http://www.nature.com/news/did-a-hyper-black-hole-spawn-the-universe-1.13743

It could be time to bid the Big Bang bye-bye. Cosmologists have speculated that the Universe formed from the debris ejected when a four-dimensional star collapsed into a black hole — a scenario that would help to explain why the cosmos seems to be so uniform in all directions.

I thought it was formed when a mega-brained hyper-dimentional star lizard caught cold and sneezed.

>It could be time to bid the Big Bang bye-bye.

I’ve always thought that it was complete twaddle.

>>>It could be time to bid the Big Bang bye-bye.<<

I thought the science was settled on the big bang

and that there was a consensus of the worlds top 2,500 scientists to prove it

???????????????

what the fuck

See my reply on FFFS forums.

In a nutshell, this is a very old idea that gets revamped numerous times and rejected just as many times. Currently it’s in is revamped phase, if dark energy has the right formulation then it’s possible. However, this new twist really has nothing to do with whether the Big Bang is correct, and is not a viable alternative to cosmic inflation.

Dropbear said:

http://www.nature.com/news/did-a-hyper-black-hole-spawn-the-universe-1.13743

It could be time to bid the Big Bang bye-bye. Cosmologists have speculated that the Universe formed from the debris ejected when a four-dimensional star collapsed into a black hole — a scenario that would help to explain why the cosmos seems to be so uniform in all directions.

that sentence doesn’t even make any sense…

diddly-squat said:

Dropbear said:

http://www.nature.com/news/did-a-hyper-black-hole-spawn-the-universe-1.13743

It could be time to bid the Big Bang bye-bye. Cosmologists have speculated that the Universe formed from the debris ejected when a four-dimensional star collapsed into a black hole — a scenario that would help to explain why the cosmos seems to be so uniform in all directions.

that sentence doesn’t even make any sense…

That’s because it’s patent bollocks.

Obviously it’s just another one of those “a few physicists had couple extra beers on a Friday arvo and say this would be a good one – We say we worked out a plausible alternative to the big bang – throw in some stuff about extra dimensions, black holes and floating branes and watch everyone jump up and down holding their collective branes and shouting and screaming and running around in circles — hahaha whose round is it ? lol!”

I thought the science was settled on the big bang and that there was a consensus of the worlds top 2,500 scientists to prove it

nothing is ever settled in science. the bbt is on pretty good ground though. any new theory will still have to explain all the evidence that the current theory models so well. plus this is about the creation event not the evolution.

Boris said:

nothing is ever settled in science.

So a hollow Earth inhabited by a race of munchins still has a chance?

<tic>

So a hollow Earth inhabited by a race of munchins still has a chance?

errrrrr yes, just need some evidence.

:-)

Doh… I put my tic in less than and greater than symbols and consequently it disappeared.

Previous post entirely TIC.

i realised that. i just answered with a straight face to hide my laughter.

:-)

The Supra-Dimensional Matryoschka Doll Universe huh?

Never warmed to these cosmologies that add complexity while just avoiding the question of ultimate origins.

Bubblecar said:

Never warmed to these cosmologies that add complexity while just avoiding the question of ultimate origins.

Must admit that the entire Universe being created from nothing sounds much more plausible.

Bubblecar said:

Never warmed to these cosmologies that add complexity while just avoiding the question of ultimate origins.

The advantage of this theory over BB is that there is significant room to describe a closed system. I would be interested to hear analysis of the maths in this theory in comparison to KJW’s multiverse scenario

>Must admit that the entire Universe being created from nothing sounds much more plausible.

There’s no such thing as nothing.

Bubblecar said:

>Must admit that the entire Universe being created from nothing sounds much more plausible.

There’s no such thing as nothing.

Well the nest thing up then.

Riff-in-Thyme said:

Bubblecar said:

Never warmed to these cosmologies that add complexity while just avoiding the question of ultimate origins.

The advantage of this theory over BB is that there is significant room to describe a closed system. I would be interested to hear analysis of the maths in this theory in comparison to KJW’s multiverse scenario

The problem is that if you have “our universe” arising from another universe, you’ve added another layer of complexity to the onion without addressing how universes come into being in the absence of “other” universes. Which presumably had to happen at some stage.

also as i have said the bbt is about the evolution of the universe after the creation. is says nothing about the creation event. much like evolution is not about abiogenesis.

The problem is that if you have “our universe” arising from another universe, you’ve added another layer of complexity to the onion without addressing how universes come into being in the absence of “other” universes. Which presumably had to happen at some stage.

like panspermia explaining life on earth. doesn’t address the question, just adds another layer.

Bubblecar said:

Riff-in-Thyme said:

Bubblecar said:

Never warmed to these cosmologies that add complexity while just avoiding the question of ultimate origins.

The advantage of this theory over BB is that there is significant room to describe a closed system. I would be interested to hear analysis of the maths in this theory in comparison to KJW’s multiverse scenario

The problem is that if you have “our universe” arising from another universe, you’ve added another layer of complexity to the onion without addressing how universes come into being in the absence of “other” universes. Which presumably had to happen at some stage.

He has only suggested that 3d matter arises through a process. This does not arbitrarily create seperate universes.

There’s no such thing as nothing.
—————————————————-

Oi…

Thats my line of proof.

The_observer said:

>>>It could be time to bid the Big Bang bye-bye.<<

I thought the science was settled on the big bang

and that there was a consensus of the worlds top 2,500 scientists to prove it

???????????????

what the fuck

its an alternate theory,… it’s “science”.. that’s what science is .. theorise, observe, experiment etc

diddly-squat said:

Dropbear said:

http://www.nature.com/news/did-a-hyper-black-hole-spawn-the-universe-1.13743

It could be time to bid the Big Bang bye-bye. Cosmologists have speculated that the Universe formed from the debris ejected when a four-dimensional star collapsed into a black hole — a scenario that would help to explain why the cosmos seems to be so uniform in all directions.

that sentence doesn’t even make any sense…

the quarrel would probably be with the journo, i imagine

Mr Ironic said:

There’s no such thing as nothing.
—————————————————-

Oi…

Thats my line of proof.

Yeah. I was going to say that.. but in a way intelligible to human type persons.