The Big Bang time paradox

[Ned]

Geronimo, that is why I thought the two-singularity collision might be a better model.

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Chemical Ollie
This is an interesting thread, but I don't have time to read all through at the moment. So I just bookmark it for later use, by asking the question:

Some believe in a cyclic universe, following a sinus curve that starts with a big bang and expands, until it eventually turns around and contracts into a single black hole, creating a new big bang. Repeat for eternity. At the moment, We are in the expansion phase. As we all know, the laws of thermodynamics defines that the total entrophy (delta-S) in any reaction always increases. But would that law be valid in the contraction phase of the universe?

I think KH already classified this sort of question as "idle speculation."

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Originally posted by Ned
Geronimo, that is why I thought the two-singularity collision might be a better model.

I believe most physicists believe such an event simply increases the radius of the event horizon of the resulting singularity.

[KrazyHorse]

Ogie, I'm really curious what you meant when you called me a beautician.

I don't get it, unless you knew I was working with b quarks (and I haven't mentioned that anywhere online)

[Ogie Oglethorpe]

Cosmologist

Cosmetolgist


Stupid joke.

But what can you expect form a simple train driver?

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


I think KH already classified this sort of question as "idle speculation."

not necessarily the part about whether entropy would necessarily always increase in a universe during a contraction.

There is a difference in speculating about possible causes preceding a state about which you know almost nothing and speculating about a hypothetical situation about which you can "know" as much as you specify.

[KrazyHorse]

Ogie

Ahh.

I was convinced you had a friend in the physics dept at Hopkins who knew what I was working on.

I was a little bit frightened...

[KrazyHorse]

And even if you meant the joke in a different way I'm going to start calling bottom/beauty quark physicists "beauticians".

It's gold.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Jon Miller
What is traditionally thought of us dark matter doesn't absorb light or energy. It's whole point is that it doesn't interact much ('dark' to interactions).

I would think that if there was a particle that absorbed light and matter, it would be relatively easy to observe it (like Black Holes).

JM

I'm not so sure. Aren't black hole suppose to be approximately Planck Length and therefor are unobservable?

[Ned]

Just checking around. It does seem that others think that the formation of (tiny black holes that persist to today) at the beginning to be plausible.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Primordial_black_holes

[Kuciwalker]

Originally posted by Ned
I'm not so sure. Aren't black hole suppose to be approximately Planck Length and therefor are unobservable?

It's very easy to observe a black hole from it's gravitational influence.

[Ned]

Originally posted by Ogie Oglethorpe


I believe most physicists believe such an event simply increases the radius of the event horizon of the resulting singularity.

What I envision (pure speculation at this point) is that when two infinities approach each other, they, in fact, cancel thereby releasing the contained matter and energy of one or both singularities.

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Kuciwalker


It's very easy to observe a black hole from it's gravitational influence.

only for stellar mass or larger black holes with appreciable gas or companion bodies in it's immediate vicinity.


Obviously primordial black holes needn't be as massive as a stellar black hole. Although there are some constraints on their size due to predicted rates of evaporation.

In any case if black holes are easy to observe from their gravitational influence then it would seem that dark matter would also be easy to observe by it's gravitational influence. I don't think anyone regards either black holes or dark matter as "easy to observe".

[Geronimo]

Originally posted by Ned


What I envision (pure speculation at this point) is that when two infinities approach each other, they, in fact, cancel thereby releasing the contained matter and energy of one or both singularities.

It's hard to see how the super massive black holes could remain at the centers of galaxies if that were indeed the case. There are almost certainly enough stellar black holes buzzing around their neighborhoods that avoiding any absorbtion of any external singularities for all these billions of years would seem to be unlikely if not impossible.

The supermassive blackholes must periodically eat smaller black holes. They are still here. Therefore when two singularities approach each other it would seem they do not release their contained matter.

[KrazyHorse]

I'm pretty sure there's no way to force mass to be ejected at any other than quantum scale from black holes.