|| Home. | Universe Galaxies And Stars Archives. | |
|| Universe | Big Bang | Galaxies | Stars | Solar System | Planets | Hubble Telescope | NASA | Search Engine ||
Energy and Mass make up the universe.
Even when we endeavour to go that proverbial extra mile on their behalf, we still see huge and mountainous obstacles restricting our progress.
For the sake of civility we fixed selective jump-off points, we even provided an ambit for detonation that really had no honest explanation, but still became bogged down in a new set of problems. To suggest all universal matter might advance as a newly formed universe we envisage today would suggest the universe itself already existed, only in vacuum format. But that throws a few preponderants in itself, for if it already did exist as a huge vacuum, just patiently waiting all universal fabric to conveniently fill it, then it must naturally have finite borders: At least that might offer us a reasonable excuse to locate time somewhere in the equation; because if it does have finite distances to run, we could not theoretically measure them over any distance.
And that appears to prohibit our generosity of allowing the consolidation of all universal material we offered a moment ago.
By now you should begin to understand just how awkward and clumsy a Big Bang singularity can be. Even when we make excuses, certain contemporary elements are liable to contradict themselves. Its reminiscent of lying for a good friend, only to be caught out and have to continuously make other lies for them. And as each lie becomes a tounch bigger, it leaves you feeling no more than a touch embarrassed.
Therefore, even if we do provide a preamble at this time, there are indeed other, more delicate matters to consider. Like most things in life, our generosity became indicative of our own good nature. We sought where possible to appease certain criteria, to fudge the issue if necessary, and still found ourselves prohibited from pursuing a convincing logic to explain this event which allowed creation.
We could do some more creative explaining if we so choose, but again I think this evaluation would most certainly become fraudulent at that time.
So far a Big Bang singularity, that point at the outset of the universe where spacetime curvature became infinite has so far failed, for us at least, to satisfy the aspects of creation we need. There appears to be no real sense of conviction to it. In fact it led us to fabricate certain events of the said event, purely to please others.
We asked some searching questions in our quest for possible answers. We asked why this event termed a Big Bang actually exploded in the first place, and found no plausible answer to describe the event. There appeared to be no explanation of pressure, a chain reaction or even the possibility of cause and effect. There was no reasonable action to start a reaction.
Therefore, to say time had a start point at that place, on that specific day, for no apparent reason leaves one wondering why anybody might endorse such a concept in the first place?
We also toyed with the question of what made all the universal material locate to that specific area in the first place? And again we were really searching for that principle of cause and effect, but evidently, once again we found nothing. There was no true definition of how universal mass could consolidate, produce time and a dimensional universe and allow, simultaneous, itself to return whence it came.
Already betrayed by the original desire, we sought to be over generous in my opinion, but then I am a big softy at heart. We provided an ambit for consolidation, then an ubiquitous Big Bang to follow, but perplexed ourselves once again when we asked honestly what it might have expanded in to? As usual the evidence was apparent by its abscence. It never emerged.
However, a more radical assessment is formulated at that time. And that is, most of those that hold to a Big Bang principle are fundamentally wrong in their belief, specifically because of the tests we laid down.
We offered an opportunity, but found failure and excuses along the way. Disappointing I know, but that's the rub of it. We began to understand there could be no centre of gravity to produce a mechanism needed to drive the universe: Help keep it together and turning. We might even be so bold as to say, without this seat of gravity, which would be lost at that point of fusion, our own Solar System could simply end-up in one big pile in the corner of our galaxy. Not a pleasant thought.
But even without that drastic disaster happening, we could still assume an element of drift would occur. Without a central gravitational influence permeating throughout the universe, there quite simply would be no universe.
So why does modern science cling so desperately to Big Bang belief?
To explain that, we need to understand humans probably more than we do the univers. Cosmologists and scientists need to show they have answers to the most basic questions we ask, and the point of creation is the most basic of all. It is the single event which preceded all others. Therefore, for an individual it becomes the question most commonly posed. Where did the universe come from? Where's all the missing universal mass? Where did God come from? What is Time?
But for most ordinary people, there are really only two preparatory inquiries asked before hearing a fuller, further explanation of universaltheories: Where did it all come from, and what is God?
Below is a list of chapters for the Metaphysics Anthology. The book itself is designed as abit of fun! One man thinking out loud. You should not see it as science, merely enjoy the imagination of the human mind in full swing.
Print Version - Print Article
Universe - Galaxies and Stars: Links and Contacts
|| GNU License | Contact | Copyright | WebMaster | Terms | Disclaimer | Top Of Page. ||