What was the universe like before the Big Bang?
According to modern cosmology, our universe was born about 13.7 billion years ago, and everything, even space and time, is a product of the Big Bang. But was there nothing before the Big Bang? Science Studies researcher Erfan Kasraei has taken a look at this question.
Lord Kelvin, the great physicist in the mid-19th century, estimated the age of the Earth to be between 24 and 400 million years. Although Kelvin’s calculation is far from the actual age of the Earth that we know today (about four and a half billion years), we should not forget that Kelvin’s proposed estimate was a great scientific achievement at a time when the general idea of the age of the Earth, based on the religious teachings of the Bible, was about 6,000 years.
It should also be noted that physicists at that time knew nothing about radioactivity, and Kelvin arrived at this number based on the laws of thermodynamics and on the assumption that today’s Earth was once a hot ball that gradually cooled.
In addition to calculating the age of the Earth, calculating the age of the universe itself became possible only in the last century, with the advent of modern cosmology and the discovery of the expansion of the universe. A calculation and estimate that is still not accurate after decades and has a lot of uncertainty.
According to the initial estimates of Edwin Hubble, the scientist who discovered the expansion of the universe, the Big Bang occurred about 1.5 billion years ago. This estimate was highly suspect from the very beginning. Because it did not match the age of the Earth estimated through geological calculations, and in other words, geologists knew that the Earth was older than 3 billion years. Therefore, the Earth could not be older than the universe itself and there was no doubt that something was wrong.
Until about two decades ago, that is, before 1999, scientists estimated the age of the universe to be between 7 and 20 billion years. Today, based on the latest cosmological calculations, we know that the universe is about 13.7 billion years old, or about 436,117,076,600,000,000 seconds old.
However, even 13.7 billion years is not the exact and final number for the age of the universe, and this number may be tens of millions of years less or more. But regardless of uncertainties due to the limitations of today's technologies or even calculation errors, what cosmology knows today is that our universe, that is, the very universe in which we live and which consists of about 2 trillion galaxies, had a beginning. Our universe was born in an event called the Big Bang, and if we go back in time, we reach a day when there is no yesterday.
In his introduction to Alan Gutt's book The Inflationary Universe, American physicist Alan Lightman considers a cultural aspect to cosmology beyond the scientific aspects, writing: "Every culture has its own cosmology, in other words, its own narrative of how the universe came into being, what it is made of, and where it is going."
The fact is that large parts of modern cosmology, despite the technical and computational complexities that only cosmologists and physicists can fathom, in some ways resemble myths and historical legends.
For example, this cosmological theory that there is an eternal and eternal cycle in which the universe is constantly created and destroyed, if it were not accompanied by mathematical symbols and equations and complex physical concepts, would probably look similar to the myths of the creation of the universe in Greek and Chinese cultures or the paintings and drawings of Arzhang Mani about the formation of the universe and the structure of the universe and the end and resurrection of the universe.
In the book The Inflationary Universe, Alan Gut himself seeks to find an answer to the question of whether other Big Bangs are constantly occurring in the distant reaches of the universe or whether it is possible that super-advanced civilizations have recreated the Big Bang? These are just some of the questions whose understanding is beyond the limits of human imagination, logic, and reasoning.
According to Alan Gutt's inflationary model, which is a key part of the Standard Model of Cosmology, the universe expanded from the size of a proton to the size of a grapefruit in a fraction of a second after its birth. However, we will never know for sure whether this actually happened. Although the theory of cosmic inflation makes accurate predictions about the universe today, it does not mean that cosmic inflation has been proven in the early universe.
One scientist who disagrees with the inflationary theory of the universe is Roger Penrose, winner of the 2020 Nobel Prize in Physics. According to Penrose, if we abandon inflationary theory, we must have something that can explain the expansion of the universe. Penrose says that our universe is the future and the end of an era or, as he puts it, a previous aeon, and the reason for the current uniformity in our universe should actually be sought before the Big Bang and in the universe before the Big Bang.
In his view, every Big Bang is the beginning of a new era and our universe is just one link in a chain, and before and after it, other universes have existed or will exist. That our universe is the fruit of a previous universe and a legacy of a universe before the Big Bang has also been proposed by cosmologists such as Abhay Ishtkar in the form of a theory called loop quantum gravity (LQC), according to which everything goes back to a time before the Big Bang; in other words, to a universe similar to ours, with the difference that this previous universe was contracting instead of expanding.
Gadget News/One of the fundamental questions in cosmology is what happened before the Big Bang? Let's review some new theories about the Big Bang.
My idea is that nothing comes from nothing. For something to exist, there must be some matter or component available, and for them to exist, something else must be available! Now my question is: where did the matter that created the Big Bang or Big Bang come from, and what happened at this point to create it?
Brian Cox, a physicist who warned on the BBC Universe program: "The last star will slowly cool and fade away. After that, the universe will become a void once again; a world without light, life or meaning."
Before the Big Bang and its theories
The disappearance of the last star will be the beginning of an infinitely long and dark period. All matter in the universe is swallowed up by supermassive black holes, which in turn evaporate into nothingness. Space will continue to expand outward until that glimmer of light expands to interact further. Then all activity ceases.
Was that strange enough? Some cosmologists believe that a dark, cold universe, such as the one we have in the distant future, could have been the source of our own Big Bang.
Issue 1: Before we answer the question of this article, let’s take a look at “physical matter.” If we are to explain the origin of stable matter made of atoms and molecules, none of these things would have existed at the Big Bang or for hundreds of thousands of years after.
We now have a precise understanding of the process by which atoms are formed from simpler particles, and we know that they were formed when the universe cooled enough for more complex matter to become stable. We also know how these atoms later evolved into heavier elements and settled into stars.
But understanding this doesn’t answer the question of whether something came from nothing. So let’s think back much further. The first long-lived particles of matter were protons and neutrons, which together make up the nuclei of atoms. These particles came into existence just a ten-thousandth of a second after the Big Bang. Before that turning point, there was literally no matter. But physics allows us to go back in time. (Back to physical processes that existed before any matter existed.)
Physics leads us to the theory of the “Grand Unity.” We are now properly in theoretical physics because we cannot generate enough power in our experiments to study the processes that were going on at that time, and we have to rely on theories.
The first plausible hypothesis is that the physical universe was formed from a short-lived “fundamental soup” (a term coined by one scientist to explain the origin of life on Earth) of quarks, the building blocks of protons and neutrons.
At that time, both matter and antimatter existed in roughly equal amounts: each type of matter, like a quark, had an antimatter or “mirror image” that was almost identical to itself, differing only by a degree. However, matter and antimatter annihilate each other when they collide; in other words, these particles are constantly being created and destroyed.
But the question is, how did these particles come into being in the first place? Quantum field theory tells us that even in a vacuum, where space-time is apparently devoid of any energy, physical activity takes the form of energy fluctuations. These fluctuations can lead to the emission of particles that disappear shortly after. This might sound like a mathematical mystery rather than real physics, but such particles have been seen in countless experiments.
In other words, the vacuum of space-time is constantly churning, with particles constantly being created and destroyed from nothing. But perhaps all this is really telling us is that the quantum vacuum (despite its name) is more than just “nothing.”
Now suppose we ask: Where did space-time itself come from? Now we can turn back the clock to the ancient Planck era, a period in the early history of the universe when our best physical theories are violated. This period occurred just a ten-millionth of a trillionth of a trillionth of a second after the Big Bang.
At this point, both space and time were subject to quantum fluctuations. Physicists usually deal separately with quantum mechanics, which governs the world of tiny particles, and general relativity, which applies on large, cosmic scales. But to fully understand the Planck era, we need a complete theory, such as quantum gravity, to unify the two.
We don’t yet have a complete theory of quantum gravity, but there have been attempts at it, such as string theory and loop quantum gravity. In these attempts, space and time usually appear like ripples on the surface of a deep ocean.
What we experience as space and time is the product of quantum processes operating at a deeper, microscopic level, and these processes have no particular meaning to us as beings rooted in the macroscopic world.
In the Planck era, our understanding of space and time is destroyed, so we can no longer rely on our understanding of cause and effect. Yet all candidate theories of quantum gravity describe something that is happening in the Planck era. But where does this come from?
Even if causality were not to apply in any other way, it would still be possible to explain one component of the Planck era in terms of another. Unfortunately, even the best laws of physics are not yet able to provide an answer. Until we move towards a “theory of everything,” we will not be able to answer this question definitively.
The best answer we can say with certainty at this point is that physics has not yet found a confirmed example of something coming from nothing. To truly answer the question of how something could come from nothing, we would have to explain the quantum state of the entire universe at the beginning of the Planck era.
But ultimately all attempts to answer this question remain speculative. Some of them point to supernatural forces, such as a designer. Other explanations remain within the realm of physics. (Like a multiverse that includes an infinite number of parallel universes, or models of the universe's cycle that are born over and over again.)
Roger Penrose, the 2020 Nobel Prize-winning physicist, has proposed an intriguing but controversial model for a cyclical universe (any cosmological model in which the universe follows infinite or indefinite cycles is called a cyclical model) called "coherent cyclical cosmology."
Penrose was inspired by an interesting mathematical connection between a hot, dense, and small state of the universe—as it was at the Big Bang—and a very cold, empty, and expanding state of the universe—as it will be in the distant future. According to Penrose's fundamental theory, the two states become identical when they reach their final limits. Although this theory may seem contradictory, the complete absence of matter could account for all the matter we see around us.
In this view, the Big Bang came about almost out of nothing. This nothingness is the result of the vacuum of matter in the universe being swallowed up by black holes, which then themselves turned into photons in the vacuum and then disappeared. So the entire universe came from something that is almost exactly the same as the nothingness we are talking about. But this “nothing” is in its own way “something”. It is in fact a physical universe, even if it is empty.
How is it possible that this state is, from one perspective, a cold and empty universe and from another perspective, a dense and hot universe? The answer lies in a complex mathematical procedure called “equivalent scaling”, a geometric transformation that actually changes the size of an object but leaves its shape unchanged.
Penrose showed how a cold dense state and a hot dense state could be related by such a rescaling, so that they correspond in the shape of their spacetimes – though not in their sizes. It is certainly difficult to understand how two objects can be identified in this way when they are of different sizes – but Penrose argues that size as a concept has no meaning in such physical environments.
In coherent cyclic cosmology, the direction of evolution of the universe is moving from old and cold to young and hot: the dense and hot state is in fact created by the empty and cold state, but the “why” of this is not so well known. It is not only size that prevents the two states from being related; in fact, time is equally important and valuable. The cold dense state and the hot dense state are on different time scales. The cold empty state continues forever in its own time geometry from the observer’s perspective, but the hot dense state creates its own time course.
The above definition can help to understand the hot dense state, which is created non-causally from the cold state. Perhaps it is better to say that the hot dense state arises from, or is established in, the cold, empty state. These are specific metaphysical ideas that have been extensively explored by philosophers of science in the context of quantum gravity. (In quantum gravity, cause-effect relationships break down.) Within our knowledge, it becomes difficult to separate physics and philosophy.
The empirical evidence
A coherent cyclic cosmology provides precise, if theoretical, answers to the question of where the Big Bang came from. But even if Roger Penrose's view and theory are confirmed by future developments in cosmology, it is still possible that a deeper philosophical question may arise that we are unable to answer: Where did physical reality itself come from? Where did the entire system of cycles emerge from? Ultimately, we come to one of the greatest and purest questions in metaphysics: Why is there something instead of nothing?
But our focus here is on explanations that lie within the realm of physics, not metaphysics! There are three comprehensive options for the profound question of how the cycles began. On the other hand, there may be no physical explanation for the question. These cycles may either repeat endlessly, in which case each one is a new universe in itself, or there may be a single, single cycle that repeats itself over and over, in which case the beginning of each cycle can be described by its end. Both of these approaches avoid the need for any uncaused events, because in physics nothing is uncaused.
Penrose also imagines an infinite sequence of new cycles, which is actually related to his interpretation of quantum theory. In quantum mechanics, a physical system is the result of a superposition of a large number of different states simultaneously, and when we measure it, we just pick one at random.
For Penrose, each cycle involves random quantum events that happen in a different way – meaning that each cycle is different from the cycles before and after it. This is actually good news for experimental physicists because it may allow them to glimpse the old universe, which they can observe through faint traces or anomalies of radiation left over from the Big Bang and seen by the Planck satellite.
The key point of Penrose’s view is that there are endless new cycles. But there is a natural solution to convert multi-cycle cosmology to a single cycle. In this case, physical reality consists of a single cycle around the Big Bang to an infinitely empty state in the distant future, and then re-forming around the Big Bang, repeating the same universe over and over again.
The question remains as to what the Universe was like before the Big Bang, remains one of the tough questions to cosmologists. It was suggested that the traditional idea of the unique beginning requires exhaustive revision within frameworks that take into consideration cosmic models beyond the Big Bang. The traditional Big Bang theory based on Relativity to predict a singularity, which means point of infinite type and density – signifying that physics soon reaches its limitation because it is not real. Nonetheless, The model of classical the singularity as a reflection of the limits of the theory and noted that it was theoretical challenge to show that the Universe started from a point (Hawking & Penrose, 1970).
Modern models suggest that the universe we live in is a result of a more prior. One such theoretical foundation, known as quantum leap, is proposed to counteract the singularity, which means that a point of infinite density, resulting in a bouncing or repeating universe model where a former universe is followed by the prevailing growth (Agullo & Singh, 2017). In an alternative approach that hails from the hypothesis of the higher created quantum universe or multiverse, it is hypothesized that our Universe came about from a former quantum vacuum or a more-dimensional multiverse scenery. In such instances, the theoretical Big Bang is another word for the tunneling event or phase change that resulted in the Universe's structure (Vilenkin, 2018). Such integration has different interdependence and imply that before the Big Bang occurs on a different ground (Vilenkin, 2018). Moreover, the idea of time remains unclear in time to come since time, as is ordinarily perceived, commenced with the Big Bang.
The question remains what transpired during the time preceding the Big Bang is futile or non-applicable (Rovelli, 2018). To summarize, contemporary scholars increasingly seem to support models that lessen the classical singularity via quantum gravitational effects or reassess the Big Bang as a phase change within a more extended cosmological situation. The Universe is depicted in a contracting phase, or even in a quantum vacuum state. Most significantly, Beyond, around these conventional spacetimes and existence, the state of the Universe poses a question on the Universe's classical insight about onset or time. Majorly, how the Big Bang takes place results informed hypotheses and is still being probed to comprehend how it affects our world.
References:
Agullo, I., & Singh, P. (2017). Loop Quantum Cosmology: A brief review. In Loop Quantum Gravity: The First 30 183-240. World Scientific.
Hawking, S. W., & Penrose, R. (1970). The singularities of gravitational collapse and cosmology. Proceedings of the Royal Society of London. Series A, Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 314(1519), 529-548.
Rovelli, C. (2018). The Order of Time. Riverhead Books. Vilenkin, A. (2018). Many worlds in one: The search for other universes. Macmillan.
Based on the hypothesis theory of the “Big Bang” and the “Expanding Universe”, a new approach to understanding the formation of the Universe is considered. The new hypothesis theory is that when two neighboring metagalaxies combine, this leads to the formation of a new metagalaxy with a critical mass and to a "Big Bang." At the same time, in the first “seconds” after the "Big Bang", an "antigravity ball" is formed, which has preserved almost all the energy matters in its volume. Active particles of a metagalaxy that bounced off or slid off the “inner surface” of the “antigravity ball” form spiral galaxies with a “black hole” in the center. The hypothesis theory predicts the possibility of the formation of at least six identical, or similar "spiral galaxies" located in opposite positions from the center of the "Big Bang", with the alleged planetary components, or with planets identical to the earth.
Key words: universe, "vacuum-like environment", metagalaxy, "critical mass", "Big Bang", "anti-gravity ball", “inner surface”, “Expanding Universe”, “black hole”, "spiral galaxies"
Introduction
The world in which we live is much more complex than previously thought. It is likely that it consists of countless "universes in the universe." So far, we know practically nothing about this large universe, complex, surprisingly diverse.
How did our universe appear? How did it turn into seemingly endless space? And what will it become after many millions and billions of years? These questions tormented (and continue to torment) the minds of philosophers and scientists, giving rise to many interesting and sometimes even crazy theories.
From the point of view of scientific validity, no theory of the origin of the universe can be considered sufficiently substantiated, since all theories of the origin of the universe have the status of only hypotheses.
Many hypothesis theories of the origin of the universe originated in science, including the hypothesis of the “big bang” and the “swelling universe” are the most popular in modern science.
Today, most astronomers and cosmologists agree that the universe we know came about as a result of a gigantic explosion that produced not only the bulk of matter, but the source of the basic physical laws according to which the cosmos that surrounds us exists. This is called the “Big Bang” theory. The discovery that the Metagalaxy is expanding, almost immediately led to the hypothesis of "Big Bang". The basics of the "Big Bang" theory are relatively simple. In short, according to it, all the matter that existed and exists now in the universe appeared at the same time — about 13.8 billion years ago. At that point in time, all matter existed as a very compact abstract ball (or point) with infinite density and temperature. This state was called a singularity. Suddenly, the singularity began to expand and gave birth to the universe we know.
At the intersection of physics and astrophysics began to develop the hypothesis of "Expanding Universe". The essence of the “Expanding Universe” hypothesis is that in the "very beginning" the universe expanded monstrously fast. For any 10-32second with the size of the nascent universe grew not in 10 times, as this rely would under "normal" enlargement, and in 1050 or even in 101000000times. The expansion was accelerated, and the energy per unit volume remained constant. Scientists prove that the initial moments of expansion occurred in a "vacuum-like environment."
As write Steepen Hawking and Leonard Mlodinow in their book “The Grand Design”: “The idea that the universe is expanding involves a bit of subtlety. For example, we don’t mean the universe is expanding in the manner that, say, one might expand one’s house, by knocking out a wall and positioning a new bathroom where once there stood a majestic oak. Rather than space extending itself, it is the distance between any two points within the universe that is growing. That idea emerged in the 1930s amid much controversy, but one of the best ways to visualize it is still a metaphor enunciated in 1931 by Cambridge University astronomer Arthur Eddington. Eddington visualized the universe as the surface of an expanding balloon, and all the galaxies as points on that surface. This picture clearly illustrates why far galaxies recede more quickly than nearby ones…That is just what Hubble found: the farther away a galaxy, the faster it was moving away from us".
In our opinion, the phenomenon of rapid removal of galaxies from each other occurs as a result of the "Big Bang" and "compression" of these galaxies. The term "surface of an expandingballsphere" is of interest, to which we shall return later in another aspect.
It is worth noting that the theories of the "Big Bang" and "Expanding Universe" are only one of the many hypotheses proposed for the origin of the universe. Even though the hypotheses of the "Big Bang" and "Expanding Universe" are generally accepted in the scientific community, they give rise to serious theoretical problems and are criticized. For example, scientists believe that problems arise at the level of generally accepted postulates underlying cosmological modeling, and there is no reason to reject alternative approaches to understanding the universe in advance.
Discussion of new theory-hypothesis
The theories of the “big bang” and the “swelling universe” are undoubtedly of great importance in understanding the modern universe. Despite the standard and common sense, their concepts do not provide answers to some questions. Carefully delving into the essence of these theories, you naturally come across the following question: how do these theories explain the formation and existence of “spiral galaxies”? After all, after the “big bang” the particles of active and energy-intensive matter had to bounce off the center of the explosion at almost the same or comparable speed in all different directions in a straight line (“swell”) (it’s known that many scientists don’t take this point of view and believe that the "big bangs" did not arise from the starting point, but occur everywhere and always, which is difficult to agree with) (Fig.1). These particles could bend their trajectory after a certain time, provided that a huge part of their energy is lost. Modern ideas prove that the universe is active and does not look like its energy is running out.
Then, how can one explain the current state of metagalaxies? We will try to understand this issue from the point of view of simple thinking.
What happened before the first "big bang"? From the question, it probably became clear that there was more than one “big bang”. There could be many.
Before the first “big bang” there was a “blackness” (emptiness, or a “vacuum-like medium”) with bright dots consisting of various energy-consuming materials, the foundations of metagalaxies (Fig.2). Naturally, for a “big bang” to occur, a “critical mass” matter. While there is no “critical” mass, the universe is at rest (“singularity”) (Fig.3). This “critical mass” arise when two (or several) neighboring matters meet or merge, or, in other words, two neighboring points (Fig.4). The whole process of the "big bang" occurs precisely after such a "merging" and arising “critical mass” (Fig. 5).
Simultaneously, with the explosion and the release of a huge number of active particles immediately from the center of the explosion there arises "anti-gravity ball" (“a ball from the inside”), which envelops all the "active particles" and together with them begins to expand Fig.6). In the initial period of the "Big Bang" a few "active particles" can jump out of the embrace of the "anti-gravity ball" (Fig.6). But, over time, the position (state) is somewhat stabilized and the active particles can no longer leave the limits of the "anti-gravity ball "(Fig.7).
After that, active particles that can no longer leave the boundaries of the "anti-gravity ball" begin to bounce off or slide off the inner surface of the "anti-gravity ball" and fly in the opposite direction. Due to the rapid rotation of these slipping particles, “spiral galaxies” begin to form (Fig.7). The formation of a "spiral galaxy" occurs by the rotation of "active particles" around a hypothetical center, which we observe as "black holes" (after all, before the "explosion" around there was only "blackness", or emptiness or vacuum) (Fig.8). Naturally, simultaneously with the formation of "spiral galaxies" inside the "anti-gravity ball" is bounced from the surface of the "active particles", or "belated active particles" on the way to its inner surface. "Belated active particles" on their way can meet or with "spiral galaxies" and affect their state, or with bounced from the inner surface of the "anti-gravity ball" other "active particles". Different "spiral galaxies" can appear, which depending on their position inside the "anti-gravity ball" can either merge together, or pass through each other, or take the form of a flat circle with a Central "black hole" ("bagels") (Fig.9). It is known that modern theories confirm the possibility of the appearance of eight-shaped or perpendicularly intersecting galaxies (Fig.9). In such a merger, the main word will be for galaxies with more energy, which will "swallow" galaxies with less energy.
In their further movement, "spiral galaxies" and "active particles" that did not have time to form "spiral galaxies" will move to the center (to the starting point) of the "Big Bang", and eventually reunite as "new matter" (metagalaxy), but with a smaller mass, due to the loss of some of their energy in the initial stage of the "Big Bang". As a result of this process, the "anti-gravity ball" will gradually shrink, directing the formed "new metagalaxy" to the center of the explosion and, eventually, will disappear and the "new metagalaxy" with much less mass and energy than at the beginning of the "Big Bang" will acquire a state of rest (Fig.10). "New metagalaxy" will expect the possibility of reunion (merging) with other metagalaxy (or with other metagalaxies) with great energy and the emergence of a new "critical mass" (Fig.10). This "critical mass" will lead to an even stronger "big explosion".
These "big explosions" will occur constantly when two or more metagalaxies meet to form new metagalaxy with "critical mass" and the whole cycle will begin again and again with the formation of a new, even larger "anti-gravity ball" with its "spiral galaxies", or with galaxies of other forms, etc.
What does give us the addition of a new theory-hypothesis of the "anti-gravity ball" to the famous theory of the "Big Bang"?:
- A new theory-hypothesis explains the possibility of the formation of "spiral galaxies”;
- Explains the origin and existence of "black holes", which are the centers of rotation of spiral, circular, or other forms of galaxies;
- Predicts the disappearance of "black holes" by the end of the "compression" of galaxies and the emergence in their place of "high-energy nuclei”;
- Predicts and explains the possibility of colliding, or merging different galaxies/or "active particles" of metagalaxy;
- Predicts the possibility of the formation of at least six identical or similar "spiral galaxies", located in opposite positions from the center of the "Big Bang", with the estimated planetary components, or with planets identical with the earth;
- Predicts the formation of planets, or celestial bodies, both with different and with completely identical chemical compositions: for example, celestial bodies consisting only of metals (including precious metals-gold, silver, platinum, etc.), from plasma, from gases, from liquids, etc. There may also be celestial bodies with new chemical elements unknown to us, or a new state of matter;
- The new theory limits the boundaries of our existing universe to the limits of the "anti-gravity ball". Beyond this sphere, other metagalaxy may be constantly evolving, with the emergence of new metagalaxy with "critical masses" and new "big explosions" that we cannot detect at present with the methods and instruments available to us;
- Due to the initial stages of "inflation" and the differences in the direction of galaxies, or "active particles", it seems to us that the universe is expanding. But this expansion is only possible inside the "anti-gravitational ball" and eventually all galaxies and "active particles" reunite in the original center of the "Big Bang";
- With the reunion of galaxies and "active particles" will be formed or one of the largest, or a few small "new metagalaxies" (which will also then merge into a "single new metagalaxy" and acquire a state of rest) and disappear "anti-gravity ball";
- With the formation of a "single new metagalaxy" and the disappearance of the "anti-gravity ball" there will be a possibility of meeting a new metagalaxy with less mass and energy with another more energy-intensive metagalaxy with the formation of a "new big metagalaxy" with a "critical mass" and the emergence of a new "big explosion”;
- The cycle of reunion of new metagalaxies with the formation of new big metagalaxy with "critical masses" and the occurrence of "big explosions" will happen continuously.
We have here described the "Big Bang" that not the whole universe experienced, but only our Metagalaxy. Our Metagalaxy is not the Whole Universe, but only some part of it. Worlds beyond our cosmic horizon are unattainable. Accordingly, to say anything about what is happening outside "our universe", to put it mildly, is extremely difficult. In the infinite and boundless universe are scattered metagalaxies, one of which is our Milky Way Galaxy, and other, large and smaller cosmic systems. Some of them are expanding, having survived their "big explosions", others are compressed, so that for them the "big explosions" are still ahead.
We can only guess at the manifestations of the amazing diversity of life in these metagalaxies.
CONCLUSİON
A new look at the processes that occurred after the first seconds of the “Big Bang” is considered. Modern theories of the “Big Bang” hypothesis cannot fully explain the formation and existence of "spiral galaxies".
The theory under consideration can explain: the possibility of the formation of "spiral galaxies"; the emergence and existence of "black holes", which are the centers of rotation of "spiral", "circular", or other forms of metagalaxies; predict the disappearance of "black holes" by the end of the "compression" of metagalaxies and the emergence of "high-energy nuclei" in their place; the possibility of collisions or merging of different metagalaxies / or "active particles" of metamatter, etc.
The new theory limits the boundaries of our existing universe to the "antigravity ball". Outside this ball, other matters can constantly merge with the emergence of new matters with "critical masses" and new "Big Bangs", which we cannot detect at present with the methods and devices available to us.
Literature
1. Hubble, E. (1926) Extragalactic Nebulae. The Astrophysical Journal, 64, 321-369.
https://doi.org/10.1086/143018.
2. Hubble, E. A Relation between Distance and Radial Velocity among Extra-
Galactic Nebulae. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 1929, 15, 168-173.
https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.15.3.168.
3. Einstein, A. The Foundation of the General Theory of Relativity. Annalen
der Physik, 1916, 49, 769-822. https://doi.org/10.1002/andp.19163540702.
4. Einstein, A., De Sitter, W. On the Relation between the Expansion and the Mean Density of the Universe. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 1932, 18, 213-214. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.18.3.213
5. Hawking, S., Rayner, G. The Large-Scale Structure of Space-Time. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1973, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9780511524646.
6. Hawking, S. Black Holes and Baby Universes and Other Essays, Bantam Books, 1993.
7. Verlinde, E. On the Origin of Gravity and the Laws of Newton. Journal of High Energy Physics, 2011, 4, 29. https://doi.org/10.1007/JHEP04(2011)029.
8. Carroll, S. Dark Matter, Dark Energy: The Dark Side of the Universe. The Teaching Company, Chantilly, Guidebook Part 2, 2007, 46.
9. Schrodinger, E. (1992) What Is Life. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1992, https://doi.org/10.1017/CBO9781139644129
10. Guth, A. “The Inflationary Universe,” Perseus Publishing, 1998.
11. Alpher, R.A., Bethe, H., Gamow, G. “The Origin of Chemical Elements,” Phys. Rev., 1948, 73, 803.
12. Kragh, H. Conceptions of Cosmos. From Myths to the Accelerating Universe: A History of Cosmology, Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2007.
13. John North. Cosmos: An Illustrated History of Astronomy and Cosmology, Chicago: University of Chicago Press, 2008.
14. Gamow, G. The Creation of the Universe, New York: Viking Press, 1952.
15. Tryon, E. “Is the universe a vacuum fluctuation?” Nature, 1973, 246 (1973), 396-397.
16. The Future of the Universe and the Future of Our Civilization/ V.Burdyusha and G. Khozin, eds. Singapore: World Scientific, 2000.
17. Gasperini, M. The Universe Before the Big Bang: Cosmology and String Theory, Berlin: Springer, 2000.
18. Bojowald, M. “Follow the bouncing universe”, Scientific American, April 2008, 299.
19. 300 Years of Gravitation/S.Hawking, W.Israel (Eds.), Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1987, 690 p.
20. Gould, R.R. Universe in Creation. A New Understanding of the Big Bang and the Emergence of Life. Cambridge, Massachusetts: Harvard University Press, 2018, 284 p.
21. Stephen Hawking. God Created the Integers. Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, 2007, 1375 p.
22. Hawking, S., Penrose, R. The Nature of Space and Time. Princeton University Press, 2010, 156 p.
23. Hawking, S.W. Occurrence of singularities in open universes. Phys.Rev.Lett., 1965, 15.
24. Hawking, S.W. Black holes in general relativity. Comm. Math. Phys., 1972, 25.
25. Hawking, S.W. Particle creation by black holes. Comm. Math. Phys., 1975, 43.
26. Hawking, S.W., Penrose R. The singularities of gravitational collapse and cosmology. Proc. Roy. Soc. London A314, 1970.
27. Hawking, S.W. A Briefer History of Time. Bantam illustrated hardcover edition published, 1996, 190 p.
28. Hawking, S.W., Mlodinow, L. The Grand Design. The Bantam Books, New York, 2010, 325 p.
- Badges
- Science topic