The Dark Shell (8) Oscillations

Given the size of the dark shell, its oscillations could not be driven by gravitational forces. If the dark shell is presumed to be merely a simple extension, that is an extreme expansion, of the original of an ultimate black hole, then the exterior boundary conditions of the dark shell should arguably be similar to those of the ultimate black hole from which it evolved. If the original expansion of dark matter within the ultimate black hole results in a somewhat steady state which roughly maintains the volume of the dark shell then a number of interesting questions arise.

Why would the dark shell be rather stable, that is, why would it not frequently burst like a balloon. If it does collapse and rebuild what are the boundary conditions of the collapse? Is it possible to consider the entire dark shell to be just an enlarged ultimate black hole, that is, a minor variation of an unexpanded ultimate black hole? One can argue that the dark shell represents an extremely small fraction of the mass/energy of the original ultimate black hole. It is probably a transient phenomena, but the oscillations may be due to the forces which shape or which give rise to geometry of a dark shell and/or to those which dominate the exterior of an ultimate black hole.

If the concentration of energy in a big bang at its densest (smallest volume) is taken as a standard, then what is the density of an ultimate black hole? If the associated dark matter in a big bang is folded, is the density of dark matter in an ultimate black hole equally dense? Are there different degrees of density in the folded dark matter?

Although it is convenient to think of dark matter as being in some way like regular matter or anti-matter in that it is evidenced by gravitational interaction with regular matter, perhaps it is improper to make such an assumption. Perhaps a completely different category of substance/energy is a better way to view dark matter. Perhaps this new category is as basic as energy or matter (or anti-matter). What should this new category be called? It is suggested that it be called tatami (after the Japanese mats). Then the basic relationships between tatami and energy and matter (and anti-matter) would need to be found.

Currently, the existence of cosmic rays (high energy particles) remains unexplained. Today, the most powerful particle accelerators can only generate a particle with a very small percentage of the energy of a cosmic ray. It is suggested that cosmic rays are a product of a back scatter effect arising from the collapse of a triple point singularity (a sink) when a big bang occurs. Arguably, the random distribution of cosmic rays seems to indicate (1) a very thorough mixing process, (2) a very long time span, (3) very great distances and (4) the existence of an overall containing structure (which is a basic characteristic of a dark shell).

It should not be a surprise that an event as dynamic as a big bang should cause the sink which accumulated such a great amount of energy to echo back in some manner. Therefore the concurrent issuance of a great pulse of energy back through the sink resulting in a back scattering of cosmic rays does not seem to be completely unreasonable. This result also would strongly imply that the situs of the singularity and the situs of the big bang are spatially very remote from each other.

It has been suggested that the very highest energy cosmic rays are produced by the accretion disks of super massive black holes at the centers of galaxies. This may be correct.

The visible universe is relatively flat. Various models have been proposed to explain why this is the case. It is generally accepted that dark matter surrounds galaxies and that this explains why they exhibit stable high rotation rates. This is strong indirect evidence of the existence of the associated dark matter. Further it has been estimated that most of the universe is comprised of dark matter with the visible (baryonic) matter constituting less than 10% of the total. This situation raises an interesting question. Perhaps the true shape of our universe is somewhat spherical and that the flat (visible) baryonic portion is just an artifact of the creation process.

Assume that a big bang is derived from a sink which collects dark matter and/or energy along with such baryonic matter as may enter the sink (as described earlier in this log). If in fact, the dark matter is folded and the baryonic matter is converted to energy on entry, then one issue to consider is how this combination is released in a big bang. The assumption made earlier is that the dark matter passes through the sink and survives the big bang unchanged (except for being folded on entry).

There is problem here -- (like in accounting) -- is it first in, first out or first in, last out (for the dark matter)? Does it make a difference? Probably not. An equally likely situation would be "everything out at once". The current two step description for the initial stages of the expansion is rather complicated and is probably incorrect. Let suppose that the (baryonic matter/energy) is enfolded with the folded dark matter -- this is a simple and probably more accurate model.

There also is the issue of the characteristics of the sink at the moment of its final instability (at the moment of transition). The assumption has been made (earlier in this log) that time on the input side is very long (billions or trillions of years) and that on the other side, time is short (or zero). What happens to time at/during the transition? Let us suppose that the sink is destroyed in the process (otherwise, we would have a lot of old ineffectual sinks floating around).

This issue relates directly to the spatial relationship between the sink and the situs of the big bang. It is probably incorrect (but easier to imagine) that there is no spatial relationship that can be defined or determined for this (see earlier speculations in this log). In passing, it should be noted that, in effect, the dark shell has constant entropy as the sink/collection/big bang sequence basically reorders everything.

What type of transition would create a flat (baryonic) universe? Let's look at the "everything out at once" situation. It would seem that the dominate item would be the still-folded dark matter/energy and that the (baryonic) energy is just an extra, minor factor. Perhaps the released (baryonic) energy is constrained to be in the form of a central "edge" accretion mechanism. In such case, a disk is formed (like a flat crack in a rock) which grows on the outer edge (like some crystals or like a snow flake) -- between two hemispheres of folded dark matter/energy.

Suppose that a sink is not destroyed by the instability which gives rise to a big bang. Suppose that a given sink produces a series of big bangs. The gradual accumulation of sinks would provide a straight forward (very long term) mechanism for the destruction of a dark shell. In such case, are the sinks also destroyed?

It has been suggested in this log that multiple dark shells may exist, that they may be sticky (touching each other) and that a sink in one feeds or causes a big bang in another dark shell. Perhaps there might be another mechanism -- suppose that the region excluded by dark shells provides a haven for folded dark matter and for energy derived from baryonic matter which enters a sink. Then some means is needed for injecting enough matter/energy to form a universe into a dark shell. Perhaps a local excess in the region might be enough -- this is a tough issue.

A big bang might occur within an ultimate black hole (or of a remnant of one). What would be the result? The answer is nothing. Why? Arguably, any process which goes from A to B can be redone to provide a steady state of any condition at A or B or in between. This is easy to say. Let us examine the very earliest moment of a big bang -- an entire universe of matter/energy is crammed into a vanishingly small point. This is our point A. It would seem that the entire ultimate black hole (or a remnant of one) has this density -- therefore the addition of this amount of matter/energy at some point within it would have little significance.

Returning to the issue of a flat universe, it may be the case that an enclosing somewhat spherical dark matter/energy volume sandwiches the flat universe in the middle but that it also extends beyond the fringes of the universe. Then instead of a sandwich it is a fat pouch. Also, it may not cover all of the fringe.

What happens if two big bangs occur close to each other? It sounds messy. The issue here is what constitutes "close". In any case, they are expanding into each other and the over lapped region has twice the normal density (assuming that both occur at the same time). What if one is young and one is much older? Very unclear result here. Suppose that a series of these occur in sequence, each close to each other -- a rapid fire input (every few billion years). The youngest one would be normal with outer shells of increasingly older structures.

Within a dark shell, is there any pattern to the distribution of universes? Asked in another way, does the existence of a universe make it less likely that another one will be created in a nearby region? Are there some regions which are saturated with universes -- or perhaps dense with them and overlapping?

For an oscillating dark shell to sweep up all of the remnants of a universe, the "reach" of a dark shell has to be large enough to get it all. Does it always get it all? Are there leftovers? Are there regions which contain lots of leftovers? What are the conditions just at the time (and region) of a reversal of the oscillation (the surface finally stops and then starts on its return journey). We are back to surface condition issues here.

The initial hemispheres of dark matter/energy bounding the top and bottom of the primordial flat universe probably have been largely dissipated in the form of expanding dark energy. There may be some small residual remnant on each side. These would be in the form of a thin cap or crust and might be slightly thicker in the center.