Notices
Results 1 to 8 of 8
Like Tree1Likes
  • 1 Post By SpeedFreek

Thread: Hypothesis: Universe expansion acceleration in expansion is due to secondary explosion to the big bang.

  1. #1 Hypothesis: Universe expansion acceleration in expansion is due to secondary explosion to the big bang. 
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    16
    Has anyone put forth the hypothesis that the big bang was caused by dark matter, so to speak? Not that straight forwardly. Allow me to expound with what-ifs:

    What-if 1. Before the big bang the singularity was encapsulated by a dark-matter/energy black hole. Or more precisely, the singularity was at its core.

    What-if 2. Pressure on the singularity became so great that it exploded.

    What-if 3. Dark-matter/energy rushed into fill the new void, like an implosion.

    What-if 4. About 5 billion years ago, the implosion had completed and recoiled as a secondary explosion to the big bang.

    Even if there wasn't a dark-matter/energy black hole, and it simply was all that expansively encompassed the singularity quiescently, these what-ifs might explain the sudden acceleration in the expansion of the universe about 5 billion years ago.
     

  2. #2  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    16
    Continuation:

    It's kind of fun to ponder implications and other ramifications of these suppositions...

    So this hypothesis boils down to dark matter and energy are the real players of the exo-universe trying to reclaim their territories evacuated by the big bang: a tug of war between expansion by dark energy and compression by dark matter.

    What would happen over aeons (many multiples longer than 14.5 billion years) is, with no added singularities mixing up the mess, dark energy and matter would continue to rush out from the implosion recoil towards the event horizon. It would eventually dissipate its acceration as it approaches the event horizon, and as the energy of the big bang at the event horizon also dissipates.

    Now if dark matter tends to coagulate and form dark matter black holes, which in turn incubate singularities, then who knows how many are ripe to big bang their way into our big-bang compromised neck of the exo-universe? Perhaps only one can happen at a time. Perhaps the exo-universe is so expansive, these big bangs are merely tine ripples having little or no effect on each other?

    If any of this is possible, then it is also possible that the resurgant dark matter within our universe would eventually tighten itself up and produce another singularity. It's just that the time it would take is unfathomable.
     

  3. #3  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    16
    I realize that there may be implications of a "center of the universe" to this hypothesis, as an implosion would have a general center. But maybe not so: Perhaps the idea of implosion for dark matter and energy does not conform to our normal understanding of implosions.
     

  4. #4  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    276
    Quote Originally Posted by ckollerer View Post
    Has anyone put forth the hypothesis that the big bang was caused by dark matter, so to speak? Not that straight forwardly. Allow me to expound with what-ifs:

    What-if 1. Before the big bang the singularity was encapsulated by a dark-matter/energy black hole. Or more precisely, the singularity was at its core.

    What-if 2. Pressure on the singularity became so great that it exploded.

    What-if 3. Dark-matter/energy rushed into fill the new void, like an implosion.

    What-if 4. About 5 billion years ago, the implosion had completed and recoiled as a secondary explosion to the big bang.

    Even if there wasn't a dark-matter/energy black hole, and it simply was all that expansively encompassed the singularity quiescently, these what-ifs might explain the sudden acceleration in the expansion of the universe about 5 billion years ago.
    This belongs in Trash.
     

  5. #5  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    16
    It may belong in Personal Theories and Alternative Hypothesis. And it deserves at least a logical, fact-cited refutation. Thank you for your consideration.
     

  6. #6  
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Sep 2017
    Posts
    276
    Quote Originally Posted by ckollerer View Post
    It may belong in Personal Theories and Alternative Hypothesis. And it deserves at least a logical, fact-cited refutation. Thank you for your consideration.
    This is a science forum not a dump site for speculations. You've been told before.
     

  7. #7  
    Junior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2017
    Location
    Santa Rosa, CA
    Posts
    16
    I'll take that as the answer to my question, "Has anyone put forth the hypothesis..." The answer being, no.

    I'm sorry you are not as interested in finding an answer to the burning question of why the universe suddenly sped up its expansion 5 million years ago. Dismissing it out of hand because I do not have a scientiic background is prejudicial, and not in the interest of science.
     

  8. #8  
    Administrator SpeedFreek's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2013
    Posts
    350
    What if: There was a website where anyone without any physics background could go and propose any "idea" they liked, and they expected people who have trained in the subject to expend time and energy meticulously explaining why their "idea" doesn't work?

    It might be fun, I must look for a site like that sometime.
    ckollerer likes this.
     

Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •