|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
 Posted - 08/19/2001 : 16:20:19 [Permalink]
|
In several previous posts there was reference to a *black hole* Big Bang at the beginning of the Universe. I have read that some astrophysicists claim that the Big Bang began from a *white hole* and not a *black hole*.
However, an explanation from *The Facts on File Dictionary of Astronomy*, FOURTH EDITION, states:
quote:
white hole The reverse of a BLACK HOLE: a region where matter spontaneously appears. Early calculations on black holes indicated that the extreme distortion of space and time inside the EVENT HORIZON should connect our Universe with another through an Einstein-Rosen bridge (or wormhole). Matter falling into the black hole should then correspondingly appear in the other universe as outpouring of material through a white hole. It now seems likely that such links, and hence white holes, do not exist.
Which leads cosmologists where?
I do not think that a black hole (which is attractive and not repulsive) could be considered as being at the origin of the Universe.
Not a black hole and not a white hole? Of course, cosmologists are still studying the matter. There is no way of observing through the Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation (CMBR) with observing instruments to determine what initiated the Big Bang, so cosmology is silent on this point.
Whatever...
I shall gaze into my crystal ball and consult my Tarot cards to find the answer...
ljbrs  
Perfection Is a State of Growth... |
 |
|
|
NubiWan
Skeptic Friend
USA
424 Posts |
Posted - 08/20/2001 : 00:18:27 [Permalink]
|
You know, think me caught a blurb about "white holes" slip by, uh, several months ago. There wasn't much 'meat' in the article, and haven't seen any follow-on articles since. It does sound more analogous to what i would expect a birth of a universe to be like. But am fairly certain, no direct observations have been made of one, thou would think they would be more easily detectable than a black hole. In fact, they may just be a theoretical possibility at this point. Huh? You wouldn't happen to have a link or two, for some info on them, would you?
Yeah, my own use of a black hole as an orgin of our universe, was really a grasp for a conception. It really warps me noodle tink'n about it, butt me likes it. If ya stay with the BH model, all of space-time is compressed within its (!?!) event horizen. Then ya run smack into, what medium defined this point, that the BB expanded into... Have had "false vacuum," an "Higg's fields" attempted to be explained to me. Kind'a follow along, seems like it might work, but a hour later, can't seem to reconstruct the concept. *LOL* With absolutely no foundation in real science, (from me not the theory), kind'a lean to a multi-dimintional explanation.
"If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities." -Voltaire
Edited by - NubiWan on 08/20/2001 00:38:23 |
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 08/21/2001 : 19:15:00 [Permalink]
|
I think we have to be physicists in the appropriate fields to understand the arcane mathematics and the terminology which is used in the physical sciences.
Just because we cannot understand a concept which is way beyond our educational background, does not mean that the theory has no value. I trust physicists (and astrophysicists) to give us the straight goods, even if we do not understand them. Peer review keeps them honest...
My late physicist father, bless him, used to discuss physics with a next-door neighbor who had not graduated from high school. There was no way of the neighbor's comprehending anything which he said. There was no way that my sweet father understood that he was over the neighbor's head, although it was fully understandable to me (who found it over my little head, too, at the time).
ljbrs   
Perfection Is a State of Growth... |
|
|
|
NubiWan
Skeptic Friend
USA
424 Posts |
Posted - 08/21/2001 : 20:48:00 [Permalink]
|
Here's an interesting article, that i ran accross today. They are really getting into it, here. Haven't you wondered, as me has, why, if at the point of matter creation, matter and anti-matter didn't just wipe each other out?
Dunno, ljbrs, kind's relate to yer dad's neighbor, *L*, but have usually found, that the real "heavy hitters," can talk to me at my level of understanding fairly easily. The math, used to test and prove a possiblity, forget it. When they get beyond 2 plus 2, am left behind pretty quickly.  One of the posters at the BABB, that impresses me as a heavy, is Don Smith. Have you caught any of his posts? Even me can follow along with his explanations, and think me understands it.
Self delusion, what's that? 
"If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities." -Voltaire |
|
|
|
James
SFN Regular
USA
754 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2001 : 08:32:19 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Here's an interesting article, that i ran accross today. They are really getting into it, here. Haven't you wondered, as me has(I have), why, if at the point of matter creation, matter and anti-matter didn't just wipe each other out?
Because, AFAIK, and as the theory goes, there was apparently just a little bit more matter than anti-matter. If the amount of both was equal, woulda been a great light show(if anyone was around then), but nothing beyond that would have happened.
The way I see it, christians are godless too...they just don't know it yet. |
|
|
|
NubiWan
Skeptic Friend
USA
424 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2001 : 09:16:48 [Permalink]
|
quote:
Because, AFAIK, and as the theory goes, there was apparently just a little bit more matter than anti-matter. If the amount of both was equal, woulda been a great light show(if anyone was around then), but nothing beyond that would have happened.
"AFAIK," sorry, don't know what it means.  Apparently, we are here. *L* But what was the mechanism to allow more matter than anti-matter? Looks as though they are closing in on the answer.
Ahh, of course, thank you. If you follow the link, there's another article at the bottom, thought was pretty good, too. Either that one, AFAIK, or the one at its bottom, gives a figure of something like one particle survived the matter-antimatter anillation in one billion. That would infer at the orginal Plank moment of the BB, AFAIK our universal mass density would have been a billion times what is now left. Huh?
"If we believe absurdities, we shall commit atrocities." -Voltaire
Edited by - NubiWan on 08/22/2001 09:18:52
Edited by - NubiWan on 08/22/2001 14:54:38 |
|
|
|
Boron10
Religion Moderator
USA
1266 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2001 : 10:16:36 [Permalink]
|
AFAIK = As Far As I Know.
From what I believe James is saying, if there was just a little more matter than antimatter "in the beginning," then, after the initial fireworks, there was a Universe with almost all matter (whatever the difference in amount was, eh?)
I am afraid I'm not clever enough to come up with a good signature, eh?
Edited by - boron10 on 08/22/2001 10:18:22 |
|
|
|
James
SFN Regular
USA
754 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2001 : 18:01:18 [Permalink]
|
You got it, Boron. All it had to be was a minute amount of matter more than anti-matter, and you have us. Eventually. If it had happened the other way around, we'd be made of anti-matter instead of matter.
The way I see it, christians are godless too...they just don't know it yet. |
|
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2001 : 18:16:47 [Permalink]
|
quote:
You got it, Boron. All it had to be was a minute amount of matter more than anti-matter, and you have us. Eventually. If it had happened the other way around, we'd be made of anti-matter instead of matter.
James:
You are right, right, right!!!
Particle physicists have found that parity has been broken by K-mesons and B-mesons (where more particles than antiparticles result from annihilations) which would leave particles as the winners in this Universe and which led eventually to us (who are made of particles) and beyond. Of course, there may be other particles which are winners against anti-particles.
ljbrs
Perfection Is a State of Growth...
Edited by - ljbrs on 08/22/2001 19:25:48 |
|
|
|
James
SFN Regular
USA
754 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2001 : 18:35:01 [Permalink]
|
Aw, I'm touched.
And some say that a high school education is worthless.
The way I see it, christians are godless too...they just don't know it yet. |
|
|
|
Zandermann
Skeptic Friend
USA
431 Posts |
Posted - 08/22/2001 : 18:48:07 [Permalink]
|
quote:
... And some say that a high school education is worthless.
chuckle...certainly not those of us who are high school teachers! |
|
|
|
NubiWan
Skeptic Friend
USA
424 Posts |
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 08/26/2001 : 13:22:09 [Permalink]
|
I have read that the anomalies in the measurements are infinitesimally tiny. Also, I will wait for the information to show up in SCIENCE, NATURE, PHYSICS TODAY, PASP, etc. I will go there later this evening when I have the time. I always go to websites with *.edu* or *.gov* in the URLs. I will wait for scientific confirmation (peer review).
ljbrs
Perfection Is a State of Growth... |
|
|
|
NubiWan
Skeptic Friend
USA
424 Posts |
|
|
ljbrs
SFN Regular
USA
842 Posts |
Posted - 09/05/2001 : 18:44:28 [Permalink]
|
NubiWan:
Beautiful sites. I have saved them all. The photograph of The Galaxy's black hole seen in X-rays is sitting on my desktop as wallpaper. The others will follow. Thank you! 
Incidently Chandrasekhar was always a favorite of mine. His *The Mathematical Theory of Black Holes* sits in my bookcase, begging to be comprehended... Fat chance! It serves to keep me very humble. My calculus classes (as a student) occurred too long ago to be helpful.
However, all three of the sites' photographs are very beautiful. I am a fan of astronomy at all wavelengths in the electromagnetic spectrum. Then there are dark matter and dark energy (Lambda, Quintessence, etc.) to take into account. However, dark things make terrible images for one's desktop wallpaper...
ljbrs
*Nothing is more damaging to a new truth than an old error.* Goethe
Edited by - ljbrs on 09/05/2001 18:47:20 |
|
|
 |
|
|
|
Topic Locked
