Infinite Universe Or Not?

[Michael Mooney]

Pluto,

Thanks for the in-depth reply. I'll be studying the links for awhile.

Seems you don't have much to say about the specifics in my post, though. If you find the time I would appreciate it if you would respond to what I proposed.

Maybe it's not all about jets spewing out matter as in the examples you referenced. Maybe the smaller "bangs" and "crunches" of my "vision" could act in a more spherical geometry under the circumstances I sketched out. (Maybe not.)

 

How about the possibility of "our cosmos" being a 'small bubble of visibility' within the "rubber" of the larger scale balloon expanding from an epicenter on colossal scale? (The rubber molecules being a metaphor for cosmic materials on grand scale... comprising 'zillions' of cosmi like "our own.") In this case, as the "rubber membrane" thins out with continued expansion, our small cosmic event horizon may eventually be able to "see out" of the larger balloon membrane and see vast space (no longer isotropic) without the look of homogeneity ... in both the direction of expansion and in the direction of "the center of the Big Balloon."

 

Like I said, I'll be studying your links for some time.

Care to give my proposal a fair hearing and contemplative reply? (Seems you dismissed my specifics as if they are merely out of touch with your expertise on "jets.")

 

Michael

[Pluto]

G'day from the land of ozzzzzzzz

 

Hello Michael

 

My response is, read up on the subject.

 

There is a reason for my madness.

 

I will give your points a comment.

 

Going out for the night,,,,,,,,,,,fun time,,,,,,,,,family time,,,,,,,kids

 

Be back in a few hours.

[Pluto]

G'day Michael

 

This may interest you

 

arXiv.org Search

 

Showing results 1 through 25 (of 38 total) for au:Steinhardt_P

 

arXiv.org Search

 

 

Just look at the links and get a gist of it.

 

Not that I agree with them

 

My opinion is not that important

[modest]

Like I said, I'll be studying your links for some time.

Care to give my proposal a fair hearing and contemplative reply? (Seems you dismissed my specifics as if they are merely out of touch with your expertise on "jets.")

 

I also couldn't figure out the connection between the links to astronomical jets and your post, but Pluto's search on Neil Turok and Paul Steinhardt in the post above is certainly in the right direction.

 

arXiv.org Search

 

Showing results 1 through 25 (of 38 total) for au:Steinhardt_P

 

arXiv.org Search

 

They've worked on cyclic brane cosmology which bears resemblance to the description in post 67. A good place to start might be this lecture by Turok:

 

Edge: THE CYCLIC UNIVERSE: A Talk With Neil Turok

 

~modest

[C1ay]

C1ay said

 

"What If" Two powerful words.

 

Maybe this link answers your "What If"

 

[astro-ph/0703265] Formation of relativistic jets by collapsing stars to black holes

Formation of relativistic jets by collapsing stars to black holes

 

Authors: V. Kryvdyk (Dept Astronomy, Taras Shevchenko National University of Kyiv, Ukraine)

(Submitted on 12 Mar 2007)

 

That article is about collapsing stars though, not collapsing black holes. What I was trying to suggest earlier was the possibility of a super black hole that contained all of the matter in the visible Universe. Could such an entity have the equivalent of a supernova?

[Michael Mooney]

Hello Michael

 

My response is, read up on the subject.

Pluto,

Please don't presume to know what I have studied and what I have not.

For instance, I'm very interested in your expertise on "jets", though am somwhat familiar with the well known examples. Still haven't studied the links you provided on them but intend to do so.

 

On the other hand, I am quite familiar with string theory in all its five main forms, and how the "11th dimension" was "ressurrected" from "disgrace" to save the varieties of string theory in an integrated form as membrane or M-theory.

 

I am familiar with the work of Turok and Steinhardt on cyclical cosmology based on clashing "membranes." However the 7 "dimensions" beyond the well known four are all based on math esoterica without a "chance in hell" of ever being verified by observation... not to mention that thay have no reasonable referents in "the real world".

And, yes, I know that Hawking has endorsed their new book. I am not impressed. He is the one who had a cosmology based on a primordial "singularity" of "infinite matter density in a point of zero volume" as a cosmic "beginning."

(I debunked him in the "Myspace" science forum many months before he "recanted" and then joined forces with the M-theory based cosmos... not that he has ever heard of me.)

I'll leave it here for now. Have other priorities for my time right now.

See ya.

Michael

[Pluto]

Happy New Year from the land of ozzzz

 

C1ay said

 

That article is about collapsing stars though, not collapsing black holes. What I was trying to suggest earlier was the possibility of a super black hole that contained all of the matter in the visible Universe. Could such an entity have the equivalent of a supernova?

 

Jets are jets regardless of their origin.

 

All the universe in one black hole I do not think will ever happen, because of a critical limit that BH can grow to and the formation of jets that keeps them smaller.

 

As for a black hole exploding similar to a supernova, I do not think so.

 

If I remember correctly the merging of subatomic partices at that density is not an explosive event. Although the magnetic fields created and entangle form jets that eject matter out.

 

I will try to find the paper that covers that.

 

Its New Year Celb's and party time.

 

========================

 

Hello Michael

 

Please don't presume to know what I have studied and what I have not.

For instance, I'm very interested in your expertise on "jets", though am somwhat familiar with the well known examples. Still haven't studied the links you provided on them but intend to do so.

 

Smile,,,I do not know you from a bar of soap.

So I cannot presume who and what you are.

 

Stay Cool

 

You said

 

I am familiar with the work of Turok and Steinhardt on cyclical cosmology based on clashing "membranes." However the 7 "dimensions" beyond the well known four are all based on math esoterica without a "chance in hell" of ever being verified by observation... not to mention that thay have no reasonable referents in "the real world".

 

I fully agree.

 

Now I know that you have both feet on the ground.

 

you said

 

And, yes, I know that Hawking has endorsed their new book. I am not impressed. He is the one who had a cosmology based on a primordial "singularity" of "infinite matter density in a point of zero volume" as a cosmic "beginning."

 

Sometimes science topics are in good faith, are like mushrooms if you feed them BS they will grow.

 

Steven Hawking, so what if he has endorsed it.

 

Science has its own method and mentality.

 

To understand cosmology there is one road, and that is to keep reading. Thats what I was told. I'm not a smart cookie, far from it.

 

My next reading will be on Ellis G

arXiv.org Search

[Michael Mooney]

Now I know that you have both feet on the ground.

 

Thank you. I appreciate the intensity of your pursuit of scientific truth as well.

Feet on the ground and head in the clouds of cosmological vision...That's me. I am first a 'visionary' and second an amateur scientist looking for empirical verification of what I "see."

 

But you say:

To understand cosmology there is one road, and that is to keep reading. Thats what I was told. I'm not a smart cookie, far from it.

I must be misunderstanding you. Surely you are not content to be told what is true of the cosmos by "experts" more intelligent than yourself! Are you not also a free-thinking visionary? Seems to me you are. Perhaps too humble to say so!

 

I have had the burden of expectation as a "high genius" all my life... expectation that I surpass Einstein, as my IQ does. Radical honesty transcends the protocol of modesty. I am not sorry, but it is a burden laid against me as a judgement that I am arrogant. The saving grace is that I am beyond caring what others think about me. I am content to tell the truth as i see it and let others deal with it however they must.

BTW... any comments on my cosmology?

Michael

[modest]

All the universe in one black hole I do not think will ever happen, because of a critical limit that BH can grow to and the formation of jets that keeps them smaller.

 

Looks like Clay posted the press release on this (the size limit for supermassive black holes) here at Hypography:

http://hypography.com/forums/astronomy-news/16106-yale-astronomer-discovers-upper-mass-limit.html

The published paper is here:

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0808/0808.2813v2.pdf

I think it's an interesting paper. When I first heard the claim (size limit for black holes), I thought It was saying black holes could only contain so much mass.

 

It's actually not saying there's an upper limit on the mass that a black hole can hold, but rather there is a growth limit beyond which black holes will no longer feed on the mass of a galaxy given the radiation pressure and momentum driven wind from the accretion disc and the mechanics of galaxies. The upper limit given is about 10 billion solar masses, but the collision of two such black holes would indeed make a 20 billion solar mass black hole.

 

Theoretically, the mass of the visible universe could fit in a black hole. By the Schwarzschild definition, there would be nothing preventing that. In fact, the mass of the visible universe including cold dark matter is estimated at about [math]2 \times 10^{53} \ kg[/math]. To work out the size of a black hole containing the mass of the visible universe:

[math]r_s= \frac{2GM}{c^2}[/math]

[math]r_s= \frac{(2) (6.67 \times 10^{-20} \ km^3 kg^{-1} s^{-2}) (2 \times 10^{53} \ kg) }{(3 \times 10^{5})^2 \ km/s}[/math]

[math]r_s \approx 3 \times 10^{23} \ km \approx 32 \ billion \ lightyears[/math]

The actual radius of the observable universe is approx. 46 billion lightyears. So, the observable universe nearly has enough density to be a black hole itself. The calculation above is naive in that it doesn't take radiation pressure or the cosmological constant into account—but interesting I think, nonetheless.

 

Clay,

 

I wonder if you've considered the similarity between your idea of a nested black hole expanding and making a local big bang with inflationary cosmology. The metric used for inflation is apparently an "inside out" black hole metric (where the cosmic horizon acts as an event horizon),

[math]ds^2 = - (1- \Lambda r^2) dt^2 + {1\over 1-\Lambda r^2} dr^2 + r^2 d\Omega[/math]

 

This is just like an inside-out black hole metric — it has a zero in the dt component on a fixed radius sphere called the cosmological horizon. Objects are drawn away from the observer at r=0 towards the cosmological horizon, leading them to fall in after a finite proper time.

 

Cosmic inflation - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

 

My understanding of the physics is far too inadequate to say, but it could be significant.

 

~modest

[Pluto]

Happy New Year from the land of ozzzzzz

 

G'day Modest

 

I have read

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0808/0808.2813v2.pdf

 

King (2005) presents a model that exploits the observed

AGN-starburst connection to couple black hole growth and

star formation. As the black hole grows, an outflow drives a

shell into the surrounding gas which stalls after a dynamical

time-scale at a radius determined by the BH mass. The gas

trapped inside this bubble cools, forms stars and is recycled

as accretion and outflow. Once the BH reaches a critical

mass, this region attains a size such that the gas can no

longer cool efficiently. The resulting energy-driven flow expels

the remaining gas as a superwind, thereby fixing the

observed Mbh − σ relation as well as the total stellar mass

of the bulge at values in good agreement with current observations.

The limiting BH mass is given by:

Mbh =

fg κ

π G2 σ4, (8)

where fg is the gas fraction (

baryon/

matter = 0.16, κ the

electron scattering opacity and σ the velocity dispersion.

This model argues that black hole growth inevitably produces

starburts and ultimately a superwind.

 

Possible explanations for the tight correlation observed

between the velocity dispersion of the spheroid and black

hole mass involve a range of self-regulated feedback prescriptions.

An estimate of the upper limits on the black hole mass

that can assemble in the most massive spheroids can be derived

for all these models and they all point to the existence

of UMBHs.

 

 

Abstruct

We make a case for the existence for ultra-massive black holes (UMBHs) in the Universe, but argue that there exists a likely upper limit to black hole masses of the order of $M sim 10^{10} msun$. We show that there are three strong lines of argument that predicate the existence of UMBHs: (i) expected as a natural extension of the observed black hole mass bulge luminosity relation, when extrapolated to the bulge luminosities of bright central galaxies in clusters; (ii) new predictions for the mass function of seed black holes at high redshifts predict that growth via accretion or merger-induced accretion inevitably leads to the existence of rare UMBHs at late times; (iii) the local mass function of black holes computed from the observed X-ray luminosity functions of active galactic nuclei predict the existence of a high mass tail in the black hole mass function at $z = 0$. Consistency between the optical and X-ray census of the local black hole mass function requires an upper limit to black hole masses. This consistent picture also predicts that the slope of the $M_{rm bh}$-$sigma$ relation will evolve with redshift at the high mass end. Models of self-regulation that explain the co-evolution of the stellar component and nuclear black holes naturally provide such an upper limit. The combination of multi-wavelength constraints predicts the existence of UMBHs and simultaneously provides an upper limit to their masses. The typical hosts for these local UMBHs are likely the bright, central cluster galaxies in the nearby Universe.

 

 

Its the mechanism that produces the jets that prevents the ultimate BH.

 

Interesting points

1) The ability to seed

2) A cyclic process.

3) Rear to find an inactive black hole that suck matter in only.

 

To date the biggest black hole is 18 Billion Sun masses.

18 Billion Suns -A Galaxy Classic: Biggest Black Hole in Universe Discovered?and it?s BIG

 

 

=======================================

Supermassive black hole formation during the assembly of pre-galactic discs

 

Authors: Giuseppe Lodato (1), Priya Natarajan (2,3) ((1) Institute of Astronomy, Cambridge, UK, (2) Department of Astronomy, Yale University, New Haven, USA, (3) Department of Physics, Yale University, New Haven, USA)

(Submitted on 7 Jun 2006)

 

Abstract: In this paper we discuss the evolution of gravitationally unstable pre-galactic discs that result from the collapse of haloes at high redshift $z approx 10$ or so, which have not yet been enriched by metals. In cases where molecular hydrogen formation is suppressed the discs are maintained at a temperature of a few thousand degrees Kelvin. However, when molecular hydrogen is present cooling can proceed down to a few hundred degrees Kelvin. Analogous to the case of the larger scale proto-galactic discs, we assume that the evolution of these discs is mainly driven by angular momentum redistribution induced by the development of gravitational instabilities in the disc. We also properly take into account the possibility of disc fragmentation. We thus show that this simple model naturally predicts the formation of supermassive black holes in the nuclei of such discs and provides a robust determination of their mass distribution as a function of halo properties. We estimate that roughly 5% of discs resulting from the collapse of haloes with $Mapprox 10^7 M_{odot}$ should host a massive black hole with a mass $M_{rm BH}approx 10^5 M_{odot}$. We confirm our arguments with time-dependent calculations of the evolution of the surface density and of the accretion rate in these primordial discs. This mechanism offers an efficient way to form seed black holes at high redshift. The predicted masses for our black hole seeds enable the comfortable assembly of $10^9 M_{odot}$ black holes powering the luminous quasars detected by the Sloan Digital Sky Survey at $z = 6$ for a concordance cosmology. (abridged)

 

I think another 2 more years of reading may give me some idea of what the heck is going on.

 

In my opinion from reading and observation a black hole has a limit.

[Michael Mooney]

Pluto:

 

I think another 2 more years of reading may give me some idea of what the heck is going on.

So rather than actual thinking you are wiiling to be told... by the proper authorities, of course... what is true. ?

 

You have not responded at all to the specifics of my posts, but rather keep "sharing" volumes of links.

Maybe you are just a librarian and I have over-estimated you. Please prove me wrong and respond to my posts in actual dialogue. Buty maybe true dialogue is a foreign concept to you. If so, let me know. I have hosted "Bohm Dialogue" at my 'center' for many years and may be able to help you out of your librarian complex.

Hope this doesn't hit too hard. Personal feelings are not one of my concerns... relative to truth telling.

Let me know if you are offended. I am actually a very "nice guy."

michael

[Pluto]

Happy New Year from the land of ozz

 

Hello Michael

 

Smile

 

Mate no offence taken.

 

It's just that I respond to so many posts not just this forum.

 

The reason why I share links is to limit the chinese whisper. If you do not want to read the links thats fine.

 

I thought I answered your points, by asking you to read an understand. Its called lateral thinking.

 

As for been a library, I feel like it sometimes.

 

What specific point would you like me to respond?

 

One point at the time, please.

 

The other issue is, I'm not a smart cookie, just learning. The moderators in this forum are great and full of info.

 

One sec

 

You said

 

Pluto,

Thanks for the in-depth reply. I'll be studying the links for awhile.

Seems you don't have much to say about the specifics in my post, though. If you find the time I would appreciate it if you would respond to what I proposed.

Maybe it's not all about jets spewing out matter as in the examples you referenced. Maybe the smaller "bangs" and "crunches" of my "vision" could act in a more spherical geometry under the circumstances I sketched out. (Maybe not.)

 

Please explain further.

 

How about the possibility of "our cosmos" being a 'small bubble of visibility' within the "rubber" of the larger scale balloon expanding from an epicenter on colossal scale? (The rubber molecules being a metaphor for cosmic materials on grand scale... comprising 'zillions' of cosmi like "our own.") In this case, as the "rubber membrane" thins out with continued expansion, our small cosmic event horizon may eventually be able to "see out" of the larger balloon membrane and see vast space (no longer isotropic) without the look of homogeneity ... in both the direction of expansion and in the direction of "the center of the Big Balloon."

 

Rather than trying to expalin something that cannot be expalined, look at the workings of the parts within the universe.

 

Like I said, I'll be studying your links for some time.

Care to give my proposal a fair hearing and contemplative reply? (Seems you dismissed my specifics as if they are merely out of touch with your expertise on "jets.")

 

The universe in my opinion is consistent in its form. Clustering from the atome to Solar system, to cluster of stars, to cluster of clusters of stars, to galaxies, to gluster of galaxies, to cluster of clusters of galaxies, and the clustering continues. If the universe is infinite. The ultimate question is: What keeps the super clusters away from each other?. What mechanism reforms the clusters and stops them from forming one ultimate cluster?

 

If you notice in the previous posts on the limit of black holes may give some indication. The jet formation from some of the monster black holes are so huge that they effect the form of other galaxies by ejecting matter at clsoe to the speed of light.

 

I hope this is what you wanted?

 

I'm off to the New Years party

 

Happy New Year all............I hope you all go off with a BB.

[C1ay]

Clay,

 

I wonder if you've considered the similarity between your idea of a nested black hole expanding and making a local big bang with inflationary cosmology. The metric used for inflation is apparently an "inside out" black hole metric (where the cosmic horizon acts as an event horizon),

 

My understanding of the physics is far too inadequate to say, but it could be significant.

 

~modest

 

I've given it some thought but I'm not sure we have all of the necessary information to fully evaluate it. If our visible Universe does exist as part of a larger infinite Universe we do not have the information needed to give consideration to the matter beyond our limits of observation and any contributing effect it has on the inflation we see locally. I do tend to think that matter is not created or destroyed so I tend to think that the matter in our Universe was not created by a big bang but existed before such an event.

[modest]

I've given it some thought but I'm not sure we have all of the necessary information to fully evaluate it. If our visible Universe does exist as part of a larger infinite Universe we do not have the information needed to give consideration to the matter beyond our limits of observation and any contributing effect it has on the inflation we see locally. I do tend to think that matter is not created or destroyed so I tend to think that the matter in our Universe was not created by a big bang but existed before such an event.

 

Aye, I'm thinking more and more along the same lines.

 

Happy New Year from the land of ozzzzzz

 

G'day Modest

 

I have read

http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/arxiv/pdf/0808/0808.2813v2.pdf

 

Its the mechanism that produces the jets that prevents the ultimate BH.

 

Howdy, Pluto. I'll answer you in Origin of th Universe..., and there's really no need to cross post :)

 

~modest

[Pluto]

Happy New Year from the land of ozzzzzzzz

 

 

Sorry for crossing must have been the New Year Party.

 

Right now I'm thinking along the lines of the BB, my head is ready to explode.

 

Its 9.40 AM Sydney and clear cool fine weather

 

C1ay you hit the nail on the head.