The Thinking Man's Universe: Part 2 of 3, The Next Cosmology

With the presumption of an ongoing hierarchal structure of the universe, beyond the scale of the Big Bang, we must begin to imagine large scale influences pervasive across the visible universe from super scale material structures.

The first association we might make is the identification of a Black Hole as a causal candidate for the Big Bang. Being the only object associated with the concept of singularity, the ostensible destination of all matter in the fullness of time, and potentially able to be as large as necessary to contain a cosmos full of matter, the Black hole is the perfect candidate for being the percursor to the Big Bang.

www.thegodofreason.com

Category:

News & Politics

Tags:

• Cosmology
• Big
• Bang
• black
• hole
• Bayesian
• hierarchy
• current
• astronomy
• infinity
• universe
• psychology
• quark
• galaxy

[wuwindz]

Is this a theory? Or a common sense way to actualize future theories

[TheGodofReason]

@wuwindz It's definitely the latter. It's a philosophical approach to the most likely (most rational) disposition of what really lies in the region well beyond our current range of vision (both macro and micro). If all of what we can conclusively examine is hierarchical in structure, it is only rational to presume the hierarchy continues in some fashion, rather than always trying to end it, as does the Big Bang and all it's predecessors.

[wuwindz]

@TheGodofReason This seems only logical. Why do you suppose most theories (quantum and Astrophysics) do not take this hierarchical structure into account? Or are you aware of any that have?

[TheGodofReason]

@wuwindz I'm sure there are theories that presume an ongoing hierarchy, but they are universally dismissed out of a psychological need for science to be the final answer on everything. Much like religion, Science poses all unknown quantities in in terms of known quantities, rather than presuming an infinite range of diversity, as has always proven to be the case. Right now, they use the cosmological principal to homogenize the unknown. It is virtually certain to be wrong.

[TheGodofReason]

I would like to reiterate at this point that the above scenario is predominantly an example of how science needs to presume a lager, unbounded, hierarchical diversity in both the micro and macro directions in any attempted cosmology.

It is only secondarily presented as a viable candidate for what is really out there based far more on intuitive mechanisms than on math. While it is true that intuition always leads the math, without the math follow up, I got nothing.

[brian12934]

Pure genius. Someone that sees the whole picture!

[TheGodofReason]

@mgw347 MG, such circumstance is beyond my ability to even speculate. There are models of two black holes converging, but they inevitably involved the two bodies orbiting each other at ferocious rates.

[mgw347]

is that to say that the black holes would not be able to sustain the circular formation? what if there were outside forces that somehow allowed this formation to exist, even if momentarily or in a partial form? i like to think about these things and then dream that they might explain deja vu or our concept of synchronicity... imagining that an apparently random collision actually formed from earlier activated data...

[TheGodofReason]

@mgw347 having black holes that close to each other would require the rosette of singularities to spin so rapidly around their mutual center that they would distort pretty severely in the plane of that rotation. As for the theory of information loss, some folks say all the info that enters the black hole is held static at the event horizon since time dilation approaches infinity as matter is accelerated to light speed (which ostensibly it does under the gravitational force at the horizon).

[mgw347]

i'm not educated formally, nor am i experienced practically... i read something about black holes and information loss paradox... what might happen if you arrange black holes in a circle, each with the singularity of 1 matching the plane of the event horizon of the next... so you could somehow 'rediscover' information as you travel around the black hole circle... does that make sense? does that apply to theory properly? i like the sentiments you present, thanks