Well, wouldn’t that line things up nicely? The universe born from a black hole… a person born from a black hole....

Imagine me saying this like Billy Bob Thornton in Sling Blade:

I likes when women folks talks dirty…mmmmmmm

I hope you’re a woman Carlene or else I’d be turned on by a guy, which would make me gay…not that there’s anything wrong with that !

I think scientists are wasting a lot of time theorizing on the origins of the universe.  All they have to do is wait for the universe to end and start again (like in Hitchhiker’s Guide to the Galaxy).  They just have to leave a note somewhere asking the first scientists in the newly reborn universe to chronicle its birth!

I know what you’re thinking…all matter will be destroyed, so how can they leave a note?  And what language do they write the note in?  Hey, I’m an “ideas guy”…I’ll leave the “kittle” problems to someone else to figure out.

“There is a theory that states that if ever anyone discovers exacly what the universe is for and why it is here,it will instantly disappear and be replaced by something even more bizarre and inexplicable.”............

Turns page..

“There is another theory that states that this has already happened”

Restaurant at the End of the Universe
Douglas Adams (Sadly missed)

Douglas Adams (Sadly missed)

Yes. I had the good luck to be able to attend a talk of his at Imperial College and came away quite impressed.

I agree about Douglas Adams. If you liked the Hitchhikers Guide trilogy (so called), you gotta read the Dirk Gently books, I’ve lived the scene with the couch in the stairwell, and thinking of all this, I’m moved to quote some Vogon poetry .

Just a little question: So if the universe came from an explosion in a black hole, where’d the black hole come from, and what caused the explosion? Eventually, you have to have something that is self existant or eternal, and an action caused by something.

The moment I read “the long dark dark teatime of the soul”,I think he was describing sunday afternoons in England,the phrase lodged in my head.This went on to be the title of one of the Dirk Gently books so it clearly had a resonance for D A too.
Shame the film never got made,did you hear the radio series?May still be available check out the BBC website
If you miss his writing I can recommend Terry Pratchet

Or Mark Simmons.

“Remember, Crossbows don’t kill people, quarells do.”

The idea of the big bang happening inside a black hole doesn’t make much sense to me, you can’t escape black holes because the escape velocity is above the speed of light, which for some reason nothing can exceed (in the case of matter it takes an infinite amount of energy, an asymtope)

The whole idea of the big bang coming from a central point has the problem of having density of matter very much greater than a black hole, therefore again it shouldn’t expand, however perhaps not all antimatter eliminated and perhaps it was of the energy where it had negative mass so repulsive gravity. Certainly I’ve heard the expansion of the universe seems to be accelarating so there must be a force exerter.

The idea of a black hole spontaneously forming and our universe being created immediately outside it is more plausable to me, in fact the light obseved to be emmited from black holes is exactly this - the nothing outside splits into matter and antimatter (or light with positive energy and light with negative energy), the anti’s can be projected into the black hole so that the matter and light can be projected out to restore entropy. The anti’s may be repeled by gravily, but only have to get into the black hole in order to eliminate something. This process slowly degrades all lumps of matter slowly, not only black holes, and it is feasible that the universe we see was liberated this way, in more of a continual stream than a bang. Since this is eliminating the black hole it is a temporary thing but having stuff flow outwards may be exerting a general force on the universe that accounts for expansion.

It is possible that the big bang was the middle point in time, with a symetrical anti version projected back in time. I would like to know why time runs at all though away from the big bang. We know some antimatter was projected forwards in time because it’s the only way electrons could form as far as we know - electrons and antiquarks are essentialy no different at high energy (the high energy gives a positive mass by relitivity, electrons have positive mass, a low energy antiquark doesn’t but a high energy one does. Both have negative charge)

Matter and antimatter are thought to be asymetrical when time goes forward - which is why more antiquarks turned into electrons than quarks into antielectrons. By relitivity you would also need a negative energy for your quark to have the negative mass needed to convert to positron - for some reason we only seem to observe positive energy when time goes forward and I don’t know why, because what could negative energy light have converted into?

Light is it’s own anti in the way that it destructively interferes, but the energy needs to go somewhere if both have positive energy, possibly back to the source. I don’t see what could’ve happened to light with negative energy, maybe it did all eliminate and the only reason we see light today is from reactions of matter, and possibly black hole degradation