A Dirt Clod census of the Cosmos All mass dimples up the rubber sheet of spacetime. (Translation: all mass has gravity) The bigger the dimple, the more other little dimples roll into it. As dimples get bigger and bigger, or deeper and deeper, the other dimples roll into it faster and faster. It is axiomatic that all dimples roll downhill. Our own galaxy and along with at least 48 other visible galaxies, all known collectively as the 'local group', are all rolling into a pretty good sized dimple and picking up speed. That dimple is called by the astronomer's on our planet "the great attractor". Astronomer's on the other planets use a different name for it. The name, Ohshitthereitis! is used on the Allischit planet in the Andromeda galaxy. In our galaxy but in a different solar system they use the word, 'Fuckwouldntyouknowit' Most of the strange galactic lifeforms are of course, dismayed at the reality of the Great Attractor, particularly in Pasadena. An unknown number of other unseen galaxies in their own little dimples from the other side of the great dimple, for example, are rolling into the same big great dimple as well. It is just that we can't see them 'cause they are on the other side of the mountain. So let's intuitively examine the length and breath of the cosmos for all the dimples of dust and dirt and keep a tally sheet of what lies where, and when, and how. Any selected section of the cosmos appears to contain a lot of cosmotic dimples of 'dirt' in all its forms.
A quick history So slowly over the eons, and simultaneously over the entire cosmos, the little dirt specks were spiritually and lovingly attracted to one another very slowly and formed little tiny balls of loosely held together dirt, each rolling into the other's dimple very slowly at first with their beginning in time. Now all the specks of dirt were not of the same kind. Some were made of iron, some were made of iron oxide, some were made of silicon, some were carbon, some were water, and so on and etc., The specks of dirt wasit depended upon what was there and what unmentioned activity happened before earier in time when and where the very tiny clods were formed during ancient blasts. All simultaneously forming cute little dimples in warped spacetime. All sorts of elemental dirt clods made from everything under the sun came rolling in to the accretion dimples. Slowly, this moving mass of tiny specks, sweeping up the stuff in their paths, accreted enough material to get to be bb sized, then marble sized, then golf ball sized, then hardball baseball sized, then softball baseball sized, then basketball sized, then medicine ball sized, then... well you get the idea. But since the "sortof" big bang had happened many times before, there were in the cosmos at any time in the past, all sorts of sizes of accretions. In short, the black holes have always been with us. Unseen, invisible, and if visible at all, then only when it is way too late for the hapless souls pelagicly floating on a tiny sphere of life close to its bun warmer. The tiny dimples kept accreting more mass. Soon over the entire cosmos there were little dimples of all sizes, mostly turning spherical as the mass increased and even the cubic planets succumbed finally to the dark forces of gravity and were crushed into a compliant form as the accretion process continued. Soon there were a gazillion singular black holes that ruled the cosmos that didn't appear. The biggest one discovered to date is estimated to be slightly bigger than our own sun. 50,000,000,000,000,000 times as big as our sun, joe is told. That reads 50 quadrillion. That is a BIG dimple. Sort of the big dimple on campus. But still, according to the Universe+ hypothesis, still a little guy when compared to the big muscles on the 'big bang' bruisers. By the way, the black hole inside our own galaxy, under the Universe+ hypothesis, is just a little squirt, sort of just big enough to have formed a somewhat standard galaxy in the first place from its original closing binary black hole distribution. let's see where was i...? But consider, after the 3 billion years, when all the 48 local group galaxies have been accreted into the great attractor, including the unknown number of those on the other side that we can't see, guessimates of the 'great attractor's mass' will have to be bigger than a mere 50 quadrillion solar masses. Things just a keep on a growin'. The accretion process continued and continues to this day thruout the cosmos, forming all sorts and sizes of dimples in the spacetime warpage of the universes big rubber sheet. Most of the main men i suspect are totally out of the range so far of our detection apparatus. Photons don't do well around them... If we are lucky, or unlucky, as the case may be, we might just actually see the light show from yet another bang or two from afar as its lightshow arrrives from same afar, putting along at c velocity. The hot stuff from the bang will get here a tad earlier than the visible stuff, due to its increased energy, which gives it a straighter and therefore shorter line dispersion track to the great important planet earth in our great home galaxy, "Milky".
A modest aside By the way, you may have noticed that our galaxy doesn't have a name. Andromeda has a name. Sombrero has a name. the 'Black Eye' or 'Evil Eye' galaxy has a name. So i took on the responsibility of naming our own galaxy. Our galaxy is now named "Milky". Or if you don't like that name, how about "Milkshake"? or "Au Lait"? or "Vanilla"? or "Dizzy"? or "WhiteBar"? or "Starbucks"? or "TitaniumOxide"? Don't like any of those? Okay, we'll vote on it. All six billion of us will cast our ballots. Tabulation and counting should take a few days. End of aside
But to continue... Some dimples got very big, very fast, and others just puttered along and fell or rolled into the bigger dimples of those next to them. So what does all this continuous growing spacetime dimpling in the cosmos imply? Well for one: There are a humongous number of solitary dark masses whose size ranges from pea to planet and beyond. They are all out there orbiting nothing, dark and waiting for goofuses to come near and unknowingly start down their slopes. Starlight When a mass reaches the proper size to generate the necessary internal pressures and temperatures, it spontaneously commences the fusion process if it has got the right stuff. Most have, is my guess, but i suppose that a number of experts would suggest that a lot don't. They just stay dark and growing, collapsing occasionally, as mass demands. So, somewhere out there, there must be: 1) Solitary suns with no planets. 2) Binary and higher sun systems with no planets. 3) Suns with a ton of planets and every numeric variation in the sandbox of the cosmos you can imagine. 4) an uncountable number of planets with no suns. 5) a gazillion tiny black holes of solar mass in excess of the minimum amount required for an escape velocity of c which may be, oh say... 502 solar masses. (but read other comments on the subject. Mass is tricky.) It is of course, axiomatic that in the Cosmos: "All things are, as they only can be." According to Joseph_Sixpack's Universe+ theory, these dimpling processes did not all start up at the same time as there is assumed to be, in existence at any time, a very hugh number of super-hyper massive black hole objects in the cosmos, all in their own space of course, far, far, apart. Joe does NOT maintain that all things in existence started up all at once within a hot singularity. But occasionally, the big fellows started to roll downhill into one another's dimple. When that happens, the spaceshit really hits the fan hard. Unimaginable mass accelerating to unimaginable velocities leave behind huge centrifugally dispersed mass items of all types. Some of it lights up, some of it doesn't. Dimpling is an evergoing, ongoing, eternal process. And occasionally, undimpling. But undimpling is another chapter related to novas and supernovas and other things that go flash in the night.. Computer models of the dimpling process (particle accretion) can be made. And probably, already have been made. Sir Isaac Newton discussed the gravity (accretion) subject a few years ago. Let's see, what would a very rough probable graph look like?
note: the smaller the particle's size, the higher the
population number. As the size of the object approaches
unimaginable solar mass values, the population number of
that object decreases relative to the number of the tinier
objects.
Of course, the final talley of objects is unknown as the
size, if size is even relevant in the cosmos. So the chart
looks like one half of a hyperbolic something...
As you can see, there are a lot of very little guys and not
so many big guys. Like buttermilk, things continue to clod
up and leave blanks.
So again, as you can see, speeding along in a very huge
nonferrocement (non-magnetic stainless) spacamen ship would
be somewhat hazardous while driving through any cosmodic
parking lot. But you need something like that to fend off
the countless wacks and hopefully you don't get a big one..
To avoid picking up lots of dents from all the hard to see
and detect round fender wackers out there, you would have to
design something that could parry the goblins from punching
through your toy spacetruck, as well as all navigation
stuff, to keep the little bozo ship from getting knocked off
course.
I respectfully recommend we stay on earth and let the sun do
the driving for us and just suffer the slings and arrows of
outrageous asteroids or whatever else hits the fan during
our stay here on mother earth and then enjoy termination in
3 billion years or less, as 'Milky' and all our neighbors,
happily get accreted into the that big dimple on campus, the
'great attractor'. In all probability, we won't have the
sense to last near that long anyway. But if you do, Watch
and listen for the belch.
Who says cosmology is fun? sigh...