black holes

[zephir]

...I want to use based on what functions and what reasoning was behind the making of those animations....

The theory can be only falsified, not proved. If you don't like it, you can try to disprove it - or leave it as it is. Or you can propose some other explanation -so I can do with it the same.
Be perfectly honest - what else you can do for example at the case of string theories or LQG theory? Here are pile of math, a myriads of equations and reasoning. Can you demonstrate, you're able to decide, which theory is more correct and why?

If not, why are you asking the another math? The formal model is supposed to support the introductory concept, not to verify it. For example the Euler computed the model of hollow Earth, the Tycho de Brahe has developed epicycles theory, a pretty formal one - but does this mean, these concepts were more exact or even understandable?

Come on, please. You missed a crucial point in logical reasoning. The less math, the better for understanding of the concept.

 

[draqon]

The theory can be only falsified, not proved. If you don't like it, you can try to disprove it - or leave it as it is. Or you can propose some other explantion -so I can do with it the same.

1) were did you get those animations?

2) what theories (names) are being formulated?

3) what functions are being used for the animations?

3) what is intended to be shown by these animations?

 

[zephir]

1) were did you get those animations?
2) what theories (names) are being formulated?
3) what functions are being used for the animations?
4) what is intended to be shown by these animations?

1) Created by mine, indeed.
2) The Ultimate model of false vacuum phase transition (UMFCPT) - if u need a dedicated name for every animation on the web
3) Computer generated animations
4) The Guth-Linde's concept of false vacuum first order phase transition. You apparently never heard about it, but such ignorance is not my problem.

When you'll met with some unknown word or phrase, use Goggle at first, just after then put the questions - be autocephalous. This is good advice for life.

 

[zephir]

So, back to business. We have a model of Universe creation by brane collisions and the resulting black hole structure of Universe. We know, every Universe CAN be considered as a black hole sitting inside of another Universe. Propose the physically viable expyrotic cosmology and its testable predictions from these prerequisites. And no, no math is necessary to develop such model - just some imagination and the ability to think independently. You can consider this as a creativity training.

I'll not teach you my theories - you should learn to derive them for yourself.
"Give a man a fish and he'll eat for a day. Teach a man to fish and he'll eat forever."

 

[nanode]

This is an interesting discussion, pretty heavy concepts being tossed about. The way I see it the presence of a black hole will have an effect on space time relative to its gravity. One observing a black hole may witness someone taking billions of years to cross into the event horizon, while one taking the journey to the event horizon may only observe a few minutes of time passing by. It could be that the infinite density of the singularity in the center of the black hole eventually slows time so much that one can never definitely measure the time to reach the event horizon, space-time simply stops flowing. I imagine this event could satisfy conditions to create a reversal in space-time. So if you could pass through the event horizon and enter the black hole space and time may stop, and possibly flow backwards though an exiting "white hole". So there you have it, traveling back in time.