question/theory

so i was thinking the other day, about black holes and how they're supposed to be punctures in the space-time continuum, gravity wells with no escape. what if, at the center of the universe, there's a super-duper massive 'anti' black hole, with repellent gravity accounting for the constant uniform universal expansion? we know little enough about gravity that it's not entirely dismissable.

any thoughts?

well..........

thanks so much for your meaningful input.

Well,25cents, I wasn't trying to be rude or "funny" but I really don't know how to respond to your question...

In all seriousness,gravity is truly a mystery. However,science abounds in mystery. Look at magnetism for example,or electricity. Electricity is certainly a mystery because we know how to produce it and we know how to utilize it,but we don't definitively know what it is.

I don't think blackholes are 'supposed' to be anything, but rather are 'assumed' to be something. Are flowers supposed to bloom, are oceans supposed to be violent? I think a better way of sting this would be to say 'they're assumed to be punctures...' But that is just me.

The human race's current understanding of the universe is limited by the mathematical knowledge which it posesses.

You also sound very defensive: we know little enough about gravity that it's not entirely dismissable. Though this may be true, I can say that your description and evidence, materials collected, data and all put forward to explain and to put forth your theory is quite minimal, lacks in desire, will not hold in any academic/scientific institution and includes an undiscovered 'repellent gravity'.

Your question: what if, at the center of the universe, there's a super-duper massive 'anti' black hole, with repellent gravity accounting for the constant uniform universal expansion? Leaves me haning. This is not an entirely complete question. So what if there is? To me, you need to elaborate more upon this thought. Answer my 'so what' and it should help evolve the thread into a better discussion. Because frankly, I don't know what I would be answering. My initial reply is to say 'If there is then there is'. I think something specific or less generic is needed.

well, it's not as if i'm proposing this idea for serious inquiry, it's just an idea i had. i presented it for anyone with more scientific ability and/or curiosity than me to chew on if they liked.

and supposed means assumed in my statement, not 'supposed as in 'should'.


i'm retarded.

I don't think there could be, for the simple reason that there's no center to the universe.

Some people would think, though, that if you rewind the cosmos, then all the galaxies should focus back in on one point then, right? Shouldn't that be the center of the universe?

Not really. The situation is analagous to saying that there's a "center" to the surface of an expanding balloon. There is NO center on the surface, yet the surface area is expanding, and if you rewind the film of the expansion, it'll all compress back to a point.

The universe is likely the same way - every portion of it is expanding, and so the distances between the galaxies is growing larger and larger. However, the center doesn't exist within our 3-dimensional perspective.


Now, it has been hypothesized that there could be "white holes" - which would be kind of anti-black holes. However, there's no math to really substantiate these theories, for there'd be no way for them to really come into existance. On the whole, a white-hole could be imagined as a sort of mini-big bang - and so it could be thought of that the universe as we know it is a white-hole.

I don't think this is so, but it is an idea that's out there.