possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

The cosmos at our fingertips.
Doum
A personalized rank.
Posts: 519
Joined: Fri Feb 18, 2005 5:38 pm

possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

Postby Doum » Tue Nov 28, 2017 3:34 pm

Who knows, there may be remains of black holes in the ongoing expansion that date from the prior contraction phase and passed intact through the bottleneck of the bounce,"

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Physi ... g_999.html

Red dwarf star can age for more billions of years then the age of the univers is. So, can we also find red dwarf star that are vestiges of the univers before? If that idea is true, is it possible to find those very old age red dwarf. Or has some been already found?

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 13341
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA

Re: possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

Postby Chris Peterson » Tue Nov 28, 2017 3:41 pm

Doum wrote:Who knows, there may be remains of black holes in the ongoing expansion that date from the prior contraction phase and passed intact through the bottleneck of the bounce,"

http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Physi ... g_999.html

Red dwarf star can age for more billions of years then the age of the univers is. So, can we also find red dwarf star that are vestiges of the univers before? If that idea is true, is it possible to find those very old age red dwarf. Or has some been already found?

The rather well observed increase in the expansion rate of the Universe argues against a cyclical bounce model. Or do we just happen to be in the final iteration of these previous cycles, one that won't repeat?
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

User avatar
bystander
Apathetic Retiree
Posts: 16420
Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 2:06 pm
Location: Oklahoma

Re: possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

Postby bystander » Tue Nov 28, 2017 4:43 pm

Bouncing cosmology inspired by regular black holes - J. C. S. Neves
Know the quiet place within your heart and touch the rainbow of possibility; be
alive to the gentle breeze of communication, and please stop being such a jerk.
— Garrison Keillor

User avatar
Ann
4725 Å
Posts: 8496
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 5:33 am

Re: possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

Postby Ann » Tue Nov 28, 2017 6:21 pm

I'm so, so looking forward to new, careful measurements of distant galaxies, galactic lensing etcetera, to learn more about the rate of the expansion of the Universe. If a previous universe has left traces in our own vast cosmos, we can hope that new, careful studies will reveal some blips.

Ann
Color Commentator

User avatar
Fred the Cat
Theoretic Apothekitty
Posts: 402
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 4:09 pm
AKA: Ron

Re: possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

Postby Fred the Cat » Tue Nov 28, 2017 7:20 pm

Yes, but we may not find out until “universal fugacity” wins and we all get ripped – in the end. :shock:
Thank God. That would be mind-blowing. :wink:
Feynman's Felicity "Only ascertain as a cat box survivor"

BDanielMayfield
Don't bring me down
Posts: 1507
Joined: Thu Aug 02, 2012 11:24 am
AKA: Bruce
Location: East Idaho

Re: possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

Postby BDanielMayfield » Wed Nov 29, 2017 5:19 am

The first sentence from the SpaceDaily article reporting this caught my attention:
Although for five decades, the Big Bang theory has been the best known and most accepted explanation for the beginning and evolution of the Universe, it is hardly a consensus among scientists.


The Big Bang isn't consensus? That doesn't sound right.
"Happy are the peaceable ... "

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 13341
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA

Re: possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

Postby Chris Peterson » Wed Nov 29, 2017 2:42 pm

BDanielMayfield wrote:The first sentence from the SpaceDaily article reporting this caught my attention:
Although for five decades, the Big Bang theory has been the best known and most accepted explanation for the beginning and evolution of the Universe, it is hardly a consensus among scientists.

The Big Bang isn't consensus? That doesn't sound right.

It sure doesn't. A small number of scientists who support other ideas doesn't mean there isn't a consensus. And it isn't even clear what they mean when they say "Big Bang", since that term really encompasses several different theories, each with different supporters (LCDM being the most widely accepted).
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

User avatar
Ann
4725 Å
Posts: 8496
Joined: Sat May 29, 2010 5:33 am

Re: possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

Postby Ann » Wed Nov 29, 2017 11:16 pm

Chris Peterson wrote:
BDanielMayfield wrote:The first sentence from the SpaceDaily article reporting this caught my attention:
Although for five decades, the Big Bang theory has been the best known and most accepted explanation for the beginning and evolution of the Universe, it is hardly a consensus among scientists.

The Big Bang isn't consensus? That doesn't sound right.

It sure doesn't. A small number of scientists who support other ideas doesn't mean there isn't a consensus. And it isn't even clear what they mean when they say "Big Bang", since that term really encompasses several different theories, each with different supporters (LCDM being the most widely accepted).


A text on cosmology that starts off by saying that the Big Bang isn't a consensus among scientists isn't likely to make me take it very seriously. And the next sentence in the text from Space Daily doesn't make me like this text a whole lot better:

SpaceDaily wrote:
Brazilian physicist Juliano Cesar Silva Neves part of a group of researchers who dare to imagine a different origin.


They dare to imagine a different origin. That's so brave.

Or not. There are a lot of things you might imagine, especially the kind of things that are popular in popular culture, such as the idea that there might be spaceships that can make the Kessel run in less than twelve parsecs.

The idea that we might live in a "bouncing universe", where there might be remnants of a previous universe in the Universe that we live in today, is of course not inherently a silly one, unlike the concept of making the Kessel run in less than twelve parsecs. It is, nevertheless, a suggestion that might endear you to a lot of people, because the idea that we live in a bouncing universe is one that is likely to be quite popular. It is similar to the idea of reincarnation, which is also a popular concept. Is it brave to put forth a hypothesis that many people are likely to embrace, so that it will make you popular? Because you have made people's "inner cosmoses" seem cosier than they did before?

Of course, it isn't wrong to test ideas. Not that the idea of the bouncing universe hasn't been put forward before.

What we need from a scientific point of view is a way to actually test the bouncing universe hypothesis.

How do you test the hypothesis of a Big Bang that did not start with a singularity?

"By looking for traces of the events in a contraction phase that may have remained in the ongoing expansion phase. What traces? The candidates include remnants of black holes from a previous phase of universal contraction that may have survived the bounce," Neves said.


So how do you tell the difference between black holes that are normal products of processes in the current Universe and black holes that are remnants of a previous cosmos?

Ann
Color Commentator

User avatar
Chris Peterson
Abominable Snowman
Posts: 13341
Joined: Wed Jan 31, 2007 11:13 pm
Location: Guffey, Colorado, USA

Re: possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

Postby Chris Peterson » Wed Nov 29, 2017 11:31 pm

Ann wrote:So how do you tell the difference between black holes that are normal products of processes in the current Universe and black holes that are remnants of a previous cosmos?

That's a very good question. A black hole is similar in many ways to a subatomic particle: a very simple thing which is fully defined by a very small number of properties. That would seem to make it a rather poor choice for that purpose. Something complex, like an ancient star, would be better. Of course, who's to say that even in a bouncing universe model anything larger than a subatomic particle (if that) would survive into the next iteration?
Chris

*****************************************
Chris L Peterson
Cloudbait Observatory
http://www.cloudbait.com

User avatar
geckzilla
Ocular Digitator
Posts: 8674
Joined: Wed Sep 12, 2007 12:42 pm
Location: Modesto, CA

Re: possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

Postby geckzilla » Thu Nov 30, 2017 6:46 am

In our current iteration of the Universe, media outlets are fine-tuning the process of acquiring viewership by verging into plausible fantasies. Too outrageous, and they lose credibility. Too mundane, and nobody reads it. I'd hate to be a writer.
Just call me "geck" because "zilla" is like a last name.

User avatar
Fred the Cat
Theoretic Apothekitty
Posts: 402
Joined: Mon Feb 22, 2016 4:09 pm
AKA: Ron

Re: possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

Postby Fred the Cat » Thu Nov 30, 2017 4:48 pm

Like the mental image of a black hole diminishing matter into :?:, the idea of a BIG BANG could be thought in completely the opposite way – the little crush. 8-)

Is there any way to know? :?
Feynman's Felicity "Only ascertain as a cat box survivor"

saturno2
Commander
Posts: 589
Joined: Wed Jun 29, 2011 10:05 pm

Re: possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

Postby saturno2 » Sat Dec 02, 2017 1:30 pm

I think that the Big Bang is the origin of the present visible Universe.
But in the Big Bang there was no singularity over a point of
infinite density.
The matter, time and space existed before the Big Bang, forever...

???????

Re: possibility of vestiges of an Universe previous to the Big Bang

Postby ??????? » Thu Dec 14, 2017 7:24 pm

saturno2 wrote:I think that the Big Bang is the origin of the present visible Universe.
But in the Big Bang there was no singularity over a point of
infinite density.
The matter, time and space existed before the Big Bang, forever...


On what basis do you make that assumption?


Return to “The Asterisk Café: Discuss Anything Astronomy Related”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: CommonCrawl [Bot] and 0 guests