User:KRISHNA BAALU

My theory:

I am not a scientist! But I was keen and spent lot of time thinking and searching for the secrets behind this creation. I thought of sending my theory to Stephen via e mail, but restrained my self to further improvement of my theory. I have answer to the two areas of uncertainty and by this, my theory is more elaborate and comprehensive too.

First what is the theory that is really new?

MY THEORY: The BANG occurred from a single point of small condensed mass. But the first logical question would be, which force inside this small mass of ball that forced the ball to explode in such an unimaginable force? Even Scientists seem to believe that just before the Big Bang, the condensed mass if it is static it CAN NOT EXPLODE, it is impossible. So my answer is the so called first singular condensed MASS OF BALL is not the first such mass of ball that was born from nowhere, but it was just then condensed itself to confine in to such a small ball, by an action of IMPLODE. Sure. but when the bang spread in the universe at a point of time and occupying the space to some extent it has to come back to its original position. If so our doubt is what makes this outward moving force to STOP at a point and reverse its direction INWARDLY and back to the same SPOT?

1. The immediate BIG BANG that occurred in the past,what we have all been discussing is not the first ONE, can not be the first BIG BANG.I mean it is not the first BIG BANG! It is part of a cycle of such 'bangs' of several such bangs. But every such Bang is a singularity by itself,but it cycles it self several times. Then HOW?

2. In this cycle of BANGS, the very first BANG is relatively small and spread relatively smaller area in the space. Later after several cycles of bangs explosion and implosions, the FORCE AND AREA increases. It is highly impossible to find out that our PRESENT AGE BANG is 10,000th Bang or Millionth Bang or so on so on? Impossible to comprehend.

3.Now what makes the spreading universe to come back to the original point? In my understanding there could be two explanations. The first one is

(a)The bang and spread of universe is not a free spread, meaning that there is a canvas of dark matter in the so called empty sky. When the galaxies and violent matter spreads, the spread itself is attached to a string from the point of BIG BANG, after the bang reaches its maximum possible area then slowly it will be pulled back to the spot. So every time when the OUTWARD and INWARD explosion, implosion occurs the enormity increases so the power of BANG too. The first BANG obviously very very small.

(b) The second explanation could be in my view there is an ENORMOUS MAGNETIC RING OUT SIDE OUR UNIVERSE which can not be seen by us at present with our devises. When the expanding universe TOUCHES this ring it violently pushes back the hitting MASS and as a result the entire universe will become a monster single GALAXY. So finally the entire mass condenses in to a single SMALL ball of mass, and again with in NO TIME?the single mass of ball explodes with a BANG. So when I said the first bang is very very small the so called my theory of OUTER MAGNETIC RING was too relatively small and always attached to this mass of ball. The OUTER MAGNETIC RING could even be the outer shield of the first condensed mass. That means THE OUTER MAGNETIC RING could be the part of the mass ball. when BANG occurs the OMR expands, and when the speed reaches the ZERO point, the OMR now pushes back the MATTER inside the RING back to the single point, or the OMR itself condenses so that the matter inside too would be compressed and again the regained force inside the condensed mass pushes outwardly (the BIG BANG) so on so on so on?

KRISHNA BAALU Hyderabad INDIA/07-12-2009

krishnabaalu@gmail.com