A Hypothesis:
Imagine a huge sheet of black nylon - like you would get in a pair of stockings.
Now stretch it out until its taught.
Now, prick the middle of the sheet with a sharp blade.
What happens?
A huge hole expands in the middle of the sheet very quickly.
Then slows down.
Then stops.
If you do this in 3D - that's the universe.
Everything inside of that gap - all of the remaining little specs of dust and nylon left behind - that's us. Thats all the planets, all the gas clouds, all the galaxies.
The universe didn't explode from one point into a space - the space was caused by everything around it contracting outwards.
Possible?
>>8190547
Alright, I'll take the bait. What existed before?
>>8190550
I have no idea - i'm just intrigued by the idea that the universe is the result of a rip rather than an explosion. All this hypothesis implies is that beyond our known universe there must be enormous forces and more matter.
>>8190547
But the universe is expanding at an accelerated rate.
>>8190562
cant material accelate as it contracts?
>>8190566
Outward from a central point?
>>8190569
yeah - i guess that would imply that before the universe there was a weird cocktail of elements that got stretched out somehow, then boom, some massive force finally tore it a new arsehole.
>>8190577
You literally have no idea what're talking about, do you? :/
>>8190588
You literally took this many posts to figure that out?
>>8190840
kek
>>8190547
What implications does this have? How do they differ from the Lambda-CDM model?
>>8190550
A universe with a higher energy false vaccum.
The big bang was the vaccum decay of a previous universe.
>>8190562
OR time could be passing at a non linear rate. It would create the illusion of an increasing redshift from everything around us, when really the wavelengths of light were emitted a long time ago when the passage of time between the peaks and troughs was different than it is now, when we are observing it. It would take an incredibly slow change in the passage of time to create this illusion.
>>8192055
Wow, good retort. I must be mistaken, invisible, undetectable, unexplainable dark energy is the only thing that could produce an increasing redshift.
You're creating a hypothesis from an analogy. This is probably a bad way to do things.
Also it's not testable since we can't observe events from beyond the observable universe let alone the entire thing.
>>8190573
Why? I think OP has an interesting point. At least it's better than wildburger threads.
so the universe was born from entropy in a wider universe? Interesting
But then where do black holes go?
>>8192226
>Is my unfalsifiable interpretation of the world possible?
Yes
>Does it make me smarter?
No
>Is it probable?
No
>contracting outwards
is this not just another way of saying "it exploded"?
Obviously, there's something 'around' our local universe, it has to exist in some kind of media, what this is or the extent of it is anyone's imagination.
>>8192420
Our local Universe? Do you mean the Observable Universe? The media is just the rest of the Universe thats being expanded faster than light away from us.
>>8190547
who have no scientific backup for my thoughts, but i always imagined that the big bang is the singularity of a black whole in a different universe; it sucked out all the energy from that one and spewed it into empty space.
This happens infinite times and all the universes are connected through the black holes.
Since theoretically there are holes of many sizes our universe could really just be the byproduct of a bored housewive on galogox8 poking into her stockings
>she is practising to kill her husband
same difference OP
by changing everything, nothing changes.
get THAT in your head :^)
>>8194995
how nihilistic. I'd rather humans knew the truth about their reality instead of simply assuming something. If just because it might give them comfort, or some way of improving their lives.
>>8192067
>undetectable
kill this meme
>>8194186
The matter that falls into a black hole doesn't disappear it is torn into its constituent part and eventually emitted as radiation.
>>8192067
you dont really know much about dark energy, right?
