that last sentence was supposed to be deleted. that is ofcourse not true in this theory. the further away will come closer as the hole sucks in everything in between.
One black hole cannot attract everything, for there are multiple of them, and at greater distance interactions with other particles become more important than the attraction. There are some people who indeed think that blackholes will eventually have sucked up most, er, things. But we don't know if they keep sucking forever.
Btw, I'm not nearly as knowledgeable as I would have to be to assert all this with certitude, I'm just giving my two cents about this. Your opinion is as good as mine I guess.
but why make it harder then it is? to sound more interesting?
Bah, you make it sound bad when you say "to sound more interesting". I see nothing wrong with this. Interesting is usually always nice, what type of world would we live in if there was nothing interesting in it.
Oh and P.S. just saying "we dunno" is considered spam.
if you just come to the point you don't have to care that people wont understand.
I prefer people to understand and agree with me (however unlikely and few times that happens).
anyway i got my own theory of cycles as i explained a few times already. so the univers simple has always existed. there is no such thing as "befor the universe / creation".
If it isn't to much to ask for, what exactly do you believe in. God? The Big Bang Theory? Anything else? Or just that the universe has always existed with no proof or validity to that statement? Do you know of a website that agrees with this and can explain it better as to why the universe has always existed then just saying "it always has" with no statements backing that up?
If it isn't to much to ask for, what exactly do you believe in. God? The Big Bang Theory? Anything else? Or just that the universe has always existed with no proof or validity to that statement?
god - definitely not
big bang theory - science is mostly pointing at this. therefor i have to take itas a serious possibility. and therefor inserted it in my own theory. after the last black hole has sucked in everything left. it will start to "eat" from itself. until it implodes and BIG BANG the cycle starts again. (see it more as a expension on the big bang theory.)
universe has always existed - yes and no. - yes it has always existed. - no not this universe alone. there have been others befor and there will be others after this one.
there is no solid proof for the big bang and especially not for god. so yea like everyone i believe it whitout solid proof.
Do you know of a website that agrees with this
not whit this specific idea. it came from my own mind. but i bet there are others who hold the same believe that it always has existed. i just dunno if they got the same theory.
big bang theory - science is mostly pointing at this. therefor i have to take itas a serious possibility. and therefor inserted it in my own theory. after the last black hole has sucked in everything left. it will start to "eat" from itself. until it implodes and BIG BANG the cycle starts again. (see it more as a expension on the big bang theory.)
universe has always existed - yes and no. - yes it has always existed. - no not this universe alone. there have been others befor and there will be others after this one.
there is no solid proof for the big bang and especially not for god. so yea like everyone i believe it whitout solid proof.
So is that a long fancy, interesting way of saying:
God - No Big Bang Theory - Maybe My Theory - Most likely in my opinion We Just Don't Know - In truth most likely
not whit this specific idea. it came from my own mind. but i bet there are others who hold the same believe that it always has existed. i just dunno if they got the same theory.
Ah, I understand and respect that, sorry if when I asked you it came off as rude/patronizing.
my theory was that inside the bubble there is something sucking the gum in. (black holes) until it has sucked up all the gum. and then blows a bubble by itself.
As noted it isn't a bubble. The expansion of the universe wouldn't allow for it all to be sucked into a black hole. In fact with the expansion accelerating it's likely that it will eventually overtake localized gravitational attraction. that means Galaxies will be ripped apart, new stars won't be able to form an so forth. It would be like a black hole effect in reverse. Gravity is trying to pull things together and right now it can win out on a localized scale. But the force that is pulling everything apart is getting stronger. Like a treadmill going faster and faster. So there should be a tipping point where that attraction can't overcome the pull. We can even see now that the pull from black holes on the larger scale isn't enough to overcome this universe expansion. Each galaxy likely has a super-massive black hole and for the most part they are showing a red shift away from us.
As noted it isn't a bubble. The expansion of the universe wouldn't allow for it all to be sucked into a black hole. In fact with the expansion accelerating it's likely that it will eventually overtake localized gravitational attraction. that means Galaxies will be ripped apart, new stars won't be able to form an so forth. It would be like a black hole effect in reverse. Gravity is trying to pull things together and right now it can win out on a localized scale. But the force that is pulling everything apart is getting stronger. Like a treadmill going faster and faster. So there should be a tipping point where that attraction can't overcome the pull. We can even see now that the pull from black holes on the larger scale isn't enough to overcome this universe expansion. Each galaxy likely has a super-massive black hole and for the most part they are showing a red shift away from us.
oke ive been thinking about this one. or 2 actually. i probably need more time tho. (think better and present it better.) but what IF we see the black holes as sort of vacuum cleaners that cleans up all what is left when the universe is thinned and cooled and then explodes. or that they go on untill nothing is left for them and then they do a small big bang that keeps the universe from stopping forever. =o
We can even see now that the pull from black holes on the larger scale isn't enough to overcome this universe expansion.
i'm really interested in this part. you know how they call it? aka what do i type in google =P it's been a while since i got busy on black holes. something new will be great. ^^
but what IF we see the black holes as sort of vacuum cleaners that cleans up all what is left when the universe is thinned and cooled and then explodes. or that they go on untill nothing is left for them and then they do a small big bang that keeps the universe from stopping forever. =o
Assuming you have the thinned out universe and one big black hole, that absorbs 90% of the mass (the rest being "out of reach", so to speak) before expansing (assuming black holes do that). Each time this happens, some matter is lost flying out in the void. After several iterations there may not even be enough matter left to create a new expansion, and the universe ends in a final black hole burp :P
oke ive been thinking about this one. or 2 actually. i probably need more time tho. (think better and present it better.) but what IF we see the black holes as sort of vacuum cleaners that cleans up all what is left when the universe is thinned and cooled and then explodes. or that they go on untill nothing is left for them and then they do a small big bang that keeps the universe from stopping forever. =o
If Hawkins theory on black holes is correct what we should expect is for them to slowly evaporate. Even if they just exploded eventually the expansion of the universe would be at a point where anything released would just be spread apart to fast for the matter to clump back together to form anything.
As far as I know (though the last thing I've heard about it was quite some while ago), black holes are thought to be points of immense gravity, which is why they absorb everything, and it all lands in the center, a single point in the mathematical definition of the term (meaning a point with no spacial dimensions). Now whether this is still actual, I don't know.
I wanted to bring this back to Dr Doughnut's original question. Here is what I know for sure: I'm 29, so the universe is at least that old from my understanding (assuming you believe in measuring time linearly). I would also have to guess that the universe pre-dates my parents, who are in their 60's. Similarly, I'm willing to bet that the universe was around when my grandmother was born...but she is the oldest person I know. Now, I can't know for sure if anything existed before I did. Some people might be skeptical, but I'm willing to take that leap of faith. So in conclusion, I think the universe is at least 94 years old.
