It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.
Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.
Thank you.
Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.
Now scientists working at Washington University in St. Louis with support from the McDonnell Center for the Space Sciences, have discovered two tiny grains of silica (SiO2; the most common constituent of sand) in primitive meteorites. This discovery is surprising because silica is not one of the minerals expected to condense in stellar atmospheres -- in fact, it has been called 'a mythical condensate.'
Five silica grains were found earlier, but, because of their isotopic compositions, they are thought to originate from AGB stars, red giants that puff up to enormous sizes at the end of their lives and are stripped of most of their mass by powerful stellar winds.
These two grains are thought to have come instead from a core-collapse supernova, a massive star that exploded at the end of its life.
Because the grains, which were found in meteorites from two different bodies of origin, have spookily similar isotopic compositions, the scientists speculate in the May 1 issue of Astrophysical Journal Letters, that they may have come from a single supernova, perhaps even the one whose explosion is thought to have triggered the formation of the solar system.
White holes are the opposite of black holes, objects into which nothing can enter but are constantly spewing out matter. They were thought to be completely hypothetical, more a mathematical oddity than a real thing...but we may have seen one.
Originally posted by DarknStormy
I have thought about this in the past. Is it possible that we are the remnants of a massive star which exploded Millions of years ago? Blackholes are the remains of failed or exploded stars, yeah?
Originally posted by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing
reply to post by LightSource
Long time lurker here posting for the first time..
Having just watched the first part of Stephen Hawking's 'Grand Design' series, it seems to me that a big problem with the hypothesis put forth in the OP is time.
Hawking states that at the centre of a singularity, time does not exist. If you were to throw a clock into a black hole, assuming it could withstand the enormous tidal forces, it would slow down until it reached a point at the centre where it would stop completely.
Any thoughts on this? How could causality in our universe continue if we are supposedly at the centre of a black hole?
Edited to add: Likewise, the quote in the message above about 'before our universe was created' makes no sense, as time did not exist at this point..
edit on 25-4-2013 by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing because: (no reason given)edit on 25-4-2013 by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by Aleister
reply to post by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing
Hello former lurker, and what took you so long? It took a black hole to suck you into the threads??? You will now not see so many ads, and be able to share stuff with everyone here. And you seem intelligent and literate, so YAY! Welcome.
About the thread, I love this type of thing too. And if we are all just projections on the black hole's surface (and whoever did the maths to get to that conclusion must be given a holographic Nobel Prize or something), then did we exist at some time as real people who were sucked into the black hole, much as ReturnofTheSonOfNothing has now been sucked into ATS? Am I just a reflection of the real Aleister, who is long gone? May he float in the black hole in peace (or pieces, as it were).
Originally posted by LightSource
Here is another thought which could also maybe shed some "light" on this thought as well. There are many people that have had near death experiences that say they saw a big white light and were headed towards it. Could this be you headed back into the black hole to the outer surface of it?
Originally posted by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing
First off, I just want to clarify something mentioned in the OP - the Science Daily story about the silicon fragments.
You do realise that the scientists are not suggesting these silicon fragments both came from the big bang, right? Only 2 elements were produced in the big bang - a lot of hydrogen and a small amount of helium. All of the heavier elements were forged in the stellar furnaces of stars which formed some time after. These stars then supernova'd and the resulting nebulae then formed accretion disks which settled into solar systems.
They are suggesting the fragments both came from the star which preceded our solar system.
So if these fragments are to be seen as evidence for existence in a black hole, it would be evidence for a localised black hole for just our solar system, and not the entire universe.
Just wanted to address that..
Okay -
Originally posted by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing
I believe that this phenomena already has a more mundane explanation - hypoxia. When the brain is deprived of oxygen, vision is reduced to just the centre of our normal visible area resulting in 'tunnel vision'. Another common symptom of hypoxia is a feeling of euphoria.
I'll agree that the idea of a holographic existence is a thought provoking one, but unless some evidence can be presented which supports the idea, that's all it is.
So far, things haven't gone so well in that area. Physicists predicted that if the holographic universe hypothesis were true, we should be able to see some signs of it. Particularly, they think we should be able to detect a certain 'fuzziness' to elementary particles at the 'Planck Scale' (10^-35m). This would be like being able to see the pixels that make up an image.
Well, they have gone further than that - ten trillion times further to be exact. Down to 10^-48m and still no sign of any pixels making up the universe.
See io9.com... or just check the wikipedia entry on the 'Holographic Principle'.
Until there is some evidence for it, or until it can be demonstrated in some way I personally see no reason to entertain the notion any further than as an interesting thought experiment.edit on 25-4-2013 by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing because: (no reason given)
String theory is an active research framework in particle physics that attempts to reconcile quantum mechanics and general relativity. It is a contender for a theory of everything (TOE), a self-contained mathematical model that describes all fundamental forces and forms of matter. String theory posits that the elementary particles (i.e., electrons and quarks) within an atom are not 0-dimensional objects, but rather 1-dimensional oscillating lines ("strings").
The earliest string model, the bosonic string, incorporated only bosons, although this view developed to the superstring theory, which posits that a connection (a "supersymmetry") exists between bosons and fermions. String theories also require the existence of several extra dimensions to the universe that have been compactified into extremely small scales, in addition to the four known spacetime dimensions.
The theory has its origins in an effort to understand the strong force, the dual resonance model (1969). Subsequent to this, five superstring theories were developed that incorporated fermions and possessed other properties necessary for a theory of everything. Since the mid-1990s, in particular due to insights from dualities shown to relate the five theories, an eleven-dimensional theory called M-theory is believed to encompass all of the previously distinct superstring theories.[1]
Many theoretical physicists (among them Stephen Hawking, Edward Witten, Juan Maldacena and Leonard Susskind) believe that string theory is a step towards the correct fundamental description of nature. This is because string theory allows for the consistent combination of quantum field theory and general relativity, agrees with general insights in quantum gravity (such as the holographic principle and black hole thermodynamics), and because it has passed many non-trivial checks of its internal consistency.[2][3][4][5] According to Hawking in particular, "M-theory is the only candidate for a complete theory of the universe."[6] Other physicists, such as Feynman, Lee Smolin and Glashow, have criticized string theory for not providing novel experimental predictions at accessible energy scales.[7]
Originally posted by ReturnofTheSonOfNothing
reply to post by LightSource
It's fascinating to think about, but again there just is no evidence.
All sorts of weird and wonderful things could be true. We could just be the extrusion into 3 dimensional space of vast pan-dimensional beings. Or perhaps the dreams of some hypergalactic space-beast.
I happen to suspect our universe was likely the result of a collision between 2 branes in the multiverse, but it could just have easily have popped into existence from nothing, or have been sneezed into existence by the Great Green Arkleseizure..
Perhaps life itself is a play written by a race of ancient turnips who live outside the known universe. Or maybe it's true that it's 'Turtles, all the way down'.
It's fun to speculate, but without evidence that's all it is.
A cosmological theory holding that the universe originated approximately 20 billion years ago from the violent explosion of a very small agglomeration of matter of extremely high density and temperature.
A black hole is a region of spacetime from which gravity prevents anything, including light, from escaping.[1] The theory of general relativity predicts that a sufficiently compact mass will deform spacetime to form a black hole.
Originally posted by felixjames20
S&F
This is just mind boggling
Let me get this right, we are all dead then yeah? As we have been sucked into the black hole and destroyed and we are kind copies/remnants of what we were chilling out on the surface of a stupidly big black hole.
Originally posted by LightSource
Originally posted by DarknStormy
I have thought about this in the past. Is it possible that we are the remnants of a massive star which exploded Millions of years ago? Blackholes are the remains of failed or exploded stars, yeah?
So that is my thought yes. Before our universe was created there was a star (or whatever creates a super massive black hole that is in the center of all galaxies) that went supernova and turned into a black hole which ripped a hole in its current universe. The other end is the white hole spewing out all the matter creating our universe. all black holes then create new universes so in theory we would then have infinite universes. Then if you watch the video that talks about the universe as a hologram all the energy/light coming out of the white hole is the "projector" if you will of our holographic universe. Also in that video they say in theory all the matter that is sent into the black hole there is now a imprint of the informaition on the black hole itself and then could have it recreated. So to get a little stranger of an "infinite" you and me and the universe I would then have to say in "theory" all universes should be the same as the "original" created universe just changed a little. So there would then be an infinite number of you and me running around in different universes.edit on 22-4-2013 by LightSource because: (no reason given)
It is not a star but common sense that is being torn apart. Black holes are not ‘stringy’ or ‘fuzzy.’ They are a mathematical figment. They don’t exist. There was no need to invent them if the electrical nature of matter and the universe had been considered. The ‘black hole’ concept is a classic example of the malaise afflicting modern physics. Mathematicians dominate the discipline. And it is a common mistake to assume that to be very clever at mathematics is to somehow be a genius across the board...
But most damning is that the narrow training of astrophysicists does not allow them to “see” the powerful electric discharge effects at the centers of galaxies. The x-rays, gamma rays, jets and radio lobes cry out for an electrical model. By simply invoking the electrical force, which is a thousand trillion trillion trillion times stronger than gravity, we can return to the realm of normal objects, normal physics, and common sense electrical engineering. The gravitational black hole model is fictional and worthless.