THE UNIVERSE AND BEYOND PART -2


The Age of the Universe

According to the astronomers, the entire matter contained in the Universe had shrunk into a single ball which exploded some 10-20 billion years ago, flinging atoms of matter in all directions. They call it the Big Bang. These atoms, while fleeing from the center of the explosion at enormous speeds, combined to form stars and galaxies. The expansion is still going on, and will continue for another 30 bn years after which the Universe will shrink once again to explode in the next Big Bang. The galaxies are moving away from the center of explosion and from one another like spots on the skin of an expanding balloon.

We can right away reject the latter part of the hypotheses as nobody in his right mind would subscribe to the idea. The Universe works with clock-work precision only because of movement. The smaller bodies avoid capture by the bigger bodies only because of movement. If the Universe has to shrink, its components will have to stop movement at least for an instant to make the return journey. What will happen if movements stop? The planets would draw in their satellites; the stars would gobble-up the planets; the nuclei of the galaxies would draw in the stars and the super galaxies would gorge the galaxies : their will be total chaos and explosions galore.

Evidently, the hypothesis was evolved at a time when the astronomers were not aware of the enormous size of the Universe. As more and more powerful telescopes were made, farther and farther galaxies came into view, compelling the astronomers to redefine the boundaries of the Universe.



According to the latest count done with the help of photographs taken by the Hubble telescope, there are not less than 50 billion galaxies in the Universe. If we take the average number of stars in a galaxy as 1 million (on a very conservative basis: remember, our Milky Way galaxy has 1000 million stars!), there should be 50 million billion stars in the Universe. Can anyone believe that the matter contained in all these stars could be shrunk into a single ball for the Big Bang to take place? We know that a star cannot have more than 100 solar masses because the radiation pressure created at the core of the shrinking mass would be so great as to fling matter back into interstellar space. How could then the matter contained in 50 million billion stars be shrunk into a single ball? The number of galaxies in the Universe is not in any way final, as the use of still more powerful telescopes would bring to view still farther galaxies and the astronomers would have to make recalculations.



The Hubble telescope has photographed some very distant galaxies, more than 10 bn light years away. A galaxy is 10 billion years away from us, means we are seeing it with the help of light which left its surface 10 billion years ago, or a few billion years after the Big Bang. Naturally, we should see a galaxy-in-the-making – one containing young, bluish stars. But surprisingly, the farthest galaxies observed contain very old stars! Of course, the astronomers do not bother to explain this paradox. What does this illogicality hint at?


Let us take the case of the black dwarfs. Astronomers say that the life-span of our Sun is 15 billion years. The life-span of smaller stars is much longer. After they burn up their stocks of hydrogen, they become white dwarfs, and after thousands of million years, become black dwarfs. Since the Universe is only about 15 billion years old, the first dwarfs are yet to appear in the skies. But is that so? Why, the star nearest to us, Proxima Centauri is a white dwarf! We cannot see the black dwarfs since they do not emit light, but astronomers believe they are everywhere.

The most logical surmise is that the Universe is much older than our estimates. Things become simpler if we can believe that the Universe is eternal – without a beginning or end. Right from childhood, we have been taught that everything has a beginning and an end. Our brains are therefore not programmed to accept anything as eternal. But we could somehow accept that time has no beginning or end. Why can not we apply this aspect to the Universe also? If we could, we could hear the sound of a few more pieces of the jigsaw puzzle called Universe falling into their proper slots. Just suppose that the Universe was there yesterday, is their today and will be there tomorrow. The concept of the expanding galaxy is based on the red-shift in the spectrographs of galaxies showing that they are moving away from us. But can’t there be any flaw in the red-shift theory? Frankly, the author does not know much about these scientific matters, hence it is only a suggestion.

The Shape of the Universe

If the Big Bang flung the atoms of the entire matter contained the previous Universe in all directions, and that these atoms, while fleeing from the site of explosion, formed stars and galaxies, the Universe should be shaped like a giant balloon, with the galaxies lying on its skin and a huge void at the centre – a spherical void with a radius of 10-20 billion light years. Why, the Big Bang threw out the entire matter contained in the Universe, didn’t it? But no astronomer or book on astronomy has hinted at the existence of such a huge void at the center of out Universe!

Black Holes

Astronomers say super giant stars, having more than 50 solar masses end up as black holes. Our own Milky Way has about 1000 million stars. If at least 0.1 % of them have more than fifty solar masses, there should be 1 million super giants. Now, the astronomers agree that the life span of a star depends upon its mass and luminosity. While the life span of an average star like our Sun is about 15 billion years, and that of a smaller star much more, the super giants burn up their stocks of hydrogen at much higher rates and live only for a few million years. Considering that our Galaxy is at least 10 billion years old, many super giants should have lived and died till now, leaving behind thousands of black holes all around. But are there so many





Black Holes in our Galaxy? The author recently saw a photograph of the Sombrero galaxy taken by Hubble telescope, and the accompanying note said there was a huge black hole in it. Why just one? The Sombrero is a giant galaxy, and very old too. There should be millions of black holes in it! For one thing, the astronomers themselves say that no star can have more than 100 solar masses. During its life span, it loses a sizeable part of its mass. However dense the matter at its core is after it explodes as a supernova, its mass can not be more than that of the original star. How could the core then have such great gravitational pull as to draw in matter from distant stars and galaxies? It is therefore logical to believe that black holes are not the remnants of single stars. Those of galaxies may be.

The Solar System

Now we shall come nearer home, and look at our own the Milky Way Galaxy.

About 7 billion years ago, a series of supernovae explosions left numerous atoms of matter in interstellar space. After millions of years, a globule of gases and dust particles formed from these atoms began to shrink slowly due to its own gravitational force. On shrinking it began to grow denser, and started rotating. The temperature at its core began to rise due to friction between particles of matter. When the temperature reached 7 million Kelvin, Hydrogen started to be converted into Helium, and the proto-Sun was formed. When the core-temperature reached 13 million K, the pressure at the core matched the weight of the upper layers and shrinking ceased. Our Sun came into being.From the remainder of the parent nebula formed the planets and satellites. Thus the Sun, all the planets and the satellites of the Solar System are of the same age, astronomers say. According to them, the planets and satellites formed in the eddies of the fast-rotating globule.

In a word, yes. I do.

In an earlier post to your "part 1" post I said that in my idea our expanding universe stated as dense energy. Dense energy is not the same thing as dense matter. Energy can be compressed into a tiny energy ball and then compressed further and further until enough energy to produce all of the matter that we can predict exists in our expanding universe can be contained in a nearly infinitely dense, near zero volume energy entity. Such a tiny dense energy could be the Big Bang event or it could be the burst of a big crunch, but either way it makes more sense to me if it was dense energy and not dense matter, and certainly not dense "atoms".

You covered a lot of territory here and you have combined some theory, fact, speculation, and even doubt. The scenario though, if I understand you correctly, does not convince you and you have your doubts if any explanation will ever be able to be found that tells the whole truth and nothing but the truth.

If I am right about your thinking, then that I can agree with. We will never know for sure, and the best we can do is say we don't know, and then say what we think might be true but can't be proved.

Is that what you are thinking?