Limits to Mass and Gravity?

Butterfly or Bug Nebula

Posted on September 26,2010

Do not consider this piece to be a rewrite of my original article on ‘Creating the Universe’ but rather as a refinement to the ideas proposed in that article.

Gravity: Be clear about gravity. Combining mass also combines the gravity associated with those masses. Larger masses mean stronger gravitational forces. However, gravity has its opposite -- energy, and maybe even limits! Read on!

Origin of Energy and Matter: I will not even speculate on where matter and energy came from. Energy and matter are like Siamese twins, one cannot exist without the other. Maybe there was a beginning, or in the Biblical sense, it just always was and always will be. Either way, the origin of matter and energy is not important for this writing.

The Big Bang: At one time, I was able to accept the idea of a single ‘Big Bang’. It seemed so logical that one could imagine a Singularity forming, expanding, creating the Universe, and then contracting once again into a Singularity. But fast forward to the present, after reading a lot of material, and with the desire for reason, I have modified my thoughts about the ‘Big Bang’. In fact, I no longer think of the Universe as limited. A limited Universe makes no sense at all. A limited Universe implies that there is an edge or frontier out there – the place where matter ends. It occurred to me that this scenario was the created product of our limited observational ability. It is hard to grasp the undetectable. But with every increase in our observational abilities, we find more galaxies and stars at far greater distances than thought possible. And each discovery of distant galaxies makes the Universe older – if we want to subscribe to the ‘Big Bang’ theory.

Computer Modeling: Computer models are useful tools but they have a failing fault – they are goal oriented. I have personally done a lot of computer modeling and can assure you that the model’s result is never more than a tweak away. In my case, the models were stock prediction. The goal of the models was always to predict stock behavior for a particular stock or at least demonstrate the stock’s future trends. Assigning the value to the variables such as trading volume, percentage of fund ownership, date, time of year, and market trend was always a guess. But whatever value assigned to a particular variable, the behavior of a stock’s performance changed along with the tweaking. So you build a model for stocks that agrees with its performance at the present, with the goal and hope of getting a prediction about its future. The result – I’m not rich.

So scientists build computer models to comport with their ideas. Scientists construct their models of the Universe using current understandings about space. If the scientist believes in the ‘Big Bang’ and wants to model the expansion of the known universe back to the singularity, then the model will yield corresponding results that appear to confirm that there was a singularity. That was the assumption that the scientist used to build his model. The model had the goal of tracing space expansion back through time as if the ‘Big Bang’ was fact.

This is to make you aware of and a bit skeptical of computer models. Some are very good, while others make broad assumptions that only appear to fit the model.

Stars: We already know about star formation, but can we elevate star formation to the another level? There are far too many heavy elements to explain using the hydrogen based star unless we stretch our imagination a bit. As you know, stars come in a variety of sizes and burn at different intensities. If hydrogen collection were the sole source for starting the fusion process, all stars would be the same design and size. But we know that the cosmos contains of a lot of different elements. The very large stars utilize the heavier elements created from previous stars.

Reason would dictate that hydrogen based stars would ignite at about the same mass each and every time. There is no reason to believe that any hydrogen-based star would be different. That reality kept tugging at my sense of logic and eventually opened the door to a new possibility.

The size of a star depends upon the elements that make it up. Larger elements require much higher pressures and temperatures for the fusion process. Temperature and pressure depends upon the size of the accumulated mass. A body would have to reach the temperature/pressure threshold demanded by its elemental makeup before the body could ignite or be able to use those heavier elements as fuel. In other words, in star formation, gravity brings the elements together regardless of which elements they are. The elements collectively dictate the terms of fusion. Heavier elements require higher extremes of pressure and temperature to be used for fuel, hence the need for size increase.

Normal Star Formation: A gravity field starts small with the coalescing of elemental matter. Gravity increases as more matter accumulates, and like a snowball rolling down a hill, the mass gets ever larger. Given enough time with the presumption that enough material is present to add to the mass. The mass grows until its internal pressure and temperature becomes great enough to start the fusion process. The size of the star created will depend upon the element makeup of the mass.

Our star, now an atomic furnace, shines brightly for a length of time until it expends its fuel and gravity once again triumphs over energy. The death throes of the star take place when the star runs low of fusible matter. The heavier elements created by the fusion process are beyond the star’s pressure/temperature threshold to become more fuel for the fusion process. Without sufficient energy, the star collapses. The energy released by a star in its death throws is beyond imagination – suffice it to say star collapse releases a lot of energy. All but the core is cast off in a spectacular explosion.

Observable Phenomena: The debris cast off from the dying star form the nebulae we see with our telescopes. The nebula forms the exploding star’s blast pattern. We name those nebulae according to their shape – the Crab Nebula, the Horse-head Nebula, and the Bug Nebula are all examples of names given to nebulas we have observed. The material blasted away from the core makes itself available once again to star creation.

The left over core is genuinely interesting. Larger stars will leave a free neutron core. A free neutron core busies itself decaying. Simplistically speaking, the free neutron decays by releasing electrons and changing into protons. Energetic streams of charged particle emissions of neutron stars are visible on the Hubble Images website.

Reverse Fusion: The great thing about a neutron star is that its process releases atomic particles back into the cosmos where they can once again bond together and create hydrogen. It is a cycle of sorts for hydrogen.

The Process: There is no attempt to throw my entire first article under the bus. There are elements of that article that are redeemable. One of the ideas expressed in that article was that if gravity was so great, that the resulting mass would lose all atomic identity. I still believe that to be true. Instead of a mass of iron or calcium or other heavy elements, our super-mass would consist of only elemental particles and no longer structured atomic elements.

The Super Mass: So what happens when mass keeps building in size? A fair question to which I can only make a guess. Natural limits exist for everything. It may be that fusion can only take place when the atomic elements are intact. If fusion ignition has occurred, and the mass of the object continues to grow, eventually the increase in gravity would snuff out the ignition. Enough gravity would crush the atoms. There would be no fusion because there would no longer be elemental atoms to fuse. This model may represent the mass in the center of our Milky Way Galaxy.

Limits may also exist to govern the size of mass. If a mass reaches a given value, that object emits the excess in particle streams and energetic waves. Limits make sense; the speed of light has a limit, so why wouldn’t total mass and gravity have a limit? And what about temperature? We accept the idea of absolute zero but no thought as to the other extreme. Nothing is infinite, the excitation of atoms or molecules is probably limited because of the limitations of the speed of light. A ball of free neutrons may be the final step for crushed atoms.

Limitations for Gravity: Does gravity have a limitation? Even if you are an ardent disciple of the ‘Big Bang’ you will have to acknowledge that the Singularity represents the maximum statement possible for gravity, but gravity could not maintain the total mass of the Universe. That idea alone answers the question if mass is limited or not. The proposal I have presented here localizes the phenomenon of mass limitation and raises the question as to whether or not the Universe may be constantly renewing itself via the free neutron star.

Further Study: Some of this article is only deductive reasoning on my part, but all of it based upon factual information. If you have an interest in the Cosmos, there is a lot of both lay and technical information on the Web. A lot of the information is speculative like this one - and a lot of it broken down into theories with associated math proofs. Whatever your level, there are good articles that will stimulate your curiosity and imagination. Happy reading.

Addendum: There have been several questions and passionate comments concerning a self-limiting mass. I thought that I had enough information about the mechanism of a self-limiting mass in the article, but your comments indicate that my reasoning for the mechanism was too vague or non-existent.

The question is how does the size of a mass limit itself? Gravity not only coalesces mass but also energy. The process is evident in the stars. Once the energetic engine of fusion comes to a halt, gravity is free to exert its will on the remainder of the star. The same is true when mass coalesces. The energy contained in the matter accumulated by gravity, is also being concentrated. Whenever the mass reaches the point that energy is able to overcome the force of gravity, the collected energy will be able to maintain the mass in state of equilibrium by discharging particles into the cosmos. Neither gravity nor energy can overcome the other.

Gravity cannot increase without adding mass and mass cannot increase without concentrating more energy. It is a cycle whether we are talking about a collapsed star or an out of control mass that reaches the point where energy concentration becomes equal to the mass. The outcome is the same – particle redistribution and rebirth of the elements. Always and infinity are terms that can be attached to the cosmos. An unlimited Cosmos!

"A good listener is not only popular everywhere, but after a while he gets to know something."
- Wilson Mizner

Cheers,
-Robert-

-Privacy Policy-

Robfg.Com does not share any personal information about its readers. Email addresses, or other personal information is strictly confidential.

Unique Visitors