Is this possible that the universe has many other universes?

Question

Okay, so i got this crazy idea.

we all know (i hope) that our universe started from a primeveal atom, which was very dense and hot, and gradually exploded and so on....

we also know that there are black holes which shrink to simgularity with the mass of a star, and hence making it super dense. my point is, if a black hole shrinks to singularity, it does happens, that it becomes the size of a primeveal atom, and it could be as dense as the primeveal atom was. so, why can't this black hole explode into a big bang and create a new universe looped in a existing one?

please, let me know your opinions, and thanks in advance.

Answer 1

well who knows its possible. but don't you think that is it was very important the scientist would of thinks the same thing and try to figure out. but i think its possible.

Answer 2

I agree with your idea, and i have a version of my own too. however,

Universe arising out of black hole of our universe(to gather that much mass) would take very-5 long time, and our universe is still very young.

what i believe is possible, is that  many universe exists with some like ours expanding and some maybe contracting and an equilibrium being maintained between them.

i got this idea when i first read pulsating theory of universe, (it is however not considered by scientists now.)

Answer 3

i totally agree with you, i think that the "aliens" that some peope are talking about are like humans from another universe, trying to explore our world.  

Answer 4

I mean, of course it's possible; just figure out a way to truly discover this.

Answer 5

There's a universe in my dog's r****m

Answer 6

You seem like a smart kid, you should know that ANYTHING is possible.  

Answer 7

interesting, hadn't thought of that. while i personally don't think it's very likely, that's really good thinking, try and follow up on that.

Answer 8

Not only possible, it's even likely.

The scientific theory is that the Universe started as a fluctuation of the vacuum. Such vacuum fluctuations make appear a small amount of energy, for a small time. This phenomenon is responsible for the existence of forces, that hold the Universe and matter together.

Normally the bigger the energy fluctuation, the smaller the time it is in existence.

Not so the Big Bang. That was a HUGE fluctuation. So big that a lot of energy came to appearance in the form of mass, elementary particles. These particles started expanding, before the vacuum could reclaim the energy.

And it is still expanding today. 14 billion years later.

Now for some speculation. Is our Universe the only one? Maybe not. The Big Bang was one big fluctuation, maybe other smaller or bigger, take place all the time.

But most of these fluctuations will produce Universes in which conditions are just not suitable for life.

The Universe we observe is by necessity one in which the conditions are just right for us to have evolved into Homo Sapiens capable of asking philosophical questions.

Answer 9

You answered my friends question saying "You posted this question in the wrong section"

and you got 2 points for that.

now im getting back her 2 points for her.

so there.

and i have a right mind to REPORT you for usuing up her time with your :answer:

and i dont want to get reported weither, so i wil answer you questions.

i hope so, i just watched THE GOLDEN COMPASS and it touched me, i wish there will be =)

Answer 10

No there's not enough mass inside a black hole to create a big bang that would create a universe. At least I don't think so. But it is possible there are many universes, see string theory.

Answer 11

I'm no expert on quantum mechanics or dark matter or singularities however I'm hoping that the LHC will discover some stuff that might shed more light on the questions we all have about how our universe began.  From my own laymans perspective I would assume that other universes do exist. Every generation has had its own version of "reality" and I'm hoping I'm open enough to know that what we think is real or common sense is just a product of the time we are living in and that anything is possible.

Answer 12

This theory has been proposed before, but it appears that the characteristics of black holes and the characteristics of the primeval Monobloc are considerably different. Where black holes are merely areas where space is sufficiently stretched, the Monobloc actually CONTAINED all the space in the Universe at that time. Furthermore, because time slows down the closer you get to a black hole, and because black holes have a finite lifespan due to Hawking radiation, every black hole in the Universe will actually explode before it can form a true singularity. Thus, it seems unlikely that black holes would produce new universes, and even if they did, these new universes should theoretically be much smaller than our own.

In terms of smaller universes though, you don't really need black holes to create them. In fact, all you really need is a computer. Isolated computer simulations, following their own rules of change over time, are in a very real sense miniature universes. One can imagine a sufficiently large computer containing a simulation complex enough for a simulated person to exist inside it. There is also little to say that our own universe is not also a simulation being run on a computer in a higher universe. The problem is that we normally think of universes as isolated areas of space, when in fact any kind of sufficiently isolated temporal system can be considered a universe, and a perfectly euclidean space in one universe may be arranged in a totally different formation in a higher universe (for example, a fully three-dimensional computer game can be run on a more or less two-dimensional chip).

>'....the universe expanded from infinitely massive and infinitely small mass....' kow can it be massive and at the same time with a small mass?

He's saying that the mass is only infinite small in space. For example, a gold brick is a 'smaller mass' than a feather pillow because it is literally smaller, despite having more mass.

It just so happens, however, that the Monobloc that spawned the Universe was not actually infinitely massive. Whether or not it was infinitely small (and therefore infinitely dense) is still being debated. At any rate, in our universe it seems that the planck length is the shortest meaningful measure of distance, so any object smaller than this may as well be infinitely small for physical purposes.

Answer 13

Sure.  Come on over to mine.  Complimentary cocktails and dancing girls await you.

Answer 14

It wasn't a primeval atom that blew up, It was a infinitely massive, infinitely small mass, that erupted.  

Black holes are singularities that are not infinitely massive. They draw in mass and energy to the event horizon, but at that point time slows down so much that the mass never actually enters the singularity.

My theory is that enough galaxies will collide to form one super galaxy (conspiracy theorists calm down it will take all of time for this to actually happen), where the center of the super galaxy, like all galaxies is a black whole, eventually sucking in all the matter around it and starting the whole big bang again.

Answer 15

Actually each person and each aware being from the biggest down to the smallest lives in their own experience of the "universe".    Some people we might even say live in a world all their own.    Other than what people perceive and what the person feels and thinks, other than that there is not other universe for that person.     What you see is what you got as your universe.  What you feel and think is what you experience about your universe.

What is the universe for a cockroach eating dog p**p or a fly thinking what a nice place to lay my eggs to feed my babies?

Scientists do think that black holes pop out baby stars.  So your idea is somewhat in harmony with that, but not whole universes.

The problem with the big bang concept is that it is an event, a huge event without any cause.         Not any better than any other speculation or uncaused event.       Science is all about cause and effect, always looking for the cause.   If they can't demonstrate the cause and effect then it's not science, just speculation.  

Anyway partless particles, the basic building block of the universe, don’t exist as a thing or solid object--that idea was out at the beginning of the last millennium.   E = mc2  

What looks and acts as a particle is waves in empty space.    Even though waves need an ocean, light appears as waves in empty space.

Waves without an ocean is existence.  

Waves without an ocean is what we call the universe.

Answer 16

  It is possible but extremely unlikely.

Answer 17

wow man i love thinking about all this kind of stuff.... i guess it could happen.. witch i guess would give me some comfort.. knowing that there is more out there your know...like i always freak out when i think about space expanding into nothing.. witch it is. and i just cant rap my mind around the mystires of space.. but if there was another big bang.. think about it ..it would be much smaller. because it dosnthave all the planets stares .etc.. but i gguessit could happen.. but if it did it would take billions of years or more.. so i wwouldn'tworry about it. :) but i like the way u think .

fun fact .. do u  no that you could fit 330 000 earth sized planets inside jupiter.. :)

Answer 18

It isn't crazy at all. It is an idea that was first put forth in 1922 and even Albert Einstein spent some time thinking about it. It is called the "oscillatory universe" and it is related to the "big bang" in models of how the universe came to be.

There are some minor confusions in the way you asked your question which I will try to clear up. Your "primeval atom" wasn't really an atom, in fact we don't know what it was but we know it is nothing like atoms as we know them. Also, in order for a black hole to be as massive as the whole universe, it would have to "swallow" the whole universe. This is one possible way the universe could end with a "big crunch" where everything falls back together and then makes another "big bang".

However, recent measurements from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (say that 5 times fast) have shown that the universe isn't going to crunch, but rather expand forever until the stars burn out.

As to what becomes of matter that falls into a black hole, we don't know, and maybe we can't know.