I just had a thought about the Big Bang

Hello,

I can't help but think that if there is an explosion, there will be an
equal but opposite inward force and an implosion. So, during the Big
Bang, the situation looks more like a star collapsing to generate a
black hole during a super nova. What is that? The middle?

If that doesn't make any sense, wouldn't that produce another
singularity? Something so many more times dense than a black hole that
even the most imaginative super massive black holes thought to one day
consume the universe, wouldn't or couldn't exist in the future?
Mainly, because something that super massive has always been there in
the middle.

The possiblity may exist that the universe is like a glass onion of
universes, and each time the singularity exploded, it imploded, and
then in that finite space, exploded again and still not in an area
large enough for us to notice, in a space where the gravity was so
intense, that even light could not escape, and continued on and on and
on generating one micro cosmos inside of another.

Interesting that explosions(outward) create an implosion(inward) at the
same instant. One could think of it as natures balancing act. Nature
creates in pairs. Implosion and explosion equal forces. Force outward
creates an expanding universe that gravity will evolve. Implosion
creates a static black hole that lays in waiting for its turn. Bert

I keep thinking that the mass of that singularity had to be more than
any black hole ever would be in this Universe, or could be in this
Universe. That had to be true before the singularity actually
exploded. In steps and stages leading to that instant where the blast
took place, it was or had to be out of the blue? But, the implosion
still leaves a greater mass at the center than any black hole would or
ever could reach or achieve. Considering, that all of the mass of this
Universe came from that single point, that point had to include the
mass of this Universe. So, when the explosion took place, the
implosion was also taking place. How close to equal were the weights,
I couldn't tell you. But, if it were half, then it was compressed by
much more force than that, and still more massive than any black hole
ever encountered, discovered or located. I'm more and more certain
that the existance of Universes is correct, and they all exist within
this one. That doesn't dictate that what happened in this space did
not happen above our heads well before this Universe, and from the
evidence of what is out there and how it has formed, acted and reacted,
speaking of matter as a whole, would be some means of predicting, or
explaining where that fraction went. So, when we see a source of
gravity so intense that even light cannot escape, that the likelihood
of the hole being deeper than we imagin is very likely. My thought of
the Universe, is that it is as dependant on matter atoms and subatomic
particles as computers are bits and bytes. But, size doesn't matter
with matter, it the ratios involved and their interactions, chemical,
fission, fusion, electronic, and magnetic. I would think that under
much more gravitational pressure, that much smaller subatomic paritcles
could stablize as some alien form of matter, alien to us. So, when
that imploded, it became so much more dense, that it may have imploded
again and exploded again in a much smaller space, and held there by
it's gravity. So, looking towards the center is to look into the
direction of another Universe. We know that the closer an object
approaches the speed of light, the less time that object experiences.
Therefore, it is safe to say a smaller particle weighing less, would be
capable of moving faster in a smaller space, and that would be tied to
the longevity of the particle. So, if the velocity of the orbit of the
electron were scaled down in size, what we observe as approximately 55
miles and hour in orbit around the centeral protons and neutrons, would
be maybe only off by 1/100th or maybe even 1 billionth of a mile per
hour less than what we observe as light speed. In the time we've spent
writing back and forth, we could have lived and died an unimaginable
number of times. In the first billionth of second a hundred trillion
trillion years may have passed in relation to time in this universe.
Our lives would have been lived, and no question would remain
concerning our Future.

I keep thinking that the mass of that singularity had to be more than
any black hole ever would be in this Universe, or could be in this
Universe. That had to be true before the singularity actually
exploded. In steps and stages leading to that instant where the blast
took place, it was or had to be out of the blue? But, the implosion
still leaves a greater mass at the center than any black hole would or
ever could reach or achieve. Considering, that all of the mass of this
Universe came from that single point, that point had to include the
mass of this Universe. So, when the explosion took place, the
implosion was also taking place. How close to equal were the weights,
I couldn't tell you. But, if it were half, then it was compressed by
much more force than that, and still more massive than any black hole
ever encountered, discovered or located. I'm more and more certain
that the existance of Universes is correct, and they all exist within
this one. That doesn't dictate that what happened in this space did
not happen above our heads well before this Universe, and from the
evidence of what is out there and how it has formed, acted and reacted,
speaking of matter as a whole, would be some means of predicting, or
explaining where that fraction went. So, when we see a source of
gravity so intense that even light cannot escape, that the likelihood
of the hole being deeper than we imagin is very likely. My thought of
the Universe, is that it is as dependant on matter atoms and subatomic
particles as computers are bits and bytes. But, size doesn't matter
with matter, it the ratios involved and their interactions, chemical,
fission, fusion, electronic, and magnetic. I would think that under
much more gravitational pressure, that much smaller subatomic paritcles
could stablize as some alien form of matter, alien to us. So, when
that imploded, it became so much more dense, that it may have imploded
again and exploded again in a much smaller space, and held there by
it's gravity. So, looking towards the center is to look into the
direction of another Universe. We know that the closer an object
approaches the speed of light, the less time that object experiences.
Therefore, it is safe to say a smaller particle weighing less, would be
capable of moving faster in a smaller space, and that would be tied to
the longevity of the particle. So, if the velocity of the orbit of the
electron were scaled down in size, what we observe as approximately 55
miles and hour in orbit around the centeral protons and neutrons, would
be maybe only off by 1/100th or maybe even 1 billionth of a mile per
hour less than what we observe as light speed. In the time we've spent
writing back and forth, we could have lived and died an unimaginable
number of times. In the first billionth of second a hundred trillion
trillion years may have passed in relation to time in this universe.
Our lives would have been lived, and no question would remain
concerning our Future.

nightbat wrote

The Flavored Coffee Guy wrote:

I keep thinking that the mass of that singularity had to be more than
any black hole ever would be in this Universe, or could be in this
Universe. That had to be true before the singularity actually
exploded. In steps and stages leading to that instant where the blast
took place, it was or had to be out of the blue? But, the implosion
still leaves a greater mass at the center than any black hole would or
ever could reach or achieve. Considering, that all of the mass of this
Universe came from that single point, that point had to include the
mass of this Universe. So, when the explosion took place, the
implosion was also taking place. How close to equal were the weights,
I couldn't tell you. But, if it were half, then it was compressed by
much more force than that, and still more massive than any black hole
ever encountered, discovered or located. I'm more and more certain
that the existance of Universes is correct, and they all exist within
this one. That doesn't dictate that what happened in this space did
not happen above our heads well before this Universe, and from the
evidence of what is out there and how it has formed, acted and reacted,
speaking of matter as a whole, would be some means of predicting, or
explaining where that fraction went. So, when we see a source of
gravity so intense that even light cannot escape, that the likelihood
of the hole being deeper than we imagin is very likely. My thought of
the Universe, is that it is as dependant on matter atoms and subatomic
particles as computers are bits and bytes. But, size doesn't matter
with matter, it the ratios involved and their interactions, chemical,
fission, fusion, electronic, and magnetic. I would think that under
much more gravitational pressure, that much smaller subatomic paritcles
could stablize as some alien form of matter, alien to us. So, when
that imploded, it became so much more dense, that it may have imploded
again and exploded again in a much smaller space, and held there by
it's gravity. So, looking towards the center is to look into the
direction of another Universe. We know that the closer an object
approaches the speed of light, the less time that object experiences.
Therefore, it is safe to say a smaller particle weighing less, would be
capable of moving faster in a smaller space, and that would be tied to
the longevity of the particle. So, if the velocity of the orbit of the
electron were scaled down in size, what we observe as approximately 55
miles and hour in orbit around the centeral protons and neutrons, would
be maybe only off by 1/100th or maybe even 1 billionth of a mile per
hour less than what we observe as light speed. In the time we've spent
writing back and forth, we could have lived and died an unimaginable
number of times. In the first billionth of second a hundred trillion
trillion years may have passed in relation to time in this universe.
Our lives would have been lived, and no question would remain
concerning our Future.

nightbat

Coffee Guy sci fi multiverse is dead in the water for there is
no observed physical evidence of same. Stop sci fi dreaming and just
continue serving up the coffee.

carry on,
the nightbat

Black holes are observed evidence. But, then in your fictional
universe matter comes from a tin cup balanced in the top of some tree,
and only you know where it is. Any symetrical blast that detonated a
nuclear bomb is evendence that if there's an explosion, there will be
an implosion. You haven't told us where that went. But, black holes
prove it has to be there.

Look here, a list of black holes, all real.
http://chandra.harvard.edu/xray_sources/blackholes.html

So, are symetrical explosions and exactly how an implosion takes place
when all you see is a blast.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../bomb3.html#c2

They are real thoughts on real science.

nightbat wrote

The Flavored Coffee Guy wrote:

Black holes are observed evidence. But, then in your fictional
universe matter comes from a tin cup balanced in the top of some tree,
and only you know where it is. Any symetrical blast that detonated a
nuclear bomb is evendence that if there's an explosion, there will be
an implosion. You haven't told us where that went. But, black holes
prove it has to be there.

Look here, a list of black holes, all real.
http://chandra.harvard.edu/xray_sources/blackholes.html

So, are symetrical explosions and exactly how an implosion takes place
when all you see is a blast.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../bomb3.html#c2

They are real thoughts on real science.

nightbat

No Coffee Guy server they are theoretical non real world
possibility sci fi speculations. A black hole doesn't exist in the
center of explosions get a clue. Stop falling for all that Hollywood B
movie and hype sci fi and get a grip. Real world science is quite
different it requires evidence not speculation. You're not to blame for
they sure make it all seem real in Hollywood for that's what they get
paid for. Now not another word until I have my cup of fresh brew,
thanks.

carry on,
the nightbat

nightbat wrote:
nightbat wrote

The Flavored Coffee Guy wrote:

Black holes are observed evidence. But, then in your fictional
universe matter comes from a tin cup balanced in the top of some tree,
and only you know where it is.


I think I just lost your profound train of thought.


Any symetrical blast that detonated a
nuclear bomb is evendence that if there's an explosion, there will be
an implosion. You haven't told us where that went. But, black holes
prove it has to be there.

Look here, a list of black holes, all real.
http://chandra.harvard.edu/xray_sources/blackholes.html

So, are symetrical explosions and exactly how an implosion takes place
when all you see is a blast.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../bomb3.html#c2

They are real thoughts on real science.

nightbat

No Coffee Guy server they are theoretical non real world
possibility sci fi speculations. A black hole doesn't exist in the
center of explosions get a clue. Stop falling for all that Hollywood B
movie and hype sci fi and get a grip. Real world science is quite
different it requires evidence not speculation. You're not to blame for
they sure make it all seem real in Hollywood for that's what they get
paid for. Now not another word until I have my cup of fresh brew,
thanks.

carry on,
the nightbat


Yes as nightbat says, there is no real world conclusive evidence that
black holes exist. But Hollywood and speculative Sci-Fi book writers
love this sort of thing. Nothing has been observed that couldn't have
an explanation other than a black hole. Black holes, Jurassic Park,
and Monster Island only exist on film!

Double-A

"The Flavored Coffee Guy" wrote:

I keep thinking that the mass of that singularity had to be
more than any black hole ever would be in this Universe, or
could be in this Universe. That had to be true before the
singularity actually exploded. In steps and stages leading to
that instant where the blast took place, it was or had to be
out of the blue? But, the implosion still leaves a greater
mass at the center than any black hole would or ever could
reach or achieve. Considering, that all of the mass of this
Universe came from that single point, that point had to
include the mass of this Universe. So, when the explosion
took place, the implosion was also taking place. How close to
equal were the weights, I couldn't tell you. But, if it were
half, then it was compressed by much more force than that, and
still more massive than any black hole ever encountered,
discovered or located. I'm more and more certain that the
existance of Universes is correct, and they all exist within
this one. That doesn't dictate that what happened in this
space did not happen above our heads well before this
Universe, and from the evidence of what is out there and how
it has formed, acted and reacted, speaking of matter as a
whole, would be some means of predicting, or explaining where
that fraction went. So, when we see a source of gravity so
intense that even light cannot escape, that the likelihood of
the hole being deeper than we imagin is very likely. My
thought of the Universe, is that it is as dependant on matter
atoms and subatomic particles as computers are bits and bytes.
But, size doesn't matter with matter, it the ratios involved
and their interactions, chemical, fission, fusion, electronic,
and magnetic. I would think that under much more
gravitational pressure, that much smaller subatomic paritcles
could stablize as some alien form of matter, alien to us.
So, when that imploded, it became so much more dense, that it
may have imploded again and exploded again in a much smaller
space, and held there by it's gravity. So, looking towards
the center is to look into the direction of another Universe.
We know that the closer an object approaches the speed of
light, the less time that object experiences. Therefore, it is
safe to say a smaller particle weighing less, would be capable
of moving faster in a smaller space, and that would be tied to
the longevity of the particle. So, if the velocity of the
orbit of the electron were scaled down in size, what we
observe as approximately 55 miles and hour in orbit around the
centeral protons and neutrons, would be maybe only off by
1/100th or maybe even 1 billionth of a mile per hour less than
what we observe as light speed. In the time we've spent
writing back and forth, we could have lived and died an
unimaginable number of times. In the first billionth of
second a hundred trillion trillion years may have passed in
relation to time in this universe. Our lives would have been
lived, and no question would remain concerning our Future.

You need to switch permanently and completely into input mode.

("The orbit of the electron"?!)

"Double-A" wrote in message
oups.com...

nightbat wrote:
nightbat wrote

The Flavored Coffee Guy wrote:

Black holes are observed evidence. But, then in your fictional
universe matter comes from a tin cup balanced in the top of some tree,
and only you know where it is.


I think I just lost your profound train of thought.


Any symetrical blast that detonated a
nuclear bomb is evendence that if there's an explosion, there will be
an implosion. You haven't told us where that went. But, black holes
prove it has to be there.

Look here, a list of black holes, all real.
http://chandra.harvard.edu/xray_sources/blackholes.html

So, are symetrical explosions and exactly how an implosion takes place
when all you see is a blast.
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu.../bomb3.html#c2

They are real thoughts on real science.

nightbat

No Coffee Guy server they are theoretical non real world
possibility sci fi speculations. A black hole doesn't exist in the
center of explosions get a clue. Stop falling for all that Hollywood B
movie and hype sci fi and get a grip. Real world science is quite
different it requires evidence not speculation. You're not to blame for
they sure make it all seem real in Hollywood for that's what they get
paid for. Now not another word until I have my cup of fresh brew,
thanks.

carry on,
the nightbat


Yes as nightbat says, there is no real world conclusive evidence that
black holes exist. But Hollywood and speculative Sci-Fi book writers
love this sort of thing. Nothing has been observed that couldn't have
an explanation other than a black hole. Black holes, Jurassic Park,
and Monster Island only exist on film!

Double-A

Hey, I just had an idea for a new book or possibly a movie or two. The Big
Bang was initiated by a Big Spark which was caused by the collision of two
big rocks. Now the questions are, 1) Who struck the rocks together, 2) What
explosive gas/liquid/solid/Bose-Einstein goo was fermenting in space in the
first place, 3) What happened to the guy's fingers who banged the rocks
together? and 4) Are Black Holes nothing more than swirling Brownian motion
eddies?

-eric