Alternative to Big Bang?

Question

How is this compare to the Big Bang?
Are there similar thories like this?

The universe is endless but a lot less dense then what we see.

Gravity create dense places in the universe that creates the galaxies we see.

The redshift is from the affect of gravity on space (bending the space that streach tje distences) and/or the higher densety of matter and energy make light travel slower (like it travel slower in air).

The background radiation is from the "outer" universe and/or the process of matter and energy entering from the "outer" universe.

In the end we will get most (or all) matter in a black hole that will return its energy by Hawkigns radiation and the process will created again someplace else.

In my model there is an area in the universe that become dense from gravity affects (maybe with other forces). As the densety raise while matter and energy are attracted from the endless universe the space is bend from the raise in gravity and this couse some redshift.

The dense area is expending while the flow of matter into it allow it.

The end is a black hole surrended by almost empty space that will emit more Hawkings raditaion then what it attract and so will vanish in the end.

Also the raise in density will mean light will travel slower with time and this sould couse additional redshift.

There are also several sources for the backround radiation :
1. Matter and energy that enter the dense area.
2. Other active dense areas.
3. Other dense areas that become a single black hole and emit Hawkings radation while returning the energy and matter back and eventualy returning the area to the avarage density of the universe.

I'll try to sumerize my Theory:
Name : Loclal Reveresed Big Bang.

Infinit big and old universe, but less dense then observed.

SubUniverse are created the same as Galaxis but at larger scale...

The SubUniverse ends in a Big Bang when an Ultra Massive Black Hole gets into some cirtical size reseting the Heavy elements into sub particales...

Answer 1

actually gravity is not creating galaxies
and redshift = When the light an object emits is displaced toward the red end of the spectrum it is said to be redshifted...
and can be caused by the motion of a source away from an observer
there is no outer or inner universes as i know
hawkings radiation is thermal radiation thought to be emitted by black holes due to quantum effects... we are alredy getting radiation..

Answer 2

The most similar theory that has ANY traction would be the steady state universe. The late Fred Hoyle was a proponent. I am unsure as to the health of the theory now that he is dead. One thing that makes scientists kok an eyebrow at the steady state hypotheses is the modifications to fairly well understood physics to match the observations, and there are always some observations that it can't explain.

While matter/gravity does redshift light leaving a mass, light generated elsewhere will be blueshifted on the way in, and then redshifted on the way out leaving it unaffected. It is impossible to explain the cosmological redshift by invoking concentrations of matter and the currently observed structure of the universe without a new description of gravity that would violate many of the verified predicitions of General Relativity.

Anyway, there are steady state theories that sound somewhat like what you have presented, however they all have holes in them. I would do a search on "quasi-steady state" in adsabs.harvard.edu . Try to find a review article on the topic.

Answer 3

Let me comment few Things
Einstein started with improving newtons theory and finding an universal theory. Newtons theory is valid for a static universe that is independent of time. He added time as a variable the 4 th dimension. All his interest is developing this theory based on observation and other mathematical equation. He did explain some physical process and gave mathematical explanation to some physical phenomena.
Now let us look at the things you mention

Gravity. This is fundamental property in the universe. This is caused by mere attraction between all particles in the universe. when a smaller object like a ball is near a big object both try to pull each other. like a tug of war. Of course the big brother wins all the time. This is what gravity is. The time warp is a mathematical explanation to that fundamental property and used in his mathematical model.

But gravity does create the objects we see. Small particles lumped together to form stars, galaxies etc. The lumped mass and the rotation is due to gravity. That is one of the main cause of the universe we see today


Redshift:

This is analogous to Doppler's effect in sound propagation. The redshift we observe is due to object moving away from us. Blue shift is the opposite

The subject you are trying to solve very complex and there is no few lines solution. In my opinion whatever we propose is one solution and there may be several other solutions like millions of species here on earth.

Answer 4

I believe in the big bang but I don't believe it requires a singularity. Not a singularity in the sense of something "infinitly dense and infinitly small" These infinities are poor substitutes for our inifinite time and space. A poor effort of "renormalization".

Answer 5

Take an old sock and cut the toe out so you have a tube. Glue a bead on the sock in one place. Watch the bead as you slowly turn the sock inside out over and over.Think of the bead as earth.Do the turning inside out over and over and think.