I've been searching for years for a black hole for my big bang, but they keep telling me I'm to white, well that's another story so for you Intelligent FU's
Big Bang happened like this. Once upon a time there was a ‘singularity’ that contained everything that was. Suddenly it blew up, releasing fundamental particles that expanded to fill space.
Gravity came into being and particles came together into stars and planets. More complicated particles were ‘cooked’ in the stars, and were released through supernova, to form other heavenly bodies, and from them eventually came life.
The theory is neat and tidy.
It came out of the realization that the universe was expanding, and when background radiation was found, identified as residue of the Big Bang, the theory gained consensus.
Of course, there are massive problems with the theory. The ‘singularity’ is nothing but a mathematical point of infinity, with no physical validity, and the math of the theory means there is 90% of the matter and energy in the universe missing.
Exotic theories come and go to account for this lack of universal weight.
Dark matter and dark energy are among them. Then there is the search for ‘mass’ in massless particles. It doesn’t occur to science that the theory may be wrong.
Previous to Big Bang was the Steady State theory. Here, matter was continually created, the universe renewing itself. But as no means was known how it did this, it was rejected for Big Bang, even though no one knows how it did this.
Big Bang fits western philosophy.
In the east, everything is cyclical, renewing itself, whilst in the west, we are linear. Things must move from a beginning to an end. Hence, it follows that the universe must also have history with a beginning and an end.
Is this philosophical mind-set the main reason we prefer Big Bang over Steady State? After all, neither can be proved. Of course, the argument is that background radiation seals it. But in other areas of science, it is accepted that nothing can have only one answer.
It seems to me that Big Bang theory has got itself in a steady state.
And maybe it’s time to look again at Steady State itself. For instance, is it still true that there is no conceivable ‘mechanism’ whereby matter can be continually created?
I don’t think it is. For years now I’ve been thinking about Black Holes, the supposed residue of collapsed stars, with a gravitational pull so powerful that everything that approaches them is sucked in.
Where does all this matter and energy go?
Science is scratching its head, trying to decide. Theories suggest that if you went through a Black Hole and survived, you’d resurface somewhere in the universe.
Isn’t this a ‘recycling’ of matter back into the universe itself? It seems to me that the black hole is a perfect mechanism to give Steady State greater validity than Big Bang. Maybe physicists should be looking at a possible way the system could still provide expansion, and background radiation, within a forever reincarnating universe.
By Anthony North
