cosmology - expansion of the universe

texastiger

Is the Accelerating Expansion of the Universe the Observable Effect of Tidal Forces?

Mystery forces [vacuum pressure, dark energy, cosmological constant] are not needed to explain the accelerating expansion of the universe. An already known gravitational effect known as tidal force is all that is needed. A *BIG* black hole at a distance beyond our current ability to detect is “all” that is needed. The size of the *BIG* black hole is on the order of 4 times the mass contained in the observable universe. The gravitational pull is greatest on the side of the observable universe nearest the *BIG* black hole and weakest in the opposite direction. The matter nearest the black hole is accelerating toward it at a significantly greater rate than the matter on the opposite side of the observable universe. Clearly this is the classical definition of a gravitational tidal force. The expansion of the universe with an acceleration increasing with distance is the observable effect of this tidal force.

Think with me about a universe consisting only of the Large Magellanic Cloud and an isolated black hole in the location of and with the mass of the Milky Way. Assume you are an astronomer inside the Large Magellanic Cloud as defined. You would observe the Large Magellanic Cloud expanding and that the expansion is accelerating. The farther away stars are from the astronomer the greater their apparent speed and acceleration. Our astronomer notices the expansion rate and acceleration peak in two directions opposite each other. He concludes that tidal forces from an unseen mass cause the observed accelerating expansion.

Our view of the expanding universe is analogous to that of such an observer. While we have not yet detected the *BIG* black hole pulling on our universe. There should be peaks/troughs in observable variations of the distant universe near a line through the *BIG* black hole and the earth. A word of caution, two objects with identical red shifts are not necessarily similar distances from Earth.

*************************************************************

Are the Histories of the *BIG* Black Hole and the Observable Universe Somehow Connected?

Think with me about what existed prior to the Big Bang. Assume a spinning black hole with a charge, and call it black hole 1.0. Let black hole 1.0 have a mass on the order of 5 times the mass contained in the observable universe. I would say let time pass, but time has no meaning here, nor does distance, nor velocity, nor even “here”. And yet there is a spin rate for toroidal black hole 1.0, but it is undefined. Dividing by a number that approaches zero tends to do that.

Now assume a vibration in spinning black hole 1.0. Let it be a sympathetic vibration such that instability results. A cataclysmic event breaks the torus creating two parts from the former one. The original spin rate and charge of black hole 1.0 create a separation velocity and repulsive force respectively in the two parts which overcomes their mutual gravitational attraction causing them to “fly” away from each other. The larger part retains 80% of the original mass meaning it has 80% of the original gravity, but herein lies a problem. The collapsed mass comprising the larger part has been compressed by a gravitational pull one fourth greater than is now exerted. It begins to expand or “uncollapse”. As luck would have it, the lower gravitational force is still high enough to restore stability and black hole 2.0 settles down into a similar but smaller version of black hole 1.0. All the while it feels the mass of the smaller part and even though they are separate for now, will that always be the case?

The smaller part is only 20% of the original mass and therefore its internal gravity is only one fifth the force that collapsed the matter of which it is comprised. This is a far greater problem than faced what is now black hole 2.0. As a resident in what the smaller part has become, I would have to say it is fortunate that the collapsed matter “inflated” at a rate too great for the gravity of the smaller part to contain. This failure of containment was a multi-step process which has been extremely well described by Dr. Stephen Hawking in his book, A Brief History of Time, dealing with the fractional moments of the Big Bang. In summary inflation occurred until the particles in the smaller part and the forces acting on them were no longer indistinguishable. The energy levels of the collapsed matter dropped sufficiently for it to become baryonic matter and the four fundamental forces we now know became distinct. The observable universe was born. The energy levels of the baryonic particles and the strength of the fundamental forces due to the close proximity of the particles were so great in combination that internal gravity could not contain the mass and the observable universe pot “boiled over”.

Early in the life of the observable universe it was compact and internal gravity ruled the motions of its dispersing parts. As billions of years passed, internal gravity no longer was a greater influence than the gravitational force of black hole 2.0. Its tidal force began to shred the observable universe just as the Milky Way is doing to the Large Magellanic Cloud.

*************************************************************

Clyde McBride
Beaumont, TX

Michael Turner

I believe it is simple.
Newton Force = mass times acceleration. If force is constant and mass is decreasing via the gravitational wave creating space then the remaining mass increases. Gravitation@cfl.rr.com for a request for more.

Anonymous · Guest Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 12:59 am

The universe everywhere does not extend. It is our galaxy it is narrowed. Therefore it seems to us that the universe extends.
[url] http://sun22y51.narod.ru/[/url]

Anonymous · Guest Posted: Fri Jan 21, 2005 1:02 am

[quote="sun22y"]The universe everywhere does not extend. It is our galaxy it is narrowed. Therefore it seems to us that the universe extends.
http://sun22y51.narod.ru/

Dave Zak

Interesting concept, however in my very, very, very limited understanding of our universe, it seems as though every galaxy is moving farther away from us. It is not just some galaxies to our north that are accelerating, it is the whole universe extending outward, away from the center. your hypothesis would make it seem as though one big black hole would be sucking up the matter in our universe and therefore all galaxies would have the tendency to start moving towards one coordinate, the coordinate of the big black hole that you theorize. If your theory of acceleration due to gravitational tidal forces were to be true, than many black holes outside of our universe would have to exist in every direction imaginable, which is to say that this is a possibility considering we don't know what exists outside of our known universe.

Dave Zak

sorry, PLEASE READ "re" WHICH WAS THE BEGINNING OF MY RESPONSE TO TEXAS TIGER
(I accidently pressed enter before I was finished with my very uneducated response.)

It is obvious that you have read about and understand more of the universe than I. I have not heard that stellar objects are traveling faster on one side of our Universe toward a point and that other stellar objects are traveling at a slower velocity at the other side of our universe. If this is the case, I am sorry for doubting your hypothesis. My understanding was that stellar objects that are twice as far away from us as other stellar objects are traveling at twice the velocity and all observed matter has shown this kind of relationship. The larger the distance a galaxy is from us is directly related to the velocity in which that object is moving. This was the basis in determining the age of our universe from the 1st second of the big bang. I beleived from what I have read that, yes, some galaxies are moving at a faster rate away from the center of the big bang, but they are moving at a faster rate in all directions. An author of a book about the big bang was lecturing on TV the other night and explained matter in the universe not as shrapnel that blows out of a grenade, but that the space between the shrapnel was what was expanding. Space itself is enlarging and as a result we are moving farther apart from everything else. That is to say that it is the emptiness of space that is getting larger and we as well as all other galaxies are caught up in our part of that space and are therfore growing farther apart as space expands. This would explain why all matter in all directions seems to be moving farther away from our vantage point here on earth. A galaxy that is farthest away from us moves at a more accelerated pace because there is more space between us and them and all of space is expanding. So, as I understand it, the less space between us and another galaxy, the less velocity it appears to be moving away from us. This obviously does not explain why the galaxies are accelerating accept that if you look at it as if it were a balloon you might catch my drift.
1st, Forget what you know about a balloon. Balloons tend to get harder to inflate as they approach the latex's stretching capabilities. Instead, place a dot with a marker on one side of the balloon and another on the opposite side. Now place another dot 1/2 of an inch from the 1st dot. Give one blow into the balloon and try to measure the two dots' distance from the 1st original dot. Obviously the dot furthest away (the one on the opposite side) is still farthest away from the 1st. Now, blow the balloon again until the dot that was 1/2 of an inch away from the 1st is 1 inch away from it (or double the distance.) The distance between the 1st dot and the one on the other side of the balloon has now expanded exponentially. Now imagine the rubber of the balloon being non existent and the air inside representing the vaccuum that is space. The 1st dot is our galaxy and the dot opposite us is the farthest galaxy from us. it appears that the galaxy farthest from us has accelerated faster than the galaxy next to us but the space( or air) that has been added is constant for both. This explains why some galaxies appear to be moving at an accelerated pace. Now here is the catch: unlike a balloon, our Universe has no rubber exterior that gets harder to stretch as it enlarges. It just continues to get larger at a constant pace but as more space comes between the 3 dots, than the more exponential the rate seems thus resulting in an apparent acceleration of the expansion of our universe. Did any of this make sense? I think I understand it more now than I did before I wrote this!

conscendo_1064

sun22y I completely agree with you.

absolutly

My response from Zak's previous post on a different but similar topic:

I am also a layman of these concepts and I do not claim to know everything there is know about what has already been discovered. However, after thinking about everything I have learned in my college classes and on the science channel, could it be that dark matter is not matter at all? Maybe it is just a force acting on neighboring galaxies around what we think of as dark matter? Let us take into account that it is possible that the center of our galaxy and every other galaxy in the universe is a black hole. I don't know how much of a stretch this is, but let us say that it is a given.

Black holes from what I understand have very very large gravitational fields. So large that not even light can escape. This force acts like a small but very heavy marble in the center of a very large trampoline. On the bottom (and upside down) of this trampoline you would see not a funnel, but a peak. It applies a force all the way to the peak of it which is what determines its shape. What if that peak is so large, that it applies its energy to anything in its way. Could it be that this energy is applied to neighboring galaxies, or maybe even across the universe? I don't remember who theorized this (Hawking?), but someone was quoted as saying the end of this funnel in the center of where blackholes lie may turn up some where else in the universe. If this is true, maybe that is what dark matter is, not matter as we know it but just a force that acts as all forces do. Since we cannot see force acting on an object, to me it seems that the dark matter is not an object (matter), but rather a force that is applied from an object we simply do not know the origin of.

Imagine a sphere that has points on it which represent bodies of mass like our galaxies. The sphere is there as a result of the big bang, and it is constantly expanding even though there is nothing in the center acting on it to make it larger. What if those bodies of mass (galaxies) are not attracted to each other, but rather they repel each other due to the nearly inifinite mass in the middle of them, maybe even on the other side of this "sphere" we call our universe? Its a hard concept to think about, but that could account for the "self-perpetuating" nature of the expansion of the universe. Plausible?

starhunter

I agree with Dave Zak, from our frame of reference, every galaxy (except those in our local group) seems to be receeding us. Besides, we cannot base a theory on a massive black hole we cant detect, we have to work with what we observe.

The missing mass could be explained by an adjustment in the gravitational constant, or low mass neutrinos, but I don't think planets and brown dwarfs are adequate. Spiral galaxies seem to be kept together by dark matter (or the mystery mass). Maybe the spinning of the galactic arms creates a "tensor stress" on space that makes the object's overall mass seem greater. Maybe the black holes at the center of the spiral galaxies have something to do with this.

As far as the expansionary force, we know the universe is expanding and being stretched because the value for LAMBDA, the Cosmological Constant, is positive. The universe may be flat at the large scale (OMEGA is very, very close to 1) but locally there are irregularities, and spacetime is bumpy. I support the idea that Quintessence is acting on spacetime variably and pulling the superclusters apart. Quintessence may explain the bumpiness. That's my view for now. Any more comments?

Michael Turner

Imagine that we are looking at the problems you discribe, missing mass and galaxy glue problems as a subset of the same principle and not distinct entities of nature but signs of a commonality, a missed fundamental process of nature that explains the overview missing link. What if time, space, acceleration, gravity are properties of matter and we didn't see the connection? Could it be possible that everything works it the three dimensional state and we couldn't see the forest through the trees?
No dark matter, no dark energy? No strings/ M- theory's?
One simple overall concept explains it all. We had it it was simple it was within our reach for many years, we were so close and yet, the carpenters, I think/ Anyhow- it's really quite simple once you see it and stop fighting it? Soon you may get it? I'll take a question or two...

cosmology - expansion of the universe

Forum Options

Register