Poll

Do you believe in this theory?

Yes
1 (9.1%)
No
8 (72.7%)
I need more of an explanation
2 (18.2%)

Total Members Voted: 10

Voting closed: May 25, 2006, 05:26:33 AM

Creation of the Universe

  • 14 Replies
  • 4851 Views
*

Demosthenes

  • 651
  • Leader of the Anti-Loli coalition
Creation of the Universe
« on: May 25, 2006, 05:26:33 AM »
I believe that i have a new theory that actually works. As all people know, there is no way to create or destroy matter, so there is only a set number of protons, neutrons, and electrons. What if all of these, at one time, were located in one giant atom? anything with an atomic number of d2 or higher is highly radioactive, and this giant atom would be well past the google mark. (Followed by one hundred zero's) So, pieces of this giant atom were coming of it in the form of alpha, beta, and gamma radiation. Something with an insanly high gravity must have caused all these to come together, or one particle was moving fast enough to not be stopped by any form of gravity and eventually collected a lot of p's, n's, and e's.

Creation of the Universe
« Reply #1 on: May 25, 2006, 05:50:24 AM »
have you heard about antimatter?

antimatter is just like matter, but equal and opposite.
the antiproton is negatively charged (the opposite of a proton) anf the positron is positively charged (the opposite of the electron)

Scientists do know that it exists, and have been able to create some
http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/antimatter_sun_030929.html

anyway, what happens when matter and antimatter particles collide, is that they annhilate each other. so you see, matter (and antimatter) can be created and destroyed.

on top of that, Einstein's theory of relativity tells us that E = MC²
what does this mean?
Einstein told us that matter and energy are equivalent. energy can become matter, and matter can become energy
E = MC² governs the amount that goes either way, where C is the speed of light (3 x 10^8 metres per second)

we shouldn't really call it a theory though, because it has been proven to work. e = mc² is the exact reason why nuclear bombs are so powerful.
you take Uranium 235, split one of these atom's nucleus, and you get a massive chain reaction that causes all the other atoms to split.
now, the splitting of the atoms alone does not create that much force, and we know this because splitting atoms of lighter elements does not do much.
what happens is that the Uranium splits up into lighter elements, like Barium and Krypton, however, when you measure the mass before the reaction and compare it to the mass after the reaction, you'll find that some of it is missing.
that missing matter has in fact been converted into energy.

to make a nuclear bomb, you don't actually use very much Uranium. only as much as the size of your fist, basically.
so how does it create an explosion so large?
well, it's e = mc²
you get your mass, and multiply it by the speed of light twice. that's a lot of energy even from a small amount of matter.

anyway, my point is that I disagree with your theory, because matter can be created and destroyed.

but if you are interested in the big bang, I think you might find this read interesting:
http://www.sciam.com/article.cfm?articleID=0009F0CA-C523-1213-852383414B7F0147
he computer genius guy

*

Demosthenes

  • 651
  • Leader of the Anti-Loli coalition
Creation of the Universe
« Reply #2 on: May 25, 2006, 05:54:58 AM »
Wait, antimatter? Isn't that supposed to cancel out actual matter?

Also:

Matter: anyhting with a volume and mass

Anti: opposite

Anti-matter: anything that has no mass and takes up no space

energy: the ability to do work, no recordable mass and no recordable volume

Creation of the Universe
« Reply #3 on: May 25, 2006, 06:21:25 AM »
from my understanding, Einstein's concept tells us that matter is actually energy.

and no, antimatter is not massless. it is exactly the same as matter, but opposite.

I've read a theory about how antimatter exists, explained by Stephen Hawking.
basically, he tells us that matter and antimatter appear to be created at the same time and place, and are also destroyed at the same time and place.
however, you can look at it another way.
antimatter can be explained as matter, but going backwards in time (since time is relative) hence the reverse properties of antimatter.
at the point where matter and antimatter appear to annhilate each other, or appear to be created, is when the matter/antimatter reverses its direction in time.

now, I do not state this theory to be fact, but it is interesting.
I think that it may be incorrrect, because when matter and antimatter annhilate each other, you get a lot of energy (hence e = mc^2) so I think that matter and antimatter do actully get destroyed, or at least changed to another form.

I think that matter and energy may actually be a distortion of space-time. simple as that.
I could be completely wrong about that, but I do find these theories interesting
he computer genius guy

Re: Creation of the Universe
« Reply #4 on: May 25, 2006, 07:19:28 AM »
Quote from: "Demosthenes"
so there is only a set number of protons, neutrons, and electrons.


Actually they have broken these down into even smaller particles and have proved that matter can and does spontaneously manifest and disappear in a vacuum, give me a minute and I’ll find a link.

Quote from: "Demosthenes"
Matter: anyhting with a volume and mass

Anti: opposite

Anti-matter: anything that has no mass and takes up no space


Now we're just getting into semantics. Antimatter has the same atomic structure as matter but with opposite nuclear charges.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Antimatter
f stupid people were an ethnic group, i'd be the next Hitler

Creation of the Universe
« Reply #5 on: May 25, 2006, 07:36:21 AM »
yeah, then we get into Quantum Physics. then we get to particles like Quarks, Quasars and Photons
he computer genius guy

*

Demosthenes

  • 651
  • Leader of the Anti-Loli coalition
Creation of the Universe
« Reply #6 on: May 25, 2006, 07:52:16 AM »
Okay, first off, you can lie on the internet. There is no way for somebody to stop someone from saying "Japan is the largest landmass"

See?

Second off, you can get atoms in a vaccuum, but our idea of a vaccuum is slighltly flawed. There is almost nowhere in the universe tha there is no matter. In between the electron and proton/neutrons there is an infintesimal amount of empty space.

No matter where you go you will always find electrons due to light and Gamma Radiation.

?

Erasmus

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4242
Creation of the Universe
« Reply #7 on: May 25, 2006, 12:04:22 PM »
Some points need to be cleared up.

1)  The way in which a particle of matter is different from its corresponding antimatter particle is that its electrical charge is opposite.  The antimatter partner of the electron (negatively charged) is is the positron, which has all the same properties as the electron but with a positive charge.

2)  Spontaneous creation of matter and antimatter in the vacuum is not related to the fact that "you can't really get a vacuum".  Even if you could really get a vacuum, you would still get spontaneous generation of matter/antimatter pairs; this is a consequence of the uncertainty principle of quantum mechanics.

-Erasmus
Why did the chicken cross the Möbius strip?

?

joffenz

  • The Elder Ones
  • 1272
Creation of the Universe
« Reply #8 on: May 25, 2006, 12:22:20 PM »
Where did this giant atom come from?

?

Erasmus

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4242
Creation of the Universe
« Reply #9 on: May 25, 2006, 12:27:32 PM »
Quote from: "cheesejoff"
Where did this giant atom come from?


That's probably not a fair question, since the Big Bang doesn't offer any explanation as to what happened before.

Then again, the Big Bang has a meh argument for why it's a meaningless question.

-Erasmus
Why did the chicken cross the Möbius strip?

*

Demosthenes

  • 651
  • Leader of the Anti-Loli coalition
Creation of the Universe
« Reply #10 on: May 26, 2006, 05:40:19 AM »
Although I do disagree with Erasmus much, he has a point. I believe this giant atom could come from many things, such as an entire galaxy becoming a mass of black holes, eventually drawing everything into them, or something that nearly reaches the threshold of mass becoming energy without actually reaching it and eventually picking up all the atoms. The first is more likely but, as with the Big Bang Theory, all we can do right now is speculate.

Creation of the Universe
« Reply #11 on: May 26, 2006, 06:19:58 AM »
in a black hole, there is too much gravity for atoms of any form to exist. you just get a bunch of protons, newtrons and electrons all compacted randomly into one very small area
*edit*
actually, I don't think they'd even be in the form of protons, neutrons and electrons. they'd be split up into their quantum particles
he computer genius guy

?

Erasmus

  • The Elder Ones
  • 4242
Creation of the Universe
« Reply #12 on: May 26, 2006, 06:16:00 PM »
Beneath the event horizon of a black hole, events are no longer measurable by outside observers, so it doesn't really make sense to talk about what's inside.  At the singularity at the center, the universe.... doesn't exist anymore.  The laws of physics aren't defined.  It doesn't mean anything to say "there are protons there".  It really is a hole in the sense that, if the universe were a sheet of paper, the singularity would be a hole in the sheet.

-Erasmus
Why did the chicken cross the Möbius strip?

Re: Creation of the Universe
« Reply #13 on: May 26, 2006, 06:51:07 PM »
Quote from: "Demosthenes"
I believe that i have a new theory that actually works. As all people know, there is no way to create or destroy matter, so there is only a set number of protons, neutrons, and electrons. What if all of these, at one time, were located in one giant atom? anything with an atomic number of d2 or higher is highly radioactive, and this giant atom would be well past the google mark. (Followed by one hundred zero's) So, pieces of this giant atom were coming of it in the form of alpha, beta, and gamma radiation. Something with an insanly high gravity must have caused all these to come together, or one particle was moving fast enough to not be stopped by any form of gravity and eventually collected a lot of p's, n's, and e's.


I voted no after the first 2 sentances. It is possible to destroy and create matter. We have created matter by shooting high-energy photons in lasers at each other. When 2 photons collide with enough energy, they form a unit of matter and anti-matter. And yes we have done this in labs, I'll dig up the source of the actual experiements if you like but I can't be asked right now. There are other forms of matter also besides this. Dark matter(which existiance has been predicted and has been detected indirectly) Neutrinos, WIMPS(weakly interacting massive particles), and many many other forms of matter/anti-matter pairs other then the electrons, protons, and neutrons we are familar with.

And imagine the beginning of the universe as a point of space and time with infinite curvature, a sphere with a diameter of 0. All of the energy is there, just in a set of dimensions that is infinately curved. The big bang was the expansion of these dimensions. 3(probably more) space dimensions, 1 (probably 2) time dimensions were all relatively flat when all was said and done. blah blah there is a thread on the big bang if you want to check it out. But this is a really basic summary of the generally accepted and currently most likely theory from observations.

*

Demosthenes

  • 651
  • Leader of the Anti-Loli coalition
Creation of the Universe
« Reply #14 on: June 02, 2006, 04:18:02 AM »
You aren't actually creating anything, but combining two existing things to make a new one.