One question I have about the conclusions of the article is that they say the narrow end of the funnel is infinite. This seems impossible considering that the big bang occured at a particular time. If this geometry (the one I predicted) withstands scrutiny and somehow my dynamics is considered I would have a few suggestions.
If we are falling into this tunnel and the system is collapsing, the funnel is finite. If the speed of light is the speed limit then eventually this could be measured. However, I predicted that eventually all mass would catch up. If the matter furthest in the Vortex reached the speed of light it would be slowed down by the gravity following it, then speed up to the speed limit, slow down, etc. This would occur until all of the matter eventually caught up and then it could fall forever at the speed of light or at whatever the max speed limit is, if indeed one exists. Or perhaps it would just stop, this is a very difficult image to conceptualize.
I know I am jumping the gun here, but this is something I considered a while back while thinking about the proton and if mass density has the ability to close up a vortex into a "stable" sphere with gravity being equal in all directions. Just interested in any comments any of you may have.
As for the Big Bang vs. my own Big Split.....is not a model that can predict the geometry of a system superior to one that cannot. I still do not dismiss the MM, because as Tom has pointed out so many times our Universe may be just one such system among an infinite number of such systems in both quantity and scale.
Topic Author
