My friend Curtis Hagen responded as follows:
Nope-not even light can escape the gravity of a black hole. Also would "dark" be the absence of light? Let me ask you this..."What if "the big bang" is actually just a small explosion in a realm larger than the universe? What if the bang was just the splitting of 1 atom in a larger realm of infinite atoms...kinda scales things down some....
My Duck Thoughts are as follows:
I'm leading toward a fractal theory of the cosmos. What I write below is NOT a theory in that it is not informed by a clear understanding of the cosmic experimental data set nor an understanding of the mathematics required to understand that data. So this is just a "seat of the pants" theory based on loose notions of what I "think I know" rather than what I "know I know".
In a fractal, the inner structure follows the same branching pattern as the outer structure, or looking at it the other way around, the outer pattern is a manifestation of the inner pattern. A good example of this is a tree. The trunk has a given length before it branches, and then each pattern has a similar proportional of length versus before it branches, and so on until you get to the smallest twigs and ultimately the leaves. A Mandelbrot Set is a better example than the tree. You can pursue Fractals in general here.
This is consistent with Curtis' idea, if I have understood him correctly. If this is true, that the elusive "Higgs Boson" that is being searched via the CERN LHC might turn out to be a whole "mini universe" (so to speak). Another way of saying that is that an atom may be broken down into various subatomic particles down to some level... but then their is a "boundary" around the inner universe that makes it invisible when viewed from the the outer universe (our universe that we live in and can see). Similarly the view from the inner universe might not be able to see outside of this boundary to the outer universe. And this pattern could continue to any number of levels of depth.
On the other hand, there might NOT be any boundary, and the "inner universe" is superimposed on the outer universe. One reason the Higgs Boson might not be visible is that in fact it exists "outside" of the atom that "contains" it. In other words, the inside is inverted with the outside, at each "boundary". So if you look for it "inside" the subatomic particle it won't ever be found since it actually is already express (at a distance) by the rest of the cosmos found outside of the atom. This begs the question of what I mean by inside and outside (i.e., what is the boundary).
We might find that one "quantum of mass" corresponds to one such "node of inversion" in the fabric of the cosmos. Gravity might then simply be the connectedness of the inner universe with the outer universe.
All of this is just a Duck Thought... Thought by a duck... floating in a dream!
Your duck is much smarter than my duck!
ReplyDeleteI am trying to follow but am lost...I think a black hole with its inescapable gravity would "clean" an area around it for light years- but still it would distort the light we see near it.
I think the reason we know black holes exist is because they actually bend what light travels near it.
So I am thinking a more accurate perception of what is actually "Out There" would be easier to understand without a black hole in the galactic neighborhood...
With little more than a high school education-here is how my "duck" operates. He sees things around him on a small scale (proton orbiting neutrons etc) then I look to the night sky and I see the same patterns repeated on a grand scale and then my duck thinks..."everything seems to repeat itself"...so my duck does not stop at the level of an infinite ever expanding universe...as it most likely exists inside other 'realms" or "Universes" for lack of a better word.
We can answer questions that have eluded the greatest minds just by 'looking around us"...for instance..
"Which came first-the chicken or the egg?"
Seems to be some sort of paradox...but then we look around at what we know and we understand that all life begins at a 1 or 2 cell level (the egg)...
so we know that for life to exist it has to start in its simpliest form-the egg.
You wont see an egg give birth to a chicken-but every chicken began at the cellular level of 2 cells meeting.
My thought processes are simplistic- its the only way I have to understand my world.
I think we more or less have an alignment of duck thoughts. I guess I could spend a lifetime thinking about such chicken-or-egg problems. But maybe the order doesn't really matter at all. Maybe it's all just like the tides running first in one direction and then unwinding back in the other.
ReplyDelete