*****WARNING!!!!*****

Subject matter of a decidedly un-empirical nature is about to commence. If you can't handle inquiry of a theoretical nature, best flee this thread while you can...




There is ample (or rather satisfactory) empirical evidence to suggest that our universe began just as the Big Bang Theory postulates. I have no interest in debating that. Most are familiar enough with the BBT to know that a moment (disregarding concepts on time for the moment) before the explosion, there existed a singular point of density....my inquiry is...in what? Space is a figurative term...a relative measurement of something in relation to another...akin to length and width and all those other relative, figurative terms. Space holds what is contained within it...gives the it borders so to speak...it is different, in that respect, to another figurative, relative term...as in 'volume'...which is the space within a thing...such that the borders imposed by the space without, creates the volume of the space within.... ...yeah, I know....

Anyway, what did this point of density exist in? Where did the mass within the point of density come from? What caused it to condense? If it was always in such a state, then what caused it to explode? There had to be some catalyst. What could it have been? And if it was not always in such a state, what caused it to condense? Where did it come from?

As impractical as this line of inquiry may be, one CAN NOT deny the fact of existence prior to known existence...so these questions demand answers...not to be ignored...

I can postulate, but can we really know? That's a philosophical question.

I have considered this myself and came to this conclusion. Universes, or the singularity that preceeds the creation of a universe, can only be created in... another universe. The energy/mass has to come from somewhere doesn't it? You can't destroy energy, you can only change it. SO it goes to figure (silly assumption here) that it couldn't have just spontaneously come into existence. The energy/mass has to come from somewhere...

I'll let the real scientists step in now...

This post has been edited by RWTAKEN: Mar 18 2008, 10:09 PM

I have my theory that for every black hole...there exists a 'white hole' at the opposite end...where the matter consumed in the black hole is condensed to a singularity and then is expelled from the opening at the white end...creating a cosmic 'big bang'....

expelled where? Into an anti-universe? A parallel universe? The same universe? Where does the energy go?

lol One would have to be able to identify the nature of the substrate to answer any one of those questions..err damn it...I'm picturing some type of geometrical shape...the name of which eludes me right now...it is of forms folding in and out...

Well consider this, if there were white holes at the end of black holes, and they emptied into the same universe, then we would be able to see them with our telescopes.

As far as the shape you refer to. THere was a sci-fi book series... and of course now I can't remember the author or name...

Wrote about there being an infinite number of universes folded up inside black holes. DIfferent universes intersecting and overlapping, being crushed together and torn apart simultaneously. Maybe you are thinking about something like that?

No, I don't think that they empty into the same universe...I think that their acting of opening up creates a new universe entire...as our universe was created....the image that comes to mind is something like this..

That's called a Fractile Image.

There is some theory about fractile universes, I'm just not familiar with it.

yep...fractal geometry....otherwise known as sacred geometry...but you can sorta get the picture of what I mean by the image posted...

now..about that substrate...

mind boggling. Fractiles make me dizzy. lol Wouldn't the substrait be the black/white hole itself?

I think the substrate must be something...as opposed to the 'void' which we typically regard space as...its illogical to presume that a void even exists...it must be that the substrate is actually everything...not a void at all...just everything in totality...infinite and eternal in scope...folding in on itself in ever increasing patterns

It seems to me that on one side you have the old universe, the you have the 'space' where the black hole is, then on the other end you have matter pouring out into a new universe, and I'm guessing what you are asking is where do those 3 things reside... Is there a sort of master area where universes and the conduits between them reside? I suppose there has to be, whether is a fractile based area that folds in upon itself, I just can't know.

Taking it one step further, if there is a master area ( what you call a substrait), where does it reside? You see the path you travel is infinite.

Somehow membrane theory fits into this schema, and maybe that's something you might want to investigate... membrane theory is the successor to string theory. There's tons of websites out there that discuss it.

I have always believed that when one universe goes through it's final big crunch in a massive Black Hole, the Black Hole itself vanishes and becomes the detonator to the next Big Bang...a new universe. So starts the cycle over again. This would be the same for all existing universes...the endless Multiverse.

Why does such a substrate have to exist? Human logic means little once you get down to the quantum level (so much of it is downright illogical if you look at it in the same way as most sciences). No void exists, it is simply a name that we give the concept of non-existence. I am of the belief that the area is merely potential until it is taken up, meaning there is nothing outside the expanses of our universe (at least nothing that it would be possible for us to interact with).

It may well be that certain conditions have to exist for fundamental particles and forces to exist, but I see no reason why those conditions wouldn't be localized to where those particles and forces exist.

This post has been edited by ThePredator: Mar 19 2008, 01:28 PM

The white hole theory wouldn't work now we know of Hawking radiation. (Use wiki to figure out the whole idea of how it works, its to do with the random appearing of atoms in the world of the very tiny (Quantum))
How this matter got there we don't yet know.... It could just be that eventually, the previous universe just collapsed, and began to pull into its self. Gravity would have pulled all things into a single point and the forces would have been so great it would have been similar to a black hole.
There would have been an unimaginable amount of gravitational potential energy.

There's pretty much no thing as empty space; in Quantum mechanics, atoms are constantly appearing and disappearing out of nowhere.
What is this concept of space anyway? Maybe it doesn't just grow, maybe its a constant, endless object; meaning at the end of the universe (Distance, not time) you wont be met by some amazing sight, but instead surrounded by the remains of long dead or recycled stars, on end lies a field of stars, and the other end; Darkness.

I think that Space is just as I said... Space as people imagine it, (Like a bubble) doesn't exist, but instead it is just nothing. It can't disappear, it cant be ripped. Its just that the forces that apply the effects we feel are distorted, causing the idea it can be.

One big problem with the Black Hole Big crunch is that people cant explain how. Black holes fade over time (A massive amount of time that is).
Even if a single black hole did eat everything; it's disappearance would be slow, and not just one big explosion.

This post has been edited by Xeno: Mar 19 2008, 02:46 PM

But the only thing left to exist is the giant black hole, the very laws of physics itself could go into a transfromation. A sudden cascade of changes. We can not be certain one way or the other.
Do you agree that when the only thing left is a black hole, the fabric of time/space would change?

I agree time will change yeah; we'll not be able to test that for a long time, only theorize and hope we hit a correct one.
Even around the largest black holes though, this Hawking radiation is still in effect; and because of the nature of how it works, I cant think why this still wouldn't apply.
I'm thinking of a few ways for an explosion, but my brain isn't working right now, bbl.

Don't forget that Hawking Radiation is quite contested because if it existed, information would be destroyed in the process. Currently we have not seen direct evidence of Hawking Radiation, furthermore his extension to the theory is pure speculation and does not really explain what happens to the information (since it is not backed up by theory).

Philosophy (and we can address it in no more than practical terms than that) defines the substrate (substratum) as the 'empty' substance that constitutes all of actuality. But the substratum itself can not be said to share any of the attributes of actuality except potential...that is to say that it is the potential to become...rather the present 'to be'. Its the same sense that you speak of Pred...only, its an 'thing' which empirical science can not admit of as existing.

Scientists are looking forward to creating a black hole in the ‘lab’ and there is a theory that black holes can create a new Universe! Hmmm…

“A more recently proposed view of black holes might be interpreted as shedding some light on the nature of classical white holes. Some researchers proposed that when a black hole forms, a BIG BANG occurs at the core which creates a new universe that expands into extra dimensions outside of the parent universe[3]. (See also Fecund universes.)

“The initial feeding of matter from the parent universe's black hole and the expansion that follows in the new universe might be thought of as a cosmological type of white hole.
Unlike traditional white holes, this type of white hole would not be localized in space in the new universe and its horizon would have to be identified with the cosmological horizon.” More @
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/White_hole#Recent_speculations

IF a new ‘Universe’ is created by these scientists, will the sentient beings, who may be expected to evolve in this ‘created’ Universe, ponder the same question as being pondered here?

The question being: HOW DID IT ALL BEGIN?
Too weird… ~rore

This post has been edited by rorechof: Mar 21 2008, 07:15 PM