it was a tremendous explosion.the universe is constanly expanding. and yes radiation is still in this universe,thats how much fore and energy the big bang was. but the universe is cooling also while it is expanding

[Xx{Midday}xX]

The big bang has a theorized cause too. Maybe you guys want to discuss that more? Just blatantly repeating the big bang doesn't really provide much conversation.

[Grandiagod]

Black holes are just large amounts of matter that has condensed into a singularity. They are caused by collapsing stars.

They do not suck things in as nothing in the universe is capable of "sucking" they attract matter towards themselves through gravity.

The big bang isn't the origin theory of the Universe, rather it is the theory about how the Universe expanded.

Misconceptions abound in this thread.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

The ultimate question about a black hole is it's extent to which it acts as a so-called pit in the spacetime fabric up to the 6th dimension. It is common knowledge that black holes are matter with densities of the exa-exa range. However, it is impossible to determine whether the black hole warps the space time fabric to the point where it rips the spacetime fabric. Einstein stated that the fabric of spacetime could only be ripped by surpassing an energy potential equal to that of the speed of light. Perhaps, black holes do hold this potential?

Another aspect to the black hole is the matter in which it creates. As I mentioned before, 4 kinds of matter exist: a combination of light/dark matter and exotic/baryonic matter. Do black holes account for the exotic dark matter that fill 99% of the universe?

More discussion. =)

In theory, light has an infinite velocity because it has no mass... yet it exerts a force. Scientists "avoid" splitting the momentum of a photon because "theoretically" light has no mass. If light truly has no mass, there is almost no way of achieving a velocity greater than that of light, or accelerating a massive (an object with mass, regardless of how small) object to that velocity. Some scientists believe that the acceleration of space acceleration is time, which is deemed to be the 4th dimension. Thoughts?

[JonXia]

Black Holes are spaces where everything gets sucked into a singularity and also stretched. Since time is also influenced by speed it would also mean that space and time are distorted at the singulatity which is spewed out of the complete opposite of a black hole, the white hole. White holes expel matter light and restore "normality" in my opinion.

Big Bang for me because, well, I like it ^^'

[devonin]

White holes expel matter light and restore "normality" in my opinion.

Except for the fact that there's not actually any evidence that such a thing exists.

Black holes aren't "holes" in the sense that you can go in one side and if you go far enough come out the other, like digging to China. They are called holes in the sense that so far as we know, nothing that goes in can get out. It's actually just a superdense object with its own very strong gravitational pull. It makes for fun sci-fi to suggest that there is "another side" (which would almost definitionally require you to accept multiple universes) but it certainly wouldn't have an "other side" -inside- our own universe.

[Go_Oilers_Go]

Is this topic really a Critical Thinking topic? After all, our opinions on the origins of the universe are purely speculation up to this point, despite any "scientific" evidence that "proves" otherwise. But if you want my take, I simply believe that God created everything in 7... err... 6 days just as the Bible says.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

If you think about it, then yeah, this could be a pretty debatable topic. One line statements really don't provide much thought though. =/

I simply believe that God created everything in 7... err... 6 days just as the Bible says.

Any critical thinking topic can be made simple in one way or another. =/

[Reach]

The universe we see around us arose some 14 billion years ago from what we model as the Big Bang Theory, which is well supported. Nobody really questions whether or not it happened anymore if they're educated on the matter, but vehement debate still rages over the why questions the theory does not address and is incapable of addressing, such as what caused the Big Bang? Or where did the energy necessary to cause the Big Bang come from? You also have to deal with difficult fine tuning problems - why are there Strong CP and hierarchy problems? How do we address constant specificity and the tiny value of the cosmological constant?

Saying God did it is a terrible explanation, specifically because it doesn't explain anything at all. It creates more problems than we already experience. For example, the word God in itself is an empty word - what is God specifically and how did God come about? In what way was God capable of creating the universe and how did it do it? We're left with no explanation and more problems (in particular, the word is often used directly to fill gaps in our understanding), so let's throw that out for the moment.

I prefer to think about ways the universe could have arisen from things that we already know about our own universe. The Big Bang was a rapid expansion of energy - where did the energy come from? From thermodynamics, we know we can't create or destroy the energy in a system. There is reason to believe that you cannot rid the ability to do work at some level from any spatial system, so the fundamental foundation of what we see around us may not require an origin if it was always there.

This still doesn't address a cause of the Big Bang though. Now things become a bit more complicated. A collision between already existing universes could potentially generate a Big Bang, but where did the first universe come from then? Where did the first anything come from? There has to be another explanation capable of generating a single universe or single something from a system of vacuum energy. It might be possible to search quantum mechanics for the answer - if quantum mechanics governs every system that exists, then it would govern our system of energy before there were any universes. If quantum mechanics governs this system at some level, the vacuum energy it contains should be subject to unpredictable fluctuations. If enough time passed (who knows, let's say 500 trillion years as an example) it doesn't seem unreasonable to suggest that a vacuum fluctuation large enough to cause the big bang could occur (remember, the Big Bang was only a rapid expansion of energy). It's a long shot though. However, if correct it would mean the universe is a self creating, sustaining and manifesting system.

Honestly, I have no idea what caused the Big Bang, so I like to leave these possibilities open, among many others. Regardless, if the universe is self creating, there would have to be another mechanism to drive the fine tuning of created universes. Otherwise it would be hard to imagine the creation of anything other than random expansions of energy occasionally that would quickly collapse or generate nothing.

One explanation for the specificity of our universe I've thought of involves Evolution. Evolution is a change in time in information that can be passed on between 'generations'. If you think of the entire universe as analogous to a living organism, it's possible to imagine that like us, it might be the product of some higher level of evolution across the birth and death of universes. One question that this leaves unanswered however is how universes create other universes and pass on information to them. Life on earth does it through DNA, but universes? I have no idea. It could have something to do with black holes, which has been discussed quite a bit here. Use your imagination, I guess :P I'm too tired to continue this right now, and it's difficult to deal with. We haven't even properly explained the mechanisms behind driving the creation of life on wee little earth, let alone on the universal scale.

[Izzy]

I am interested to know what other evidence of the big bang theory there are other then the patterns of heat left over and how stars are moving away from us showing that the universe is expanding. Someone probably knows here.

[JonXia]

Is the universe expanding or are he stars and glaxies just getting farther into space that is already there?

That is what goes through my head