Big Bang

Big Bang

 
There was a "Big-Bang" or a "Bang"
 
Posts  1 - 3  of  3
Big Bang discussion
 
JoseSeveriano
A New Vision obout the Universe


To start with, we must consider the two main theories about the creation and evolution from the universe :

1st-the theory of “Big-Bang”;
2nd-the theory of a “Bang”, or several “Bangs” or the multiverse theory.

The theory of a “Big-Bang”, naturally emerged from an observation of a phenomenom by the astronomer Hubble, whom arrived to the conclusion (by observation) that the universe it is expanding. This observation gave the birth to the universe another meaning for its evolution.

If the universe it is expanding, arriving to its now known (aproximatelly) dimension, it would imply that somewhere in the past it was much more smaller then it is now (everything we see was concentrate in a tiny point), or to be more precise, sometime all that we can see was concentrate in a tiny space (a singularity), due to this conclusion we have arrived too, to the conclusion that something catastrophic happened in the begining, that we called a “Big-Bang”.

With the “Big-Bang”, space and time began, and finally we arrived to the actual scenario.

Some things became (at the time, and some are until now) unexplained althought, for example, at which rate its expansion ocurred initially ? Will the universe have an end ? What will hapen at the end ? Will be happen a Big-Crunch, and all start again ? Is the universe cyclic or it will expand forever, the Big-Rip ?

Recently, a cosmologist (W. Gut) devised a good explanation to this (accepted by the scientific community), “inflation”, to explain it we must think that at the very beginning the universe expanded exponentially (at a super-luminal rate), there was no space no time. At the first glimpse we would think that a constant stablished by Albert Einstein was being violated, that show to us that the speed of light is an universal constant (independently from the referential), but this does not occur, more space and time was being created at all.

Now we have to go backward in time and remember another physicist, named Hugh Everett III, that introduced (due to an interpretation from the paradox of the cat of Schröndiger) the concept of MWI (Multi-World-Interpretation and the superposition of states too).

This interpretation lead to a concept of multi-universes, not Just one.

One of the most interesting theories about this (for me), divised by Neil Turok, Robert Steinhardt and others, was the brane universes (universes in a membrane), here we arrive to a point where we can put together two theories, the string theory and this of multi-universes, represented as membrane universes.

The string theory by its side, needs to have, to be consistent, that space has (at least) 11 dimensions, so the membrane universes too, I say.

This theory lead too, to a conclusion (at minimum) curious, that there wasn´t the need of a “Big-Bang”, and that what really could have occurred was Just a “Bang” to create our own universe (a huge burst of energy due to the collision between two brane-universes).

We may question what it would mean at least ? The eventual collisions between these “Brane-Universes” would be enough to generate a “Bang” so powerful as a “Big-Bang” so a new universe would be created ?

Now, I would introduce a new idea, that not Just one new universe would be created by these collisions, but two, or by pairs. One universe at the very beginning “entangled” with the other within a brief time, so that when this “entanglement” is broken a new and powerfull amount of energy will be introduced in the system so that it will expand exponentially (in an inflationary way, indeed).

There would appear too a paradox, from our point of view, we cannot distinguish a “Big-Bang” event from that of a “Bang” event, they will appear to us to be the same phenomenom, and behave as.

Other thing that I have been thinking about is that (by the observational results) the universe instead of slowing its expansion, indeed it is accelerating (due to the existence of what we called DM and DE, in accordance to some theories). The question that remains, is this expansion “inflationary” too ?

As one thing conduct us to another, I am convicted (and I have been studying it) that each of the infinity number of universes are at least hiper-huge-massive Black holes too, and behaves as.
The singularity is still there, the events horizon too.

It may look, perhaps at first glance paradoxal, but it ins´t, take the brane-universe, with 11 dimmensions (in accordance with ST) we could conceive, for example that a surface of Kalabi-Yau as the projection of a brane-universe into a lower dimension, and doing so we could arrive to a Möebius surface of 3 dimensions. The Möebius surface it is interesting because, althought exists in 3 dimensions, Just have a face and an edge. It will occurs with a Kalabi-Yau surface and for consequence with a brane-universe, in a much higher dimension !

At this point someonelse would do the question : why am I talking about, Möebius , Kalabi-Yau, surfaces, etc ?

Simple, bringing to a lower dimension the representation of a brane-universe we could study its properties and infer those related to our own universe as a brane-universe or not.

Other question that I want to raise here is that the “background noise”, result of a “Big-Bang” or a “bang”, seems to come from any direction we look to, but I would state that this noise Just come from a point, “the singularity”, itself !

The fluctuations we observe in this “background noise” are due in reallity result from the interference of “dark Matter” and “dark Energy” !

Thru recent discovered papers from Albert Einstein, even him speculated about the “Big-Bang”, and in some way was open to others alternatives.

By the other side there is an entity that have intrigued me for several years and I have been studying its role in the evolution from the universe, Neutrinos. This entity, for me, takes a fundamental role in the process of evolution of our universe and that is of real importance.
They, for me, are one of the most intriguing entities until now discovered, and you will see how. They have some strangeness that amaze, at least, us :

-its too feeble interaction with the common matter, they have no charge;
-its abundance, they are the second most abundant sub-particle in the known universe. Being Just behind the photons;
-the speed at which it displaces, almost that of the light (99.9998 %);
-its very tiny mass;
-and the most strange of all, they oscillate, or to be more precise they change its “flavor” as travelling thru the universe.

The last strangeness its that I have been studying, and arrived to some conclusions, maybe interesting :

-in the process of oscillation a neutrino –a- becomes a neutrino –b-, in this process I have arrived to a relation between the phenomenom of the role of two other entities (both theoretical), that I named Planck-Black-Holes and Planck-Wormholes;

-by some papers I have read there appear to exist a tight relation between BH and WH, where is one the other will be there;

-by the Shcwarszild metric, at least theoretically, the smaller BH we may have will have the Planck´s Mass, as the neutrino´s mass is almost kinetic, I divised a process by which the neutrino´s kinetic mass becomes that of the Planck´s mass, then a pulse occurs and the neutrino gives the origin to a pBH and consenquently a counterpart appear, a pWH. The pBH, By the Hawking´s Law of evaporation from a BH, in a burst will supply the pWH with all energy needed to keep it open, then when the total energy evaporated by the pBH finish , a neutrino in a different state (of energy) will appear, and the excess of energy will be “pumped” into the universe as DE or DM, this process is self-contained;

-this process occurs in such a way that, for na external observer, he won´t be able to detect any amount of energy generated in the process of oscillation (is Aleph null), so that if we could follow the trajectory of a neutrino it would look like more to a “dashed” line;

-the last conclusion I have arrived is that we are immersed in billlions and billions of pBH and pWH, at room temperature.

You may ask me which is the connection from this entytie and the evolution from the universe, and I would tell you that this phenomenom is responsible for, at least, a part from DE and DM, and consenquently may explain its accelerated expansion.


Petropolis,april the 2nd of 2014

Jose Severiano Lopes de Queiroz Neto


Open to discussion
           
 
lucaspa
replied to: JoseSeveriano
Jose, you need to distinguish between the origin of universe we live in and theories about an overall cosmos that contains many universes like the one we live in. "Multiverse" theories cover a cosmos that has many -- sometimes billions -- of universes like ours.

Now, the ekpyrotic theory of Turok et al. is NOTHING like the multiverse of Everett. Everett had our universe splitting each time there was a superposition. As a simple example, say we entangle the spins of 2 electrons. We don't know what the spins are. We look at one electron and it is spin "up". Well, at that point the universe splits and there are other "we" that sees an electron in spin "down". Both universes are "real" but have no contact with each other. In the end, you end up with an infinite number of "universes" that derive from quantum events.

Turok with ekpyrotic is something very different. It is based on String Theory, which is a theory about the basic nature of light and matter in our universe. Ekpyrotic starts with 11 dimensions, but 6 are "rolled up" and can be ignored. So there is a flat 5-dimension space. In this 5D space "float" two 4-dimension universes. One is our universe, the other a hidden "parallel" universe. Random fluctuations cause hidden universe to shed membrane that floats to our universe with quantum fluctuations. Some of energy of collision becomes matter and energy in our universe.

Ekpyrotic removes the need for inflation and the singularity of big bang, instead is a "plate-like splash". Big bang and ekpyrotic have different gravity waves. If another membrane peels off of hidden universe, then it would destroy ours on impact. The acceleration expansion, in ekpyrotic, would be our universe "accelerating" toward the 'brane that will eventually destroy our universe.
www.arXiv.org/abs/hep-th/0103239
http://www.sciencemag.org/cgi/content/full/292/5515/189
http://wwwphy.princeton.edu/~steinh/npr/
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/astronomy/bigbang_alternative_010413-1.html

"The last strangeness its that I have been studying, and arrived to some conclusions, maybe interesting :

-in the process of oscillation a neutrino –a- becomes a neutrino –b-, in this process I have arrived to a relation between the phenomenom of the role of two other entities (both theoretical), that I named Planck-Black-Holes and Planck-Wormholes; "

Instead of putting this here, I strongly suggest you write it up as a paper and put in on arXiv.org. Let trained physicists evaluate it. IF it passes that peer-review and is generally accepted by the physics community, THEN tell lay audiences like absolute astronomy. Telling us without getting the idea peer-reviewed serves no purpose.
           
 
JoseSeveriano
replied to: lucaspa
A New Vision about the Universe


To start with, we must consider the two main theories about the creation and evolution from the universe :

1st-the theory of “Big-Bang”;
2nd-the theory of a “Bang”, or several “Bangs” or the multiverse theory.

The theory of a “Big-Bang”, naturally emerged from an observation of a phenomenom by the astronomer Hubble, whom arrived to the conclusion (by observation) that the universe it is expanding. This observation gave the birth to the universe another meaning for its evolution that we follow today.

If the universe it is expanding, arriving to its now known (aproximatelly) dimension, it would imply that somewhere in the past it was much more smaller then it is now (everything we see was concentrate in a tiny point), or to be more precise, sometime all that we can see was concentrate in a tiny space (a singularity), due to this conclusion we have arrived too, to the conclusion that something catastrophic happened in the begining, that we called a “Big-Bang”.

With the “Big-Bang”, space and time began, and finally we arrived to the actual scenario.

Some things became (at the time, and some are until now) unexplained althought, for example, at which rate its expansion ocurred initially ? Will the universe have an end ? What will hapen at the end ? Will be happen a Big-Crunch, and all start again ? Is the universe cyclic or it will expand forever, the Big-Rip ?

Recently, a cosmologist (W. Gut) devised a good explanation to this (accepted by the scientific community), “inflation”, to explain it we must think that at the very beginning the universe expanded exponentially (at a super-luminal rate), there was no space no time. At the first glimpse we would think that a constant stablished by Albert Einstein was being violated, that show to us the speed of light is an universal constant and no known object in our universe can overcome it (independently from the referential), but this does not occur, more space and time was being created at all.

Now we have to go backward in time and remember another physicist, named Hugh Everett III, that introduced (due to an interpretation from the paradox of the cat of Schröndiger) the concept of MWI (Multi-World-Interpretation and the superposition of states too).

This interpretation lead to a concept of multi-universes, not Just one.

One of the most interesting theories about this (for me), divised by Neil Turok, Robert Steinhardt and others, was the brane-universes (universes in a membrane), here we arrive to a point where we can put together two theories, the string theory and this of multi-universes, represented as membrane universes.

The string theory by its side, requires to have to be consistent, that space has (at least) 11 dimensions, so the membrane universes too, I say.

The vibration of these strings (by the ST) would explain each elementary particle we know, except “gravity”, that would be explained by a “closed-string”. These “closed-string” would transit between the brane-universes, explaining for its side why gravity is so feeble (apparently), comparing to all the others forces, already unified.

The quantum fluctuations from the density of these “closed-strings” would be responsible to the eventual collisions of two brane-universes. Then a “bang” would occur.

This theory lead too, to a conclusion (at minimum) curious, that there isn´t the need of a “Big-Bang”, and that what really could have occurred was Just a “Bang” to create our own universe (a huge burst of energy due to the collision between two brane-universes). Collisions that occur eventually from time to time, creating more and more universes, in the process.

We may question what it would mean at least ? The eventual collisions between these “Brane-Universes” would be enough to generate a “Bang” so powerful as a “Big-Bang” so a new universe would be created ?

Now, I would introduce a new idea, that not Just one new universe would be created by these collisions, but two, or by pairs. One universe at the very beginning “entangled” with the other within a brief time, so that when this “entanglement” is broken a new and powerfull amount of energy will be introduced in the system so that it will expand exponentially (in an inflationary way, indeed).

There would appear too a paradox, from our point of view, we cannot distinguish a “Big-Bang” event from that of a “Bang” event, they will appear to us to be the same phenomenom, and behave as.

Other thing that I have been thinking about is that (by the observational results) the universe instead of slowing its expansion, indeed it is accelerating (due to the existence of what we called DM and DE, in accordance to some theories). The question that remains, is this expansion “inflationary” too ?

As one thing conduct us to another, I am convicted (and I have been studying it) that each of the infinity number of universes are at least hiper-huge-massive Black holes too, and behaves as.
The singularity is still there, the events horizon too.

It may look, perhaps at first glance paradoxal, but it ins´t, take the brane-universe, with 11 dimmensions (in accordance with ST) we could conceive, for example that a surface of Kalabi-Yau as the projection of a brane-universe into a lower dimension, and doing so we could arrive to a Möebius surface of 3 dimensions. The Möebius surface it is interesting because, althought exists in 3 dimensions, Just have a face and an edge. It will occur with a Kalabi-Yau surface and for consequence with a brane-universe, in a much higher dimension !

At this point someonelse would do the question : why am I talking about, Möebius , Kalabi-Yau, surfaces, etc ?

Simple, bringing to a lower dimension the representation of a brane-universe we could study its properties and infer those related to our own universe as a brane-universe or not.

Other question that I want to raise here is that the “background noise”, result of a “Big-Bang” or a “bang”, seems to come from any direction we look to, but I would state that this noise Just come from a point, “the singularity”, itself !

As the universe unfold ontoself, we can´t look to its limits at all, everything converge to the “singularity”.

The fluctuations we observe in this “background noise” are due in reallity result from the interference of “dark Matter” and “dark Energy” !

Thru recent discovered papers from Albert Einstein, even him speculated about the “Big-Bang”, and in some way was open to others alternatives.

By the other side there is an entity that have intrigued me for several years and I have been studying its role in the evolution from the universe, Neutrinos. This entity, for me, takes a fundamental role in the process of evolution of our universe and that is of real importance.

They, for me, are one of the most intriguing entities until now discovered, and you will see how. They have some strangeness that amaze, at least, us :

-its too feeble interaction with the common matter, they have no charge;
-its abundance, they are the second most abundant sub-particle in the known universe. Being Just behind the photons;
-the speed at which it displaces, almost that of the light (99.9998 %);
-its very tiny mass (most kinetic);
-and the most strange of all, they oscillate, or to be more precise they change its “flavor” as travelling thru the universe.

The last strangeness its that I have been studying, and arrived to some conclusions, maybe interesting :

-in the process of oscillation a neutrino –a- becomes a neutrino –b-, in this process I have arrived to a relation between the phenomenom of the role of two other entities (both theoretical), that I named Planck-Black-Holes and Planck-Wormholes;

-by some papers I have read there appear to exist a tight relation between BH and WH, where is one the other will be there;

-by the Shcwarszild metric, at least theoretically, the smaller BH we may have will have the Planck´s Mass or little above, as the neutrino´s mass is almost kinetic, I divised a process by which the neutrino´s kinetic mass becomes that of the Planck´s mass, then a pulse occurs and the neutrino gives the origin to a pBH and consenquently a counterpart appear, a pWH. The pBH, by the Hawking´s Law of evaporation from a BH, in a burst will supply the pWH with all energy needed to keep it open, then when the total energy evaporated by the pBH finish , a neutrino in a different state (of energy) will emerge, and the excess of energy will be “pumped” into the universe as DE or DM, this process is self-contained;

-this process occurs in such a way that, for an external observer, he won´t be able to detect any amount of energy generated in the process of oscillation (is Aleph null), so that if we could follow the trajectory of a neutrino it would look like more to a “dashed” line, on each gap the oscillation occurs;

-the last conclusion I have arrived is that we are immersed in billlions and billions of pBH and pWH, at room temperature.

You may ask me which is the connection from this entytie and the evolution from the universe, and I would tell you that this phenomenom is responsible for, at least, a parcel from DE and DM, and consenquently may explain its accelerated expansion.

And more,with all exposed above, would lead us to a GUT, unifying, relativity, quantum mechanics and ST, and finally gravity will fit in the big picture.

Now the efford to prove all this will be to create the mathematics needed, quite an efford.

Petropolis,april the 2nd of 2014

Jose Severiano Lopes de Queiroz Neto

Ps.: revised on may the 5th of 2014.