Big Bang
in [Relativity]
|
From: Thomas Heger on 14 Jul 2010 02:23 Hi Ng Please, have a look at this Wikipedia page: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang You see this picture: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Universe_expansion2.png What is missing there? We miss a 'z'-axis! Now we cannot simply add a z axis, because the picture describes spacetime and the z axis would fit, where there is now the t axis. So, how do we get z back into the scheme? Actually we had to multiply the picture by three, because there are three combinations of two axis (as depicted in that diagram) out of three. These are x/y, x/z and y/z. Since the timeline is multiplied by this process, too, we cannot have the calender-like relation as in the big-bang theory. So there are actually three timelines (or components of temporal 'movement') and any worldline is actually a manifestation of a certain combination of all three. But the universe itself could not move along a single line, as a material body could, but has to behave in all three ways simultaneously. Relativity says now, that the change of the timeline lets space contract. In the inverse, space seen from one of those other axes, the space expands, what makes it look like coming out of a singularity. TH
From: mpc755 on 14 Jul 2010 02:29 On Jul 14, 2:23 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: > Hi Ng > > Please, have a look at this Wikipedia page:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang > You see this picture:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Universe_expansion2.png > > What is missing there? We miss a 'z'-axis! > Now we cannot simply add a z axis, because the picture describes > spacetime and the z axis would fit, where there is now the t axis. > So, how do we get z back into the scheme? > > Actually we had to multiply the picture by three, because there are > three combinations of two axis (as depicted in that diagram) out of three.. > These are x/y, x/z and y/z. Since the timeline is multiplied by this > process, too, we cannot have the calender-like relation as in the > big-bang theory. > > So there are actually three timelines (or components of temporal > 'movement') and any worldline is actually a manifestation of a certain > combination of all three. But the universe itself could not move along a > single line, as a material body could, but has to behave in all three > ways simultaneously. > Relativity says now, that the change of the timeline lets space > contract. In the inverse, space seen from one of those other axes, the > space expands, what makes it look like coming out of a singularity. > > TH The following is an image of a jet stream: http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is, a jet stream. This image of the jet stream associated with a black hole is analogous: http://structureofentropy.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/blackhole.jpg It's not the Big Bang. It's the Big Ongoing.
From: Thomas Heger on 14 Jul 2010 02:45 mpc755 schrieb: > On Jul 14, 2:23 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: >> Hi Ng >> ... >> Relativity says now, that the change of the timeline lets space >> contract. In the inverse, space seen from one of those other axes, the >> space expands, what makes it look like coming out of a singularity. >> >> TH > > The following is an image of a jet stream: > > http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html > This is the famous big-bang illustration, where could see the alleged calender-like evolution. But universe means everything and that cannot move in various directions at the same time, only parts of it can move, like the Earth does. Seen from a specific point of view, we could ascribe a calender to the universe, but that is our view and our calender. But we had to consider all other possible calenders, too, because universe means everything - and not only our view. > The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is, a jet stream. > Well, there is a difference between everything and our local universe. The latter is, what we could see and could think, it is all that exists. But this is - of course - wrong. TH
From: mpc755 on 14 Jul 2010 02:52 On Jul 14, 2:45 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: > mpc755 schrieb:> On Jul 14, 2:23 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: > >> Hi Ng > > .. > >> Relativity says now, that the change of the timeline lets space > >> contract. In the inverse, space seen from one of those other axes, the > >> space expands, what makes it look like coming out of a singularity. > > >> TH > > > The following is an image of a jet stream: > > >http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html > > This is the famous big-bang illustration, where could see the alleged > calender-like evolution. > But universe means everything and that cannot move in various directions > at the same time, only parts of it can move, like the Earth does. > Seen from a specific point of view, we could ascribe a calender to the > universe, but that is our view and our calender. > But we had to consider all other possible calenders, too, because > universe means everything - and not only our view. > > > The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is, a jet stream. > > Well, there is a difference between everything and our local universe. > The latter is, what we could see and could think, it is all that exists. > But this is - of course - wrong. > > TH 'Mysterious Cosmic 'Dark Flow' Tracked Deeper into Universe' http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/releases/2010/10-023.html 'The clusters appear to be moving along a line extending from our solar system toward Centaurus/Hydra, but the direction of this motion is less certain. Evidence indicates that the clusters are headed outward along this path, away from Earth, but the team cannot yet rule out the opposite flow. "We detect motion along this axis, but right now our data cannot state as strongly as we'd like whether the clusters are coming or going," Kashlinsky said.' The clusters are headed along this path because the Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is, is a jet stream. Matter and dark matter are constantly emitted into the jet stream our Universe is. Eventually the matter and dark matter 'go over the water fall' and wind up at the Rindler Horizon: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rindler_coordinates#Geodesics The matter and dark matter then exist in the disk of the jet stream: http://structureofentropy.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/blackhole.jpg Where it will once again, eventually, be re-emitted into the jet stream.
From: Thomas Heger on 14 Jul 2010 03:56
mpc755 schrieb: > On Jul 14, 2:45 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: >> mpc755 schrieb:> On Jul 14, 2:23 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: >>>> Hi Ng >> .. >>>> Relativity says now, that the change of the timeline lets space >>>> contract. In the inverse, space seen from one of those other axes, the >>>> space expands, what makes it look like coming out of a singularity. >>>> TH >>> The following is an image of a jet stream: >>> http://aether.lbl.gov/image_all.html >> This is the famous big-bang illustration, where could see the alleged >> calender-like evolution. >> But universe means everything and that cannot move in various directions >> at the same time, only parts of it can move, like the Earth does. >> Seen from a specific point of view, we could ascribe a calender to the >> universe, but that is our view and our calender. >> But we had to consider all other possible calenders, too, because >> universe means everything - and not only our view. >> >>> The Universe is, or the local Universe we exist in is, a jet stream. >> Well, there is a difference between everything and our local universe. >> The latter is, what we could see and could think, it is all that exists. >> But this is - of course - wrong. >> >> TH > > 'Mysterious Cosmic 'Dark Flow' Tracked Deeper into Universe' > http://www.nasa.gov/centers/goddard/news/releases/2010/10-023.html > > 'The clusters appear to be moving along a line extending from our > solar system toward Centaurus/Hydra, but the direction of this motion > is less certain. Evidence indicates that the clusters are headed > outward along this path, away from Earth, but the team cannot yet rule > out the opposite flow. "We detect motion along this axis, but right > now our data cannot state as strongly as we'd like whether the > clusters are coming or going," Kashlinsky said.' > > The clusters are headed along this path because the Universe is, or > the local Universe we exist in is, is a jet stream. > > Matter and dark matter are constantly emitted into the jet stream our > Universe is. > > Eventually the matter and dark matter 'go over the water fall' and > wind up at the Rindler Horizon: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Rindler_coordinates#Geodesics > > The matter and dark matter then exist in the disk of the jet stream: > > http://structureofentropy.files.wordpress.com/2009/04/blackhole.jpg > > Where it will once again, eventually, be re-emitted into the jet > stream. I think the pictures you have chosen aren't good examples. Maybe this one here is better: http://www.astronomy.com/asy/objects/images/milky_way_galaxy_w_spire_pacs_cameras.jpg This is a picture made with the Herschel Teleskop. This measures far infrared also, than that picture is superimposed with a picture of the visible spectrum. Now we could see, that the structures in the visible range are part of something way larger, where only a part is visible, that seem to point in our direction. This means the angle of observation has an influence on the frequency of observed light. Since visible light has higher frequency, the part pointing in our direction is actually blueshifted and the whole structure is one large thing, that emits generally far infrared. To have such a behavior, the timeline should point in our direction, but only for the part that is moving towards us. This looks like the structure would receive light fom here. This means the structure is actually spherical shaped, but the frequency of observed radiation depends on the direction of observation. This makes the structure look like kind of explosion in spacetime. This could only be possible, if time is actually multidimensional and is 'pointing' in different directions, but this would violate the big-bang idea, because that would require only one single line. TH |