Bang, scattering these like particles at unimaginable speed evenly throughout the Universe (gravitons did not exist before the Big Bang).
On a similar note, some try to explain the uniformity of the Universe's temperature and physical makeup by the cosmic inflation theory. They believe that all of the Universe was held in such close proximity at the beginning and suddenly was thrust outward and away from its very origin by 'unknown forces', far exceeding the speed of light at such a speed nothing had a chance to cool. This is the only plausible way scientist can explain how bodies on opposite sides of the visible universe can be identical in physical temperature, makeup, elements and at the same time be so far removed from each other.
This continuity throughout the Universe has also been referred to as the horizon problem, that is to say again, how is it possible for all the same elements and temperatures to be in all areas of the Universe at such great distances? Again, the only way all of the same properties and particles could be uniform throughout the Universe is if they were all together at some point in time, but how did they get to where they are now in a mere fourteen billion years without vastly exceeding the speed of light?
Dark energy is not the evil in the Universe that scientist think it is, without dark energy there would only be a very small Universe after the Big Bang. Dark energy was the property (force) which allowed the Universe to expand to what it is today, an evolving and growing Universe. As dark matter relaxed the envelope surrounding the Universe, dark energy was allowed to push the masses out in an ever expanding bubble. Dark Energy is not anti-gravity, but rather a force which pushes against objects of mass. Einstein was partially correct when he suggested there was not gravity (gravitons), but rather that the fabric of space is pushing against objects of mass in the cosmos, he did not understand there were two forces that he could not comprehend. Initially the expansion of the Universe was at a very high rate, thus allowing all like properties to be consistent throughout the Universe.
Cosmologist base the age of the Universe on what they calculate the rate of expansion to be. They believe by going backward at the same rate of speed (as the current expansion), they can go to the very beginning of time, thus setting the age of the Universe somewhere between thirteen point seven and fifteen billion years (their best guess). Cosmologist believe at the very beginning, all this matter had to drastically exceed the speed of light in order to end up where it is now, but that defies all that they understand about physics, that nothing in the Universe can exceed the speed of light. Again, their only explanation is that the rules of physics were different or did not exist at the beginning of time (their thought is; if you can't explain it change the rules, truth of the matter is; scientist are way off on the actual age of the Universe!).
The real question is, do scientist manipulate mathematical formulas to justify their hypotheses, or are their hypotheses based on the mathematical formulas? An example of this is the math concerning the formation and makeup of the Universe, IE adding different dimensions to justify the M Theory.
Light can circle the Earth seven and one half times in one second, it takes about eight and one half minutes for light from the Sun to reach the Earth (about 93 million miles). The Diffuse nebulae in the Milky Way Galaxy is about two and a half light years across., that is over fifteen trillion miles across, and the Diffuse nebulae is only a very small part of our Galaxy.
Again the question is, how can such distant galaxies have the same inherent qualities and physical makeup as those on opposite sides of the known Universe? The answer cosmologist are looking for will not be found until they understand the true formation and composition of the Universe.
Some used to disavow the possibility of the Big Bang because they believed there should be remnants of the flash of light created by the Big Bang, what is called the 'primordial light', after all, we see the flashes of light when a star goes supernovae from billions of light years away.
As the Universe expanded at a tremendous speed, the primordial light from the Big Bang has been elongated across the Universe over time and distance to the point of becoming just a radio wave, similar to an ever increasing ripple from a stone thrown into a pond. As the ripples move outward from their origin they become further and further apart and slowly lose their magnitude.
The remnants of the primordial light was first discovered by Bell laboratories scientist by accident, at first they could not explain the 'static' they were receiving on their radio telescope, they finally hit upon the fact that what they had interpreted as static, was in actuality the remnants of the Big Bang, the primordial light that is present throughout all the Universe. Any average person on this planet can also see and hear the remnants of the Big Bang, the primordial light is some of the fuzzy static you see and hear on your television set between broadcast signals.
The nucleus of a solar system is its star, simply put, most stars consist primarily of the gas hydrogen, gravitons, photons, electromagnetic force and high and low intensity radiation, thus enabling the nuclear fusion reaction. In the process of the hydrogen atoms fusing together they create a new more dense elemental atom consisting of four hydrogen nuclei, IE the atom helium. It is interesting to note that the combining of single volatile elements such as oxygen (catalyst for fire) and hydrogen (very explosive) creates a non explosive element to combat fire, water! This same diffuseness of the elements is repeated throughout the elementary table, with volatile elements combining to create non volatile elements and vice versa.
The electrons of a solar system are the planets and moons that orbit the nucleus. As are atoms, each solar system may be comprised of different numbers of the three primary elements; one or more stars, planets and moons. In the example of combining different atoms to create elements of a very different nature, IE. hydrogen and oxygen to form water, the mixing of different 'solar atoms' will also create a galaxy of a different nature in the Universe. This is the primary reason not all galaxies have Earth like planets, or very few indeed.
No two galaxies are exactly alike, as are Human Entities, each is unique in the Universe and each are a vital part of the Universe.
Some solar systems actually have more than one star, the dual solar systems are called binary star systems and would be completely foreign to any thing you know, based on our own solar system. Any planets in this type of solar system have a very erratic trip around their stars as they are pulled from the gravitational influence of one star to the other in an exaggerated eccentric orbit. Extreme surface temperature variations (in most cases) and excessive amounts of radiation negate life as we know it in this type of solar system.
The swirling masses of gas, dust and pure energy in a galaxy are referred to as nebulae (28), these are actually a Salesian (29) of the Eternals. This never ending cycle of dying stars and creation of new stars and planets ensures the continuing life of the Universe. With the use of the Hubble telescope, scientist and astronomers have been able to look deep into several nebulae in our own galaxy and actually have seen the birth of new stars.
In our own Milky Way Galaxy we have what is called a diffuse nebulae, out of this nebulae new stars are created, ensuring the continuation of our Galaxy, as a matter of fact there are a minimum of twenty new stars born in the diffuse nebulae of the Milky Way Galaxy every year. Other than the diffuse nebulae, one of the most popularized by pictures released from NASA (observed by the Hubble telescope) is the horse-head nebulae.
There are many different types of stars in the Universe, some are colossal while others are relatively small or average such as our Sun. All of these stars will eventually run their life cycle and be reclaimed by the Universe. Generally speaking, a star such as our Sun will exist for about ten billion years. But the giant stars, some many thousands of times the size of the Sun, will live out their lives in a matter of a few thousand years. This is a good example of where bigger is not necessarily better, although the extremely large stars create more diverse elements that are essential to the h
ealth and continuance of the Universe.
Our Sun is only approximately one thousandth the size of a super massive star. Most stars of note to astronomers of this planet are the ones in their dying phase, such as Betelgeuse. Other spectacular events that we can see is a supernovae, or the observance of a pulsar. We are able to observe these spectacular events through telescopes and sometimes with the naked eye. As with black holes, these spectacular events raise fear in the hearts of observers, even though this is just a part of what is natural in the Universe and essential for the continued health and well being of the Universe.
Is the Universe, we are a part of and live in, the only Entity in the vastness of the bulk or are there other universes that have been formed in a similar fashion? Is it possible there is another (or many) universe in the vast nothingness?
It is a common belief by cosmologist and scientist alike that there are other universes besides our own. Some believe that our Universe may be similar to the billions of galaxies in our own Universe, in that the Universe is in its self a part of something much larger. (???)
The belief in other universes is