Origin of the Universe,,,,Bang or no Bang

[buddyzen]

they are suppose to make a mini recration of the big bang to prove that it was possible on a smaller scale that is one of the many things they are going to do with LHC if it does not work we are only 1 step closer

[Pluto]

G'day Buddyzen

You said

they are suppose to make a mini recration of the big bang to prove that it was possible on a smaller scale that is one of the many things they are going to do with LHC if it does not work we are only 1 step closer

How can you create or mimic something that is very theoretical. Unless you assume what it is an than fit the data?

Its amazing how some information fits the theory regardless if it fits or not.

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzzz


The Future US Cosmology Program
The Future US Cosmology Program
Bernstein,*Gary
American Physical Society, 2008 APS April Meeting and HEDP/HEDLA Meeting, April 11-15, 2008, abstract #S2.003

Abstract:
There is now a standard cosmological theory that is consistent with all extant data, including for the first time cosmological measurements of very high accuracy. The ``concordance model,'' however, contains three elements with weak theoretical motivation and no laboratory verification: a dark matter particle, a non-zero cosmological constant, and a field to drive inflation. Where do we go from here? I will describe observational opportunities that exist in several areas:
(1) Testing General Relativity on large scales, where it underlies the concordance model;
(2) Detecting signals that originate during cosmological epochs that are presently unobserved: gravity waves from the early Universe, and 21-cm signals from redshifts 6--50;
(3) High-precision measures of the expansion and matter-clustering history of the Universe, to gain further information on the ``dark'' phenomena;
(4) More detailed understanding of the paradigm that galaxies form by collapse of baryons into dark-matter potential wells. I will describe US facilities proposed to exploit these observational opportunities.

Sounds like good research.

[Pluto]

G'day from th eland of ozzzzzz

I was just thinking aloud, and could not keep this thought from my mind.

Black holes not only suchk in matter but also put out.

Than I stated reading Steven Hawking works. I see that he keeps on changing his understanding of the workings of black holes.

This is a key issue in recycling and maybe the end to the Big Bang theory.

Hawking cracks black hole paradox
14/07/2004 19:00
Hawking cracks black hole paradox - 14 July 2004 - New Scientist


Quote:
After nearly 30 years of arguing that a black hole destroys everything that falls into it, Stephen Hawking is saying he was wrong. It seems that black holes may after all allow information within them to escape. Hawking will present his latest finding at a conference in Ireland next week.

Hawking concedes black hole bet
21/07/2004 19:26
Article Error - New Scientist

Black holes turned 'inside out'
BBC NEWS | Science/Nature | Black holes turned 'inside out'

Quote:
Stephen Hawking has put forward a new theory that changes the way scientists view black holes, saying he was wrong about them in the past.


Stephen Hawking, Black
Holes And Alex Collier
Stephen Hawking, Black Holes And Alex Collier

Quote:
In his lecture he says that the Andromedans told him that: "Everything in our universe, including us, came from a black hole."


Hawking Loses Bet; Changes Mind on Black Holes
Hawking Loses Bet; Changes Mind on Black Holes

Quote:
"I've been thinking about this problem for the last 30 years, and I think I now have the answer to it," Hawking told the British Broadcasting Corp.'s "Newsnight" program.

"A black hole only appears to form but later opens up and releases information about what fell inside. So we can be sure of the past and predict the future."


Stephen Hawkins revises his opinion about black holes.
Stephen Hawkins revises his opinion about black holes by Ajoy Roy

==================================================


Cosmology in the last 8 years has opened the doors to greater understanding and with great respect to Steven Hawkings and other great scientists new understanding have evolved.

[maddog]

Pluto,

This turnabout by Hawking in 2004 does not deflate nor kill the Big Bang
Theory (BBG). Yes Hawking did an about face, had to pay the professor
from Caltech (Berkenstein I think) a baseball encyclopedia for his error.
It turns out a Black Hole can yield information through the event horizon
(temperature), thereby solving the Hawking paradox.

This has nothing to do with the initial creation.

maddog

[maddog]

Pluto,

Buddyzen (I think) is referring to how LHC can help to verify the Big Bang in
this way -- by recreating a quark plasma. This would have been in the very
early period of the history of the universe before actual baryons formed like
protons, neutrons and mesons from the their quark constituents. Actually,
this has already been demonstrated by Brookhaven where they collided two
beams of Gold ions together to attain a brief quark plasma. So all CERN will
have to do is verify the effect. Initial tests will only be doing proton beams
though at much higher energy (multiple Tev). Another product of the
collision might be are mini-black holes that then radiate away. This was not
well determined by Brookhaven.

You do not have to recreate the hole universe to verify the effect. You just
have to demonstrate how at high enough energy quarks can disassociate
to overcome gluons binding energy. If they can verify at Tev energy scales
that a quark plasma can form, that is enough.

maddog

[Pluto]

G'day maddog

You said

You do not have to recreate the hole universe to verify the effect. You just
have to demonstrate how at high enough energy quarks can disassociate
to overcome gluons binding energy. If they can verify at Tev energy scales
that a quark plasma can form, that is enough.

Enough for what?

It just gives us evidence that may confirm a recycling process.

As for the previous post. If we solve the problem with black holes that they are unable to eject matter. Than we can research into the recyling process without the need for the BBT or expansion or dark matter and so on.

I have no love for any theory. I just want to understand what the heck is going on, without the influence of BB people restricting the information flow.

If the BBT is correct, well an good.

[maddog]

Originally Posted by Pluto

Enough for what?

Enough to validate plausability for early universe.

Originally Posted by Pluto

It just gives us evidence that may confirm a recycling process.

My comment does nothing of the kind. In any case "recycling"
presupposes a "before" for the Big Bang. The Big Bang has no "before",
at least within the same universe or model.

Originally Posted by Pluto

If we solve the problem with black holes that they are unable to eject matter.

All current Black Holes models (rotating singularities) have light able to be
ejected out the poles. Light is in the form of X-Rays and Gamma Rays,

Originally Posted by Pluto

Than we can research into the recyling process without the need for the BBT or expansion or dark matter and so on.

No need.



maddog

[Pluto]

G'day Maddog

We know what mainstream thinks.

You say "NO NEED"

This limits research to explain the workings of star formation and galaxy evolution where we do have a cyclic process. Matter been sucked in and ejected and reforming not only matter but reforming stars and galaxies.

You can always read up on star formation and the varies stages.

Also galaxy evolution and the dependence on the size and mass of the black hole determing the form and structure of the galaxy

use the search in arXiv and ADS for cyclic universe.


SPACE.com -- In New Theory of Universe, Time Never Ends
In New Theory of Universe, Time Never Ends


NO SECRETS: Scientific American
A Recycled Universe


Edge: THE CYCLIC UNIVERSE
THE CYCLIC UNIVERSE: PAUL STEINHARDT [11.21.02]



"The cyclic universe model is a simple mechanism for solving the cosmological constant problem" - Scitizen
"The cyclic universe model is a simple mechanism for solving the cosmological constant problem"

The search for a single theory of everything has led scientists to propose a surprising, new and non-intuitive description of our Universe. Stephen Hawking and Thomas Hertog have just proposed a model based on the no-boundary hypothesis, in which the Universe is a closed surface and has no beginning in time [1]. Before the summer break, we interviewed Paul Steinhardt, physicist at the Department of Physics at Princeton University, USA, and co-author of a report published in Science in which he shows that the small and positive value of the cosmological constant, the vacuum energy, can be understood within a cyclic Universe model [2].

CYCLIC UNIVERSE
Cyclic Universe

[361] "Turnaround in Cyclic Cosmology" by L. Baum and P.H. Frampton.
Phys. Rev. Lett. 96, 071301 (2007). hep-th/0610213.
[365]"Entropy of Contracting Universe in Cyclic Cosmology" by L. Baum and P.H. Frampton.
hep-th/0703162.
[367]"Cyclic Universe and Infinite Past" by P.H. Frampton. arXiv:0705.2730.



http://www.ias.ac.in/jaa/junsep2007/JAA521.pdf
J. Astrophys. Astr. (2007) 28, 67–99
Cosmology and Cosmogony in a Cyclic Universe
Jayant V. Narlikar1,∗, Geoffrey Burbidge2 & R. G. Vishwakarma3


The Cyclic Universe by WARDELL LINDSAY (Book) in Medicine & Science


Cosmology and Cosmogony in a Cyclic Universe


==============================================

For many years we have had a restriction because of main stream thinking.
The idea was that we had a standard model, why do other research.

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzzz

I like to share this link, to me in my opinion is a door way to explaining how matter can recycle via black holes.

[gr-qc/0510083] Production and decay of evolving horizons
Production and decay of evolving horizons

Authors: Alex B. Nielsen (University of Canterbury), Matt Visser (Victoria University of Wellington)
(Submitted on 18 Oct 2005 (v1), last revised 27 Jun 2006 (this version, v3))

Abstract: We consider a simple physical model for an evolving horizon that is strongly interacting with its environment, exchanging arbitrarily large quantities of matter with its environment in the form of both infalling material and outgoing Hawking radiation. We permit fluxes of both lightlike and timelike particles to cross the horizon, and ask how the horizon grows and shrinks in response to such flows. We place a premium on providing a clear and straightforward exposition with simple formulae.
To be able to handle such a highly dynamical situation in a simple manner we make one significant physical restriction, that of spherical symmetry, and two technical mathematical restrictions: (1) We choose to slice the spacetime in such a way that the space-time foliations (and hence the horizons) are always spherically symmetric. (2) Furthermore we adopt Painleve-Gullstrand coordinates (which are well suited to the problem because they are nonsingular at the horizon) in order to simplify the relevant calculations.
We find particularly simple forms for surface gravity, and for the first and second law of black hole thermodynamics, in this general evolving horizon situation. Furthermore we relate our results to Hawking's apparent horizon, Ashtekar et al's isolated and dynamical horizons, and Hayward's trapping horizons. The evolving black hole model discussed here will be of interest, both from an astrophysical viewpoint in terms of discussing growing black holes, and from a purely theoretical viewpoint in discussing black hole evaporation via Hawking radiation.

Some of you have responded to some of the links above via my private email. Thats ok, but I prefer if you responded here even though your opinion may not be main stream.
Some of the moderators will pull you up if your go into the deep end.


Slowly slowly I'm starting to understand the workings of the universe.