The common explanation to GRB's is we are seeing the quasars of the first black holes that gave rise to the first stars... Thus seems to be based on the idea they are "too big" to be anything but tightly concontrated beems.
Could these not be neiboring "big bangs"? It seems to me these explosions must be common in an infinite universe, why assume our "local" matter is all there is? Also, why didn't this bang happen 5 seconds earlier, or a trillion google plex years earlier for that matter?
Isn't it more likely that a certain amount of matter drifts about and acreats until a point of critical mass causes such an explosion?
The attitude that "everything is local" seems to me just another example of people instintively avoiding the concept of "infinite" because we can't truely get our heads around it.
2007-02-17 12:23:47 · 4 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
BTW: Pls excuse my spelling, javascripts are screwed-up and check isn't working...
2007-02-17 12:24:47 · update #1
OK, need some more explanation. I AM SPECULATING! Not saying I'm not.
As to the "universe is expanding", that is our local universe-that which comprised our local bang in my hypothosis. My point is that OTHER universes may be expanding near-by also. PLEASE read more carefuly before making flipant comments.
"Everything Is Local" I'm taking a licence with here to refer to the more fundamental aspect of human thinking to reduce things to familiar patterns. Don't be so ready to invent fault by deliberate misinterpratation. The sign of a weal argument.
2007-02-17 18:08:29 · update #2
You have to remember that the Universe does most certainly have a definite edge. The thing is, the Universe is constantly expanding from the first Big Bang that occured. Therefore, the universe isn't infinite.
And the explanation that we see the quasars of the first stars is true. It takes Millions of years if not billions for the light from a spot to travel to the earth, or at least, our solar system, since most information we gather is through satellites.
The prospect of a neighboring universe, also called a multiverse, is still in debate, although the scientist stephen hawking claims that it is true.
The whole thing in paragraph 3 is true. When a bunch of gasses gather and clump, they form a star. Eventually, when that star is dying out, the matter explodes in what is known as a supernova, which releases huge amounts of heat and gamma rays, among other types of waves and light.
Until we get more information in the future, the idea that the universe is never ending cannot be sustained.
2007-02-17 12:31:05 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
Gamma ray bursts are real things,but pinpointing them is still a problem.
several theories exist for what they are,but none of these seem to be very satisfactory
the idea of merging black holes is a stretch.
If black holes could exist they would never meet..
The universe is finite,a one time event that will never happen again.
The universe started at some point after time zero.
It resulted from a finite potential.
You can't really look at a second or a trillion years,there was nothing before zero,so when it started it had to be that point in time.
It's a good question and a definite answer may never be possible.
2007-02-17 20:56:49 · answer #2 · answered by Billy Butthead 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
"Everything is local" is a political rule of thumb that has nothing to do astronomy or cosmology. GRB's are caused by vastly energetic events most likely the collision of neutron stars or some other like event. Guessing that GRBs are a result of new universes springing into existence is total speculation with no basis in physics.
2007-02-17 21:58:55 · answer #3 · answered by Michael da Man 6 · 1⤊ 1⤋
If the Universe is infinite how can it be expanding?
No, I'm afraid I don't think you've out-thought the best astrophysicists in the world, you need to read more about it.
2007-02-17 22:03:02 · answer #4 · answered by Goodly Devil 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋