Black Crunch jams Universal cycle [Cosmology]

Nature Magazine ^ | 23 Decemeber 2002 | PHILIP BALL

[PatrickHenry]

Cosmology ping.

[This ping list for the evolution -- not creationism -- side of evolution threads, and sometimes for other science topics. If you want to be included, or dropped, let me know.]

[Sentis]

Not all that much use speculating about this until we know for certain what the shape of the universe is.

[Jhoffa_]

In related news, Trent Lott's spokesman has issued a statement apologizing for this story..

[Scully]

Thanks for the ping, Patrick. In any event, we will not be here either to be relieved or disappointed.

[LibWhacker]

At this point, the speed of sound equals the speed of light.

!!!

Does light slow down or sound speed up? Anyway, I was completely unaware that there could be either light or sound inside a black hole . . . It's a mathematical point, no?

[Dimensio]

Are Jessie Jackson and Al Sharpton expected to comment on this story?

[Larry Lucido]

No theory can cope with a Big Crunch.

And a doughnut-shaped Universe could meet a quite different fate

Don't know the answer, but I've got a taste for a Nestle's Crunch and a donut.

[LibWhacker]

And a doughnut-shaped Universe could meet a quite different fate

A giant cup of coffee?

[Sentis]

Actually looking at it from a closer perspective determining if the universe has cycles of big bang, big crunches can tell us several things about the universe we live in now. The first thing that comes to mind is that if this is a continous cycle then the chances of humans being able to exist without a creator is not as far fetched as could be claimed if the big bang was a singular event. If we are in a continuous cycle in each cycle the laws of nature would be slightly different sooner or later natural laws would occur that make life possible. Thus we emerge during this cycle which is amicable for our survival.

[ALS]

Donut Law

[MacDorcha]

it would exist, but it wouldnt bounce off of anything to prove it exists.

also, there are theories that blow this out of the water. gravi-stars for one.look black and all, but are finite in power, and are really just magnetically altered stars, making what would be light into darkness. the surface of one of these would be so dense that nothing would ever see it's core, being crushed on the outside by gravity into it, and pressure coming from it at the same time, making a barrier. this theory not only accounts for a more plausable universe, but allows for the Big Bang theory to be easier to debate, is more logically sound, and allows for Creationism to follow as well.

also, in either eevnt, if blackholes exist, they would be holes in existance itself. they would be linked to planes of being that aren't in our own realm of thinking. it would go into the negative space, and create an anchor of sorts into a constant place forever. in short, a Big Crunch couldnt take place, as it would be pulled away from the center of the universe, as well as into the blackholes themselves.

[Scully]

if this is a continous cycle then the chances of humans being able to exist without a creator is not as far fetched as could be claimed if the big bang was a singular event

Oh, dear! Now you've "let the genie out of the bottle", as it were. Expect some disagreement (hoho) on this point! ;-)

[Scully]

Space might end up dark, thick and boring.

Just like my life in the lab...gads! I'm just depressing myself.

[MacDorcha]

ok, try this... tie a ball to a rope, then tie the other end of the rope to the ceiling. back away from under the point were the rope is hanging, and drop the ball, allowing it to swing away from you (make sure it doesnt touch the ground) then let it swing back. it will never hit your face. why does it not hit your face? because it loses energy traveling away from you. if the laws of physics are the Law of the universe, which would be what you guys are trying to prove, then the bang-crunch cycle MUST end. if there is a definite end, there is a definite begining. thus, God.

[MacDorcha]

check post 15

[Sentis]

MacDorcha wrote"also, in either eevnt, if blackholes exist, they would be holes in existance itself. they would be linked to planes of being that aren't in our own realm of thinking. it would go into the negative space, and create an anchor of sorts into a constant place forever."

actually most black holes would not be holes at all. They are more like containers for supercondensed matter. It is theorized that if a black hole is spinning that it could link itself with another part of space time. This however isn't speculated to be a link to a "constant place". I will admit this is all speculation but its hard to be positive about a phenomenon that doesnt even allow light to escape it.

[Scully]

I'm not a physicist, but I think what you have just "proven" is the existence of air resistance. Our atmosphere is not fictionless.

Although, I'm only a lowly geochemist and it's been many years since physics lab, but that's what I remember.

[PatrickHenry]

From the article:
"In a bouncing universe, all the matter currently flying apart slows until it reverses and falls towards a Big Crunch. Some physicists think this could ignite another Big Bang, in an unending sequence of expansion and contraction."

I wish Physicist would show up. My understanding regarding various theories of so-called "Oscillating Universes" is that they're supposed to undergo an entropy increase each time they bounce, so it can't be an eternal cycle. (I have my doubts about that.) Also, we recently had a thread called Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation's Polarization Detected at Last, which -- again, assuming my limited understanding is right -- puts to rest the new "crashing brane" theory of oscillating universes, proposed by Steinhardt and Turok. Polarization, so I'm told, wouldn't be a feature of the Steinhardt-Turok universe. If so, the scenario of a crunch, followed by another bang, is in deep doo-doo. But it's still early days.

[MacDorcha]

if something wont allow things traveling as fast as light to excape, how can we speculate how spinning would effect it? but if we want to get into it, it supposedly came from a star, which is spinning. as far as we know, once anything stops spinning that is of that size, it falls into oblivion. it tears apart. but black holes operate on the further generation of gravity, and the fastest way to establish that is further and faster spinning.