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

[modest]

Originally Posted by Pluto

The reaon why I question this is because the redshift data places Earth at the centre. This tells me of a common error.

History repeats itself through history placing Earth at the centre of the Universe.

Redshift data cannot place earth at the center of the universe in and of itself. Only with some explanation or model describing redshift would earth be considered at the center of the universe or not.

In relativistic cosmology the universe is expanding such that all cosmic distances are increasing so that all observers will see distant objects redshifted. Earth is not in the center of the universe with this interpretation. This same model (the concordance model) is strongly supported by evidence and observation.

The most common analogy given is the surface of a balloon. Consider a very large balloon that has ants crawling around on its surface. If you inflate the balloon then each ant will observe all the other ants get further away. The distance between them will increase—it will expand. The further two ants are from one another, the faster the distance between them will expand. This correlation between distance and speed of expansion is known as Hubble's law.

In this example, no ant is at the center even while each ant sees all the other ants moving away from it.

This is just an analogy and it should not be taken too literally, but it does demonstrate the idea of an expanding metric in an easily envisioned way.

~modest

[maddog]

Originally Posted by Pluto

The reaon why I question this is because the redshift data places Earth at the centre. This tells me of a common error.

History repeats itself through history placing Earth at the centre of the Universe.

Fundamental flaw in your logic. As modest was in his last post this says nothing of the kind. No such assumption placing the Earth (or our Universal location) as anything SPECIAL.

I can show with this analogy as follows.

Imagine a raisin loaf (loaf of bread with raisins spread randomly thoughout) in the
oven. As the loaf is baked it will rise because yeast in the bread say. For our purposes we can assume a fixed rate of expansion of the bread over time.

Thus were your to inhabit any raisin in the bread you would view all the raisins receding from you. All raisins would see a "redshift" away. There would be no SPECIAL raisins in the bread.

The same for the universe. This is an analogy that is used in all freshman Astronomy courses I have heard of (even lay texts on the subject). This has been a thought process around awhile and does show that Hubble Expansion or Red Shift does not place any universal object (Galaxy, Star, Planet, etc) in ANY SPECIAL light.

Pleeezze !

maddog

[Little Bang]

Maybe they have it right but if they do that must mean that they know the rate at which the universe is expanding. I think space is expanding at C.

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzz

Yes I know of the baloon and the bread.

Your logic assumes spacetime expansion and not actual metric length.
Show me that spcae bodies are expanding from various points throughout the known universe.

Session R9 - Non-Doppler Redshift Mechanisms with Possible Cosmological Applications.

Session R9 - Non-Doppler Redshift Mechanisms with Possible Cosmological Applications.


Oct 18, 2004
Fingers of God
The Fingers of God

The big bang theory predetermines the size, the shape and the age of the universe (according to the latest satellite data, it is an expanding sphere 78 billion light years in diameter and 13.7 billion years old.) Because astronomers believe that redshift is a measure of distance, most of the distances of millions of galaxies, quasars, and gamma ray bursts have been distorted. A different interpretation of redshift will imply a much different universe. Halton Arp's research shows that redshift cannot be a measure of distance. The charts above compare a galaxy cluster in Arp's observed universe to the big bang's theoretical universe.

Close-up view of Einstein Cross
Macro and microlensing, coupled with the giant eye of the European Southern Observatory's Very Large Telescope, enabled astronomers to probe regions on scales as small as a millionth of an arcsecond.
Provided by ESO, Garching, Germany
Astronomy.com - Close-up view of Einstein Cross

The team of astronomers from Europe and the United States studied the "Einstein Cross," a famous cosmic mirage. This cross-shaped configuration consists of four images of a distant source. The multiple images are a result of gravitational lensing by a foreground galaxy, an effect that was predicted by Albert Einstein as a consequence of his theory of general relativity. The light source in the Einstein Cross is a quasar approximately 10 billion light-years away, whereas the foreground-lensing galaxy is 10 times closer. The lensing galaxy's gravitational field bends and magnifies the quasar's light.
This magnification effect, known as "microlensing," in which a galaxy plays the role of a cosmic magnifying glass or a natural telescope, proves useful in astronomy as it allows us to observe distant objects that would otherwise be too faint to explore using currently available telescopes. "The combination of this natural magnification with the use of a big telescope provides us with the sharpest details ever obtained," said Frederic Courbin, leader of the program studying the Einstein Cross with ESO's VLT

It is the intrinsic properties that are not fully understood that may give error to redshift data.

The Great Escape: Scientists Detect Black Hole Slowing Flight of Light
By SPACE.com Staff
SPACE.com -- The Great Escape: Scientists Detect Black Hole Slowing Flight of Light

Astronomers have watched a black hole drag on light trying to escape its surroundings, causing the light to lose energy just as Einstein predicted in his theory of general relativity.

With all the science that we know people except the redshift data without quation.

I maybe wrong.

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by Little Bang

Maybe they have it right but if they do that must mean that they know the rate at which the universe is expanding. I think space is expanding at C.

Here's a nice wiki that explains it all quite well.

The metric expansion leads naturally to recession speeds which exceed the "speed of light" c and to distances which exceed c times the age of the universe, which is a frequent source of confusion among amateurs and even professional physicists.[1] The speed c has no special significance at cosmological scales.

Metric expansion of space - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[modest]

Originally Posted by Pluto

G'day from the land of ozzz

Yes I know of the baloon and the bread.

Your logic assumes spacetime expansion and not actual metric length.

If by "metric length" you mean measured distance then I disagree. Spacetime expansion is an increase in measured distance everywhere on the metric. Freeztar's link in the previous post explains.

Originally Posted by Pluto

Show me that spcae bodies are expanding from various points throughout the known universe.

I cannot take you somewhere else in the universe and show you. This is beyond humanity's capability for the time being. But, why do you ask? Are you honestly suggesting that earth occupies a privileged place in the universe such as being at its center? This is not the case according to the cosmological principle which is a basic tenet of the big bang theory.

Originally Posted by Pluto

Close-up view of Einstein Cross
Macro and microlensing, coupled with the giant eye of the European Southern Observatory's Very Large Telescope, enabled astronomers to probe regions on scales as small as a millionth of an arcsecond.
Provided by ESO, Garching, Germany
Astronomy.com - Close-up view of Einstein Cross

It is the intrinsic properties that are not fully understood that may give error to redshift data.

The link and quote you just posted describes a gravitational lens which is understood in (and was predicted by) general relativity—the same theory that gives us the big bang.

Originally Posted by Pluto

The Great Escape: Scientists Detect Black Hole Slowing Flight of Light
By SPACE.com Staff
SPACE.com -- The Great Escape: Scientists Detect Black Hole Slowing Flight of Light

With all the science that we know people except the redshift data without quation.

I maybe wrong.

Again, you post a link and quote of an observation (light travel time delay) that agrees with (and was predicted by) general relativity, the same theory that gives us the big bang.

These observations are completely consistent with (and indeed support the case for) the reality of expansion.

~modest

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzz

Hello Modest, you said

I cannot take you somewhere else in the universe and show you. This is beyond humanity's capability for the time being. But, why do you ask? Are you honestly suggesting that earth occupies a privileged place in the universe such as being at its center? This is not the case according to the cosmological principle which is a basic tenet of the big bang theory.

Your right, but! there are plenty of images that indicate clustering and not expansion.

Think of it this way. If the universe originated 13.7 Gyrs. Why should there be clustering,if there is acceleration of expansion.

Also I did not say that Earth is at the centre of the universe, in no way.

The links that I posted are just to indicte the presence of intrinsic properties altering the light properties.

Any person can support an existing main stream theory, it takes energy to go up stream.

As soon as I finish my reading, I will down load the information on intrinsic properties. This will take another 6 months.


[0806.0454] Ultra High Energy Cosmic Rays from decays of Holeums in Galactic Halos
Ultra High Energy Cosmic Rays from decays of Holeums in Galactic Halos

Authors: Abhijit L.Chavda, L.K.Chavda
(Submitted on 3 Jun 2008)

Abstract: Stable, quantized gravitational bound states of primordial black holes called Holeums could have been produced in the early universe and could be a component of the Super Heavy Dark Matter (SHDM) present in galactic halos. We show that Holeums of masses of the order of 10**13 to 10**14 GeV and above are stable enough to survive in the present-day universe. We identify such Holeums as promising candidates for the SHDM "X-particle" and show that the decay of such Holeums by pressure ionization can give rise to cosmic rays of all observed energies, including Ultra High Energy Cosmic Rays (UHECR). The absence of the GZK cut-off is explained by the galactic halo origin of the UHECR. We predict that the cosmic rays are a manifestation of the end-stage Hawking radiation burst of the primordial black holes (PBH) liberated by the ionization of Holeums. Antimatter detected in cosmic rays could be a signature of their Holeum origin.

and this is quite interesting.

[gr-qc/0309044] Holeum,enigmas of cosmology and gravitational waves
Holeum,enigmas of cosmology and gravitational waves

Authors: L.K.Chavda, Abhijit L.Chavda
(Submitted on 8 Sep 2003 (v1), last revised 24 Jun 2004 (this version, v3))

Abstract: The principle of nuclear democracy is invoked to prove the formation of stable quantized gravitational bound states of primordial black holes called Holeums. The latter come in four varieties: ordinary Holeums H, Black Holeums BH, Hyper Holeums HH and the massless Lux Holeums LH.These Holeums are invisible because the gravitational radiation emitted by their quantum transitions is undetectable now. The copiously produced Holeums form an important component of the dark matter and the Lux Holeums an important component of the dark energy in the universe. A segregation property puts the Holeums mainly in the galactic haloes (GH) and the domain walls (DW) explaining the latters' invisibility now. Cosmic rays (CR) are produced by two exploding black holes created in a pressure-ionization of a stable Holeum. Our prediction that more CRs will be emitted by the haloes than by the discs of galaxies already has a strong empirical support. The concentration of the Hs and the HHs in the GHs and the DWs lead to the formation of Holeum-stars emitting the CRs and the gravitational waves(GW).Innumerable explosions of BHs at the time of decoupling of gravity from the other interactions lead to inflation and baryon asymmetry. A substantial cosmic back ground of matter and GWs and an infra-quantum gravity (infra-QG) band and an ultra-QG band of GWs and their emission frequencies are predicted. A unique quantum system containing matter-energy oscillations is found.

The only part that I disagree with is the BBT origin.

Compact matter in varies forms and sizes can form now. From Neutron to various composite quark matter to Neutrino and preon particles and various combinations.

[modest]

Originally Posted by Pluto

Your right, but! there are plenty of images that indicate clustering and not expansion.

Once again, you present clustering and expansion as an either / or situation. This is not the case. Galaxy groups, clusters and superclusters represent the most local gravitational interactions between galaxies. Here in the milky way, for example, we can see the Andromeda galaxy (which is in our local group of about 30 galaxies) is heading straight for us. It's not expanding away from us. But, this doesn't mean the universe isn't expanding.

Galaxies that are close to one another can affect each other gravitationally forming clusters even while the rest of the universe expands away from such a cluster. Not only is this logical and possible, it's exactly what astronomers see happening through their telescopes.

Originally Posted by Pluto

Think of it this way. If the universe originated 13.7 Gyrs. Why should there be clustering,if there is acceleration of expansion.

Think of the universe as a very small, hot, dense place that expands to a large, cold, not-dense place. An analogy would the the piston of a car. There is an explosion in the piston which causes a hot, dense, and highly-compressed gas. The piston expands and the gas is allowed to leave the piston. Water vapor condenses from the gas and turns to water droplets then full sized drops of water. By the time the gas exits the exhaust pipe the homogeneous gas in the piston has turned into an un-homogeneous mix of steam and water dripping onto the pavement.

Things can condense out of an expanding gas. Galaxies can condense out of an expanding universe. The galaxies then interact with one another gravitationally forming clusters. None of this is inconsistent with the big bang theory.

~modest

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzz

Modest I'm fully awear of the BBT, Redshift and expansion and their problems.

Knowing that I try to look at the reality of what is actually going on.


This picture, image of:
http://www.universetoday.com/wp-cont...07-1217jet.jpg
Paints a 1000 words.
December 17th, 2007
Galactic Black Hole Fires a Jet at a Nearby Neighbour
Galactic Black Hole Fires a Jet at a Nearby Neighbour | Universe Today

The black hole in the larger galaxy is actively feeding, and has an enormous jet of radiation and material blasting out into space. Unfortunately, the smaller galaxy has gotten caught right in the crossfire of this jet.

"We've seen many jets produced by black holes, but this is the first time we've seen one punch into another galaxy like we're seeing here," said Dan Evans, a scientist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics and leader of the study. "This jet could be causing all sorts of problems for the smaller galaxy it is pummeling."

THis system is actively contracting and expanding at the same time. This process is responsible for the recycling process and reforming galaxy form.

[modest]

Fantastic picture, Pluto. Relativistic Jets certainly are a great area of interest for astronomy.

Why do you suppose galaxies that are far away from us are so much more likely to have active galactic nuclei and jets than galaxies that are close to us? This certainly means that far away galaxies are different from nearby galaxies, have you considered why that is the case?

~modest