Jump to content

The Blink Theory

Stephen Peterson
 Share

Recommended Posts

Stephen Peterson

Stephen Peterson

Posted
Posted (edited)

Stephen Peterson

July 6th, 2019

                                                            The Blink Theory

            Once the universe has reached its tipping point on the balance beam it is currently balancing on, it will collapse into itself in the blink of an eye. This is where super-massive black holes come into play. As the universe collapses onto itself, thus activating every super-massive black hole which in turn protects us from the giant contraction and expansion in an instant. There is a super-massive black hole at the center of our galaxy which is the milky way galaxy. So I theorize that in a split second our solar system and everything the Milky Way Galaxy entails will be sucked through our black hole and sent out into a parallel universe, all so symmetrical with the universe collapsing and expanding in the blink of an eye that we will barely notice once this happens.

           What I am theorizing is that when this happens every super-massive black hole, at the center of each galaxy, will all simultaneously do this as well. Everything will turn to nothing, but nothing is something, someplace and some time. The surge of energy inward after the collapse is what puts the black holes into action. Which in turn takes us for an inter-dimensional ride to a parallel universe. All these singularities meet at one singularity and that in turn gives us the “big bang”. The opposing end of a black hole is mirrored on the other side. It does not begin to form that shape until all these singularities meet. This is how we get spun out into a parallel universe.

            I do think it is possible to test my theory so it can be scientifically theoretical. The issue I have with my theory would be Hawking Radiation. Which states that light is emitted from a black hole’s event horizon. In short, photons and other particles escape falling below the event horizon and go back into space. This cannot be possible when contraction is indicated, everything must be consumed by the super-massive black hole.

            In a thought experiment I think of how photons act under force. Take two different depths of the ocean, the surface and the bottom. Imagine you are traveling at the speed of light in a continuous circle inside a wavelength of light at the top and bottom of the ocean. What I theorize is that the pressure (force) the photons have on them will vary greatly from the surface to the bottom of the ocean, because the force of the water has on the photon of light. The top of the ocean would be us right now in the universe theoretically and the bottom would be a photon of light under contraction of the universe. They will be under such immense force nothing will be able to escape.

            In the beginning of time when the “Big Bang” happened the universe vastly expanded in a fraction of a second from one singularity then seemingly slowed and started to expand at a much slower rate. This is what I believe will happen when we go into contraction, but it will be in reverse. The universe will reach its maximum growth and then start to slowly start to decrease in size over a period of time. From our perspective when the universe decides to give way it may still seem like it is still expanding because time takes time to travel. Then it will suddenly give way forcing all its matter and energy through every black hole. Astronomers believe there is a Super-massive black hole at the center of every galaxy.

            One of the main functions of a black hole is the ability to handle huge amounts of mass in an infinitely small space. This is where the curvature of space time is brought to singularity at the middle of the black hole. Every singularity of every black hole, that is at the center of each galaxy, meet at this moment of contraction. This meeting of every black hole is what causes the universe to be able to expand that vastly in a fraction of a second. There is a reason for everything in the universe and everything is interconnected as one. The universe created these black holes to prepare for this event and its quest to be infinite. Space and time, being one is critical in this regard.

            I believe this is the reason Stephen Hawking spent a lot of his focus was on black holes because they do the key to our fate. This may happen within our humanities existence. The energy in the cosmos is shifting indefinitely. If we are prepared, we will be able to track what happens exactly when we go through a black hole. That will tell us its rate of speed around the event horizon and then we will be able to tell when we are getting sucked back towards the black hole. Black holes are relative to the galaxy that surrounds it, so the event horizon speed will vary but there should be a traceable amount of change so we can detect when this occurrence will happen again. This will in turn show us that a universe is an infinite place. Infinite existence must have infinite time.

            In conclusion I do believe this is how our universe works. But I still ask myself, how did everything start with one singularity? I may never find out, but I will continue looking for a solution. I will continue working on ways to test and prove my theory over my lifetime, this is just the beginning to lifelong journey. May you heart be open and the stars be with you.

Edited by Stephen Peterson
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Scotius

Scotius

Posted
Posted

I'm not a physicist in any way, shape or form... but "almost instantaneous collapse of the Universe" and "We would barely notice anything" sounds like a pretty big contradiction to me. Not to mention the problem of being spaghettified by Black Hole's event horizon.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kerbart

Kerbart

Posted
Posted
3 hours ago, Scotius said:

I'm not a physicist in any way, shape or form... but "almost instantaneous collapse of the Universe" and "We would barely notice anything" sounds like a pretty big contradiction to me. Not to mention the problem of being spaghettified by Black Hole's event horizon.

If it happens faster than your neurons can process that you would barely notice anything. One moment you’re there, the ne...

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest

Guest

Posted
Posted (edited)

I have a few problems with it...

16 hours ago, Stephen Peterson said:

Everything will turn to nothing, but nothing is something, someplace and some time.

Nothing is not something... nothing is nothing! >_< 

16 hours ago, Stephen Peterson said:

From our perspective when the universe decides to give way it may still seem like it is still expanding because time takes time to travel.

Time takes time to travel? X_x

If you contract space you get time dilation. I’m not sure what you’re trying to say tbh. Maybe that our observations are built of things travelling at the speed of light and things happening instantly would happen before we were aware of them... if that’s it then ok, that’s true...

16 hours ago, Stephen Peterson said:

There is a reason for everything in the universe and everything is interconnected as one. The universe created these black holes to prepare for this event and its quest to be infinite. Space and time, being one is critical in this regard.

I guess you can literally say that there is a reason behind everything, that reason is called the past... the past of something is the explanation of its present.  But any more than that definition is probably creationism as far as there being a “reason” for everything. Similarly problematic saying that the universe is preparing for or deciding anything or having a quest to be something.

Look I could go on and on but I’ll just say that Carl Sagan could talk a certain way about the cosmos and it had a poetry and beauty to it. It’s something that’s hard to do without sounding crazy. The way you talk about your theory sounds crazy to me. It’s hard to get past. So my advice is to explain it as dryly and accurately as you can. 

You do need to have some kind of theoretical model though. Without it, it’s just fiction.

Edited by Guest
Brain spasms
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Stephen Peterson

Stephen Peterson

Posted
  • Author
Posted

Thanks for you’re feedback everybody. I just started working on this theoretical model about 5 months ago. It is a working hypothesis right now and I am working with mathematicians and astrophysics currently to try and prove this theory true. It’s going to be a long process. This is the first edition of this theory. It is a lot to comprehend. May your singularity maker be with you!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KerikBalm

KerikBalm

Posted
Posted
On 7/6/2019 at 10:08 PM, Stephen Peterson said:

Imagine you are traveling at the speed of light in a continuous circle inside a wavelength of light at the top and bottom of the ocean. What I theorize is that the pressure (force) the photons have on them will vary greatly from the surface to the bottom of the ocean, because the force of the water has on the photon of light.

Error: nonsense threshold exceeded, ending process.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
YNM

YNM

Posted
Posted
On 7/7/2019 at 3:08 AM, Stephen Peterson said:

I theorize that in a split second our solar system and everything the Milky Way Galaxy entails will be sucked through our black hole and sent out into a parallel universe, all so symmetrical with the universe collapsing and expanding in the blink of an eye that we will barely notice once this happens.

So much like False Vacuum ?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Spacescifi

Spacescifi

Posted
Posted
29 minutes ago, Cunjo Carl said:

Some rando physicist is charging $50 for 20 minutes on skype!? I'm honestly not sure if I should be impressed or appalled. Can I be both?

 

I guess she figured tutoring was not her thing? Or perhaps this is just a side gig to see hoe profitable it is? A test-run?

I dunno. Personally I would never nerd her help for $50.

A lot of science you can get for free. Quora? Reddit? Kerbal Space Forums?

Enthusiasts are the experts.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HebaruSan

HebaruSan

Posted
Posted
Just now, Spacescifi said:

She would be ripping him off for such conjecture.

I hope her conscience bothers her.

To be clear, I doubt she collects this money often (ever?). She's probably inundated by crackpot theories, and specifying how much her time is worth is a gentle way to tell them to "go away."

Link to comment
Share on other sites
mikegarrison

mikegarrison

Posted
Posted
1 hour ago, Spacescifi said:

A lot of science you can get for free. Quora? Reddit? Kerbal Space Forums?

Enthusiasts are the experts.

LOL. Experts are the experts. There are a few actual experts in forums, but most of the time what you get are people who only think they are experts.

The classic thing is to ask a question requiring engineering expertise and watch how many first-year engineering students provide answers that sound authoritative but are actually wrong.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
KSK

KSK

Posted
Posted (edited)
1 hour ago, Spacescifi said:

I guess she figured tutoring was not her thing? Or perhaps this is just a side gig to see hoe profitable it is? A test-run?

I dunno. Personally I would never nerd her help for $50.

A lot of science you can get for free. Quora? Reddit? Kerbal Space Forums?

Enthusiasts are the experts.

Sometimes. More often than not their enthusiasm gets in the way of the required objectivity. 

As for $50 for 20 minutes. that sounds about right to me. $150 per hour, so call it a $1,200 a day. That's at the mid to lower end of the scale for an academic consultancy fee. Top tier professors would earn a lot more. Source - personal experience from six years in a university tech transfer department.

Of course your target market for consultancy is rather different to your target market for tutoring but even so, as a gentle 'this is how much my time is worth' reminder, it seems perfectly reasonable.

Edit:  Probably stating the obvious but remember that the take-home salary that physicist is earning is rather less than the amount they'll be costing their institution or company to employ them. My ballpark figures for the UK won't work for the US though.

Edit the 2nd. Just followed the actual link:

Quote

My own expertise is in: cosmology, quantum mechanics, general and special relativity, quantum gravity, unification and the theory of everything, particle physics, and general questions about academia. On my team are also experts on: quantum foundations, astrophysics, and string theory. I am sure we have you covered. All of us have a PhD in physics and many years of research experience.

We do not counsel students for homework assignments and do not review written material.

So more actual consultants rather than tutors. At least that's how they're pitching themselves. And right at the bottom of the comments:

Quote

Regarding the stagnation of physics, could a symptom of this be related to the fact our government is stamping everything do not release for "Reasons of National Security" currently there are thousands of patents (ideas) being hidden from the public, everything from Anti-gravity technology to anti-aging drugs. I believe by hiding the latest breakthroughs not only causes stagnation in science it also causes stagnation of our society.

And that, right there, is why they're charging a fee.

 

Edited by KSK
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Cunjo Carl

Cunjo Carl

Posted
Posted
3 minutes ago, 5thHorseman said:

https://www.google.com/search?q=balance+beam&tbm=isch

That could be- alternatively I was imagining a 3 beam balance: https://www.google.com/search?q=3+beam+balance&tbm=isch . I think both allusions work. Balanced on a knife's edge sort.

 

Bringing it back around. Physics is rather special among the sciences because of just how far the theory is ahead of experiment. There's a lot of fields where it's the other way around, like Materials Science and Chem E. In these fields we often know materials properties or heuristics years in advance of knowing why things are the way they are! But in Physics, we instead have theory decades ahead of experiment. In a lot of ways that's a good thing! Most big physics experiments are getting pretty danged expensive, so having a lot of good ideas of what things we should be looking for is critical. However it also means there's literally thousands of theories of the universe floating around all waiting for their chance to shine. Some make more sense than others, but mother nature has proven countless times she has no interest in being sensible to us humans! In that way, having the correct theory is like holding the winning lotto ticket. It still impresses me how well the physics theoreticians embrace this despite how passionately each believes in their vision.

Many of physicists greatest heroes follow just such a pattern: They have a beautiful idea, then they do years of research on it only to 'accidentally' prove it wrong, but they still share their results with the world and push science forward by a great leap. Kepler, Planck, Schrodinger, de Broglie, Einstein, Michelson&Morley, and many others were this way. Their beautiful ideas are what drove them forward to make the discoveries they're actually known for today, despite the original ideas themselves now being just footnotes. In the end some accepted it, and some didn't, but they all moved science forward with their discoveries and are remembered for it.

So, I say chase your theory down those rabbit holes, @Stephen Peterson. Find all the weird implications and see what pans out! Make sure you strive to understand the universe however it may work, even if it doesn't turn out how you'd like :) . Like the physics theoreticians don't be afraid to change your theory or even discard it if the evidence calls for it- the universe works in weird ways . Getting stuck in your idea to the exclusion of others is the only thing that can truly hold you back!

Also if you'd like, I can talk about specific points- I have a generalist background in physical sciences, engineering and programming. Just let me know.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
HebaruSan

HebaruSan

Posted
Posted (edited)
13 minutes ago, KSK said:

As for $50 for 20 minutes. that sounds about right to me. $150 per hour, so call it a $1,200 a day. That's at the mid to lower end of the scale for an academic consultancy fee. Top tier professors would earn a lot more.

There's also this:

Quote

Half of the fee is due at least 24 hours before the scheduled call, the other half after completion. [...] If you feel that we have not delivered the service we offer, you do not have to pay the 2nd half of the fee. In this case however we require a written explanation of our shortcoming.

So they're only reliably collecting $75/hr. 20 minutes of "No, that's not right" and "There's no evidence of that" and "That's not how that works" probably inclines a good number of their customers to skip out on the second half of the bill.

Edited by HebaruSan
Link to comment
Share on other sites
This thread is quite old. Please consider starting a new thread rather than reviving this one.

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...