Skip to comments.Some Black Holes May Pre-Date The Big Bang, Say Cosmologists
Posted on 05/03/2011 12:23:32 PM PDT by Red Badger
If the Universe expands and contracts in cycles of Big Bangs and Crunches, some black holes may survive from one era to the next, according to a new analysis
Black holes are regions of space in which gravity is so strong that nothing can escape, not even light. Conventionally, black holes form during a gravitational collapse, after a large supernova for example.
But there is another class of objects called primordial black holes that cosmologists think must have formed in a different way. These are essentially leftovers from the hugely dense ball of stuff from which the universe expanded, some parts of which must have been dense enough to form black holes.
These primordial black holes would then have been widely dispersed as the universe expanded.
Primordial black holes are very different beasts to the ones that form when stars die, in particular because they ought to be much smaller.
Although nobody has yet seen a primordial black hole, our knowledge of them comes from thinking about the processes that must have occurred shortly after the Big Bang.
In recent years, however, cosmologists have begun to think seriously about processes that occurred before the Big Bang. One idea, is that the Universe may eventually collapse leading to an endless cycle of Big Bangs and Crunches.
Today, Bernard Carr at Queen Mary University of London, UK, and Alan Coley at Dalhousie University in Canada, ask what might happen in such a universe in the moments before a crunch.
By some accounts, a Big Crunch generates a singularity that ought to cause everything in the Universe to merge. But Carr and Coley say that in some circumstances, black holes of a certain mass could avoid this fate and survive the crunch as separate entities. The masses for which this is possible range from a few hundred million kilograms to about the mass of our Sun.
That leads to a problem, however. Coley and Carr say that since the mass of primordial and pre-crunch black holes is similar, they will be very difficult to tell apart.
Nobody has yet seen a primordial black hole, although efforts are underway to search for the telltale signatures they ought to produce.
Small black holes ought to evaporate away in relatively short period of time, finally disappearing in a violent explosion of gamma rays. The hope is that observatories such as the Fermi Gamma Ray Space Telescope will see such events. Indeed, some cosmologists say this thinking might explain the gamma ray bursts that we already see from time to time.
What all this means, of course, is that there may be objects in our Universe that predate the Big Bang. And if we can somehow find a way to distinguish them from primordial black holes, we may yet be able to observe these most ancient of objects.
Ref: arxiv.org/abs/1104.3796 : Persistence Of Black Holes Through A Cosmological Bounce
Don't ask me what this is. I have no freaking idea............
Since when did faith in something that is unobservable become a valid tool of science?
Now we may be able to think about the processes that must have occurred before the Big Bang.
Something to do.
That graph looks like science of some sort...
“Since when did faith in something that is unobservable become a valid tool of science?”
Amen to that!
How do you go about asking a black hole how old it is?
Nobody said anything about faith.
I think the universe was created by two baby squirrels rubbing their tails together. No one has ever seen it but in theory it might have happened that way.
Who do you think made the laws the Universe operates by?
So then, they’re expired?
I thought LSD went out of style years ago. Obviously not.
"Hey man, what if our whole universe is just a few atoms on the back of a turtle in another universe?"
Just don’t call it God.
Believing that something exists without any objective proof requires faith.
Why should I believe that "primordial black holes" even exist if none have been observed? Even if all the "evidence" points to such things existing, we could say that there's a ton of evidence that Bigfoot exists as well, even though no one has seen Bigfoot.
This piece honestly reads like bad fiction. Perhaps these scientists should wait until they have observed something before they speculate as to whether or not it exists.
How do you know that the Big Bang isn’t the “God Said” moment?
From the left side of the graph, it appears there were no Birth Certificates for a Barak Hussein somebody or other. But as you move to the right, there was apparently PCB contamination at a High school.
From a great distance. Same as with a woman.
This is a classic case of intellectual masturbation. There are no facts or phenomenon to support the theory.
I'm totally going to reuse that term the next time this comes up. :)
I’ve been helping my two college student kids with courses such as psychology, cross-cultural anthropology, ethics, and world history (all of which are prerequisites for degrees in actual majors).
This crap doesn’t sink to that level—and some of you would be amazed at what a low level that is—but neither does it rise above the level of an all-night sophomore bull session. Just about three in the morning, before that crack-of-dawn hour of clarity.
Big Crunch- some people call it a nut, some people don’t.
It’s a way of supporting the idea of an infinitely bouncing universe, i.e. to dodge a “creation moment.”
But there is no such thing as a black hole, gravity has nothing to do with binding cosmic objects together, and The big bang never happened.
My head hurts just thinking about it ping.
“Hey man, what if our whole universe is just a few atoms on the back of a turtle in another universe?”
Whoa! You just blew my mind!
Had a T-shirt in college:
“And God said
(the three Maxwell equations)
And their was light”
‘..there may be objects in our Universe that predate the Big Bang.’
the mind boggles..
I am working on a web-series of lectures on how to survive the coming crunch ... locations and investments that will weather the storm of universal collapse and yield profits!
Pretty soon snakes will come from horse tail hairs in rain barrels.
The Bohr atomic model is unobservable - yet it is a valid model in that it explains facts and allows prediction - it is thus a useful model.
I don’t think they are asking you to believe. They are trying to decode a universe governed by mathematical properties and physical laws, not by magic. If science works properly this can either be proven as fact or thrown down the black hole.
The Big Bang Model for the Origin of the Universe
..there may be objects in our Universe that predate the Big Bang..
I fear it nears...
don’t do it...
N o H e l e n T h o m a s p i c t u r e s !!!
Some Black Holes May Pre-Date The Big Bang, Say Cosmologists
Why should I care what hairdressers have to say?
> Whoa! You just blew my mind!
It's TRUE!!! And it's turtles, all the way down!!
You can exhale now.
Careful! You’re just asking for a HT Pic!..............
So they are saying there was a hole in the doughnut before there even was a doughnut?
Which came first? The donut or the hole?..............
Maybe if it had a Pancake......
Wrong. It is a graph of WalMart’s sales following a new moon.
In recent years, however, cosmologists have begun to think seriously about processes that occurred before the Big Bang.
I’ve always thought about this, but obviously before
there were Bangs there were Frizzies and Split Ends.
I thought the entire universe grew out of the “singularity” with the expansion we call the “Big Bang”.
Which means until the “Big Bang”, there was no universe, just the singularity.
So if these primordial black holes were not incorporated into the singularity, and there wasn’t any universe yet because the “Big Bang” hadn’t happened, where the heck were these primordial black holes supposed to be living?
Im beginning to like the brain (membrane) theory.
Of course there is ...
When you put the first lot of doughnuts in the oil, do you see anything on the plate? Of course not! That's where all of the holes are!