What if the Big Bang wasn't the beginning? New research suggests it may have taken place inside a black hole
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission.
The Big Bang is often described as the explosive birth of the universe — a singular moment when space, time and matter sprang into existence. But what if this was not the beginning at all? What if our universe emerged from something else — something more familiar and radical at the same time?
In a new paper, published in Physical Review D, my colleagues and I propose a striking alternative. Our calculations suggest the Big Bang was not the start of everything, but rather the outcome of a gravitational crunch or collapse that formed a very massive black hole — followed by a bounce inside it.
This idea, which we call the black hole universe, offers a radically different view of cosmic origins, yet it is grounded entirely in known physics and observations.
Today's standard cosmological model, based on the Big Bang and cosmic inflation (the idea that the early universe rapidly blew up in size), has been remarkably successful in explaining the structure and evolution of the universe. But it comes at a price: it leaves some of the most fundamental questions unanswered.
For one, the Big Bang model begins with a singularity — a point of infinite density where the laws of physics break down. This is not just a technical glitch; it's a deep theoretical problem that suggests we don't really understand the beginning at all.
To explain the universe's large-scale structure, physicists introduced a brief phase of rapid expansion into the early universe called cosmic inflation, powered by an unknown field with strange properties. Later, to explain the accelerating expansion observed today, they added another "mysterious" component: dark energy.
Related: 5 fascinating facts about the Big Bang, the theory that defines the history of the universe
In short, the standard model of cosmology works well — but only by introducing new ingredients we have never observed directly. Meanwhile, the most basic questions remain open: where did everything come from? Why did it begin this way? And why is the universe so flat, smooth, and large?
Our new model tackles these questions from a different angle — by looking inward instead of outward. Instead of starting with an expanding universe and trying to trace back how it began, we consider what happens when an overly dense collection of matter collapses under gravity.
This is a familiar process: stars collapse into black holes, which are among the most well-understood objects in physics. But what happens inside a black hole, beyond the event horizon from which nothing can escape, remains a mystery.
In 1965, the British physicist Roger Penrose proved that under very general conditions, gravitational collapse must lead to a singularity. This result, extended by the late British physicist Stephen Hawking and others, underpins the idea that singularities — like the one at the Big Bang — are unavoidable.
The idea helped win Penrose a share of the 2020 Nobel prize in physics and inspired Hawking's global bestseller A Brief History of Time: From the Big Bang to Black Holes. But there's a caveat. These "singularity theorems" rely on "classical physics" which describes ordinary macroscopic objects. If we include the effects of quantum mechanics, which rules the tiny microcosmos of atoms and particles, as we must at extreme densities, the story may change.
In our new paper, we show that gravitational collapse does not have to end in a singularity. We find an exact analytical solution — a mathematical result with no approximations. Our maths show that as we approach the potential singularity, the size of the universe changes as a (hyperbolic) function of cosmic time.
This simple mathematical solution describes how a collapsing cloud of matter can reach a high-density state and then bounce, rebounding outward into a new expanding phase.
But how come Penrose's theorems forbid out such outcomes? It's all down to a rule called the quantum exclusion principle, which states that no two identical particles known as fermions can occupy the same quantum state (such as angular momentum, or "spin").
And we show that this rule prevents the particles in the collapsing matter from being squeezed indefinitely. As a result, the collapse halts and reverses. The bounce is not only possible — it's inevitable under the right conditions.
Crucially, this bounce occurs entirely within the framework of general relativity, which applies on large scales such as stars and galaxies, combined with the basic principles of quantum mechanics — no exotic fields, extra dimensions or speculative physics required.
What emerges on the other side of the bounce is a universe remarkably like our own. Even more surprisingly, the rebound naturally produces the two separate phases of accelerated expansion — inflation and dark energy — driven not by a hypothetical fields but by the physics of the bounce itself.
One of the strengths of this model is that it makes testable predictions. It predicts a small but non-zero amount of positive spatial curvature — meaning the universe is not exactly flat, but slightly curved, like the surface of the Earth.
This is simply a relic of the initial small over-density that triggered the collapse. If future observations, such as the ongoing Euclid mission, confirm a small positive curvature, it would be a strong hint that our universe did indeed emerge from such a bounce. It also makes predictions about the current universe's rate of expansion, something that has already been verified.
This model does more than fix technical problems with standard cosmology. It could also shed new light on other deep mysteries in our understanding of the early universe — such as the origin of supermassive black holes, the nature of dark matter, or the hierarchical formation and evolution of galaxies.
These questions will be explored by future space missions such as Arrakihs, which will study diffuse features such as stellar halos (a spherical structure of stars and globular clusters surrounding galaxies) and satellite galaxies (smaller galaxies that orbit larger ones) that are difficult to detect with traditional telescopes from Earth and will help us understand dark matter and galaxy evolution.
These phenomena might also be linked to relic compact objects — such as black holes — that formed during the collapsing phase and survived the bounce.
RELATED STORIES
—When will the universe die?
—Universe may revolve once every 500 billion years — and that could solve a problem that threatened to break cosmology
—Scientists may have finally found where the 'missing half' of the universe's matter is hiding
The black hole universe also offers a new perspective on our place in the cosmos. In this framework, our entire observable universe lies inside the interior of a black hole formed in some larger "parent" universe.
We are not special, no more than Earth was in the geocentric worldview that led Galileo (the astronomer who suggested the Earth revolves around the Sun in the 16th and 17th centuries) to be placed under house arrest.
We are not witnessing the birth of everything from nothing, but rather the continuation of a cosmic cycle — one shaped by gravity, quantum mechanics, and the deep interconnections between them.
This edited article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
17 hours ago
- Yahoo
I Heard Jurassic World Dominion Was Bad, But I Would Watch It Over Any Other Jurassic Sequel
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. SPOILER WARNING: The following article gives away, just about, the entire plot of Jurassic World Dominion. If you have not yet seen the 2022 Jurassic Park movie, act like Owen Grady holding up his hand to magically neutralize a dinosaur, and proceed with caution as you read on. With Jurassic World Rebirth hitting theaters soon, I figured it was about time that I do something I had been reluctant to do: catch up with the full franchise and watch Jurassic World Dominion. Considering the beastly reviews from critics and audiences, I was braving the worst, but, to my surprise, I thought it was far from it. To be clear, I would not call Colin Trevorrow's sequel a good movie. I think it suffers from a pitifully lazy script, sleepy acting, and throwing out the previous film's setup for a dinosaur-ridden dystopia in favor of, echoing Eric Eisenberg's Jurassic World Dominion review, two bland, disparate plotlines that have little to do with, ya know, dinosaurs. However, I do not at all regret watching it and would choose to watch it again over most sequels to Steven Spielberg's 1993 classic, which I realize may come as a shock to many Jurassic fans. Well, allow me to explain… In previous articles of mine, such as my reaction to the recent sci-fi thriller Companion, I have made it clear that I am a staunch technophobe who fears how dangerously technology's advancement could, or already has, affected our society. However, there is one fear of mine that I have been a bit less vocal about in my writing until now: bugs, especially ones of unusual size. So, you might be able to imagine how I felt when the genetically engineered locusts appeared on the screen. Now, I will agree with the widely shared opinion that a Jurassic Park movie focusing its plot on a non-reptilian prehistoric creature is a mistake, but said creatures did manage to get my adrenaline going faster than any of the dinosaurs that appear in Jurassic World Dominion. That being said… Whenever a dinosaur would appear on screen in Dominion, I found it nothing short of impressive. The special effects, boasting the classic blend of practical animatronics with some of the best CGI Hollywood has to offer, were so convincing, I am surprised there was not more praise about that aspect, at least. Aside from their visual effects, I felt that the action sequences involving dinosaurs are genuinely some of the best that the franchise has ever seen. I recall, in particular, being thoroughly riveted by a scene taking place in Malta, when Owen Grady (Chris Pratt) is chased on a motorcycle through the city by Atrociraptors. I had to stop and think to myself, Wow, I am actually having fun with this movie, and it did not stop there. Some have said the extended edition of Jurassic World Dominion is better than the theatrical version, but you can get both on a Blu-ray and 4K UHD set from Amazon for nearly half off the regular price!View Deal The one reason I had to be somewhat optimistic about finally watching Dominion was the one aspect that I had heard positive rumblings about: DeWanda Wise as Kayla Watts. I could not agree more with my colleague Sarah El-Mahmoud that the daredevil pilot is the best character from the Jurassic World trilogy for her bravery and quick wit, and for just being a badass. If there are any downsides to Kayla, I would say that she makes most of the other newer characters (including Mamoudou Athie's Ramsay Cole and even Pratt's Grady) look weaker than I already believed they were, and that she should have been introduced to the franchise earlier. With all due respect to Scarlett Johansson and Mahershala Ali, a part of me wishes that she were the focus of the upcoming 2025 movie, Jurassic World Rebirth, instead. Despite my harsh words about the newer Jurassic characters, I have to admit that I really enjoyed seeing them finally interact with Dr. Alan Grant (Sam Neill), Dr. Ellie Sattler (Laura Dern), and Dr. Ian Malcolm (Jeff Goldblum). In fact, I don't think I was ever amused by the OG heroes' return until that moment, as the parameters of their reunion and the moments the trio shared never felt particularly natural. And don't get me started about the random callbacks to the first film, like Lewis Dodgson (Campbell Scott) somehow possessing the fake Barbasol canister and displaying it in his office. What?! Anyway, I can't say that 'natural' is a word I would use to describe Grant, Sattler, and Malcolm's meeting with Grady, Claire Dearing (Bryce Dallas Howard), and others in the final act either. The events that lead them to each other are far too convenient (like many other aspects of the plot), and much of their dialogue feels egregiously forced. Yet, there was something about seeing them all gathered together and relying on one another to survive against the prehistoric wildlife that left me wishing the movie had dedicated more time to bringing them together. Of course, any Jurassic Park fan knows that the real draw of this franchise is not the meat, but the meat-eaters, and the one who rules them all is the Tyrannosaurus Rex. Any return by that big behemoth in these movies, no matter how convoluted the reasoning may be, is warmly welcomed by me, and its appearance in Dominion was no exception, especially since it was not alone. I actually really dug how the T-Rex was treated as a hero, Godzilla style, in the film's final act, when it teams up with a Therizinosaurus to bring down the Giganotosaurus. Watching the T-Rex throw the Giganotosaurus onto the Therizinosaurus' claws, fatally impaling it, made for a more satisfying final battle than the Indominus Rex showdown in 2015's Jurassic World, if you ask me. I don't see a future in which I ever boot up my Peacock subscription to watch Jurassic World Dominion again, unless I get curious and decide to check out the extended edition, which I hear is an improvement. Yet, I can't say I feel that I wasted my morning watching it the other day, which is something I can't say about most of the follow-ups to the original '90s movie classic, and that calls for a modest roar of applause in my book.
Yahoo
18 hours ago
- Yahoo
Scientists discover rare planet at the edge of the Milky Way using space-time phenomenon predicted by Einstein
When you buy through links on our articles, Future and its syndication partners may earn a commission. Astronomers have used a space-time phenomenon first predicted by Albert Einstein to discover a rare planet hiding at the edge of our galaxy. The exoplanet, dubbed AT2021uey b, is a Jupiter-size gas giant located roughly 3,200 light-years from Earth. Orbiting a small, cool M dwarf star once every 4,170 days, the planet's location is remarkable — it is only the third planet in the entire history of space observation to be discovered so far away from our galaxy's dense center. Yet perhaps more exceptional than the planet's location is the method used to discover it. The effect, known as microlensing, occurs when the light of a host star is magnified by the warping of space-time due to a planet's gravity. The researchers published their findings May 7 in the journal Astronomy & Astrophysics. "This kind of work requires a lot of expertise, patience, and, frankly, a bit of luck," study co-author Marius Maskoliūnas, an astronomer at Vilnius University in Lithuania, said in a statement. "You have to wait for a long time for the source star and the lensing object to align and then check an enormous amount of data. Ninety percent of observed stars pulsate for various other reasons, and only a minority of cases show the microlensing effect." Nearly 6,000 alien worlds beyond our solar system have been discovered since the first exoplanet was detected in 1992. The two most common detection methods, called transmit photometry and radial velocity, detect planets through the dimming of host stars as they pass in front of them, or from the wobble that the planets' gravitational tugs impart upon them. A rarer method, known as microlensing, is derived from Einstein's theory of general relativity and is produced by massive objects as they warp the fabric of the universe, called space-time. Gravity, Einstein discovered, isn't produced by an unseen force but by space-time curving and distorting in the presence of matter and energy. Related: James Webb telescope discovers its first planet — a Saturn-size 'shepherd' still glowing red hot from its formation This curved space, in turn, determines how energy and matter move through it. Even though light travels in a straight line, light traveling through a curved region of space-time also travels in a curve. This means that when a planet passes in front of its host star, its gravity acts as a lens — magnifying the star's light and causing its brightness to spike. "What fascinates me about this method is that it can detect those invisible bodies," Maskoliūnas said, essentially by measuring the bodies' shadows. "Imagine a bird flying past you. You don't see the bird itself and don't know what color it is — only its shadow. But from it, you can, with some level of probability, determine whether it was a sparrow or a swan and at what distance from us. It's an incredibly intriguing process." RELATED STORIES —James Webb telescope zooms in on bizarre 'Einstein ring' caused by bending of the universe —James Webb telescope uncovers 1st-ever 'Einstein zig-zag' hiding in plain sight — and it could help save cosmology —Stunning 'Einstein engagement ring' from the early universe is one of the oldest ever discovered AT2021uey b's cosmic shadow was first spotted in 2021 in data taken by the European Space Agency's Gaia telescope, revealing its presence by a momentary spike in the brightness of its host star. The astronomers then took detailed follow-up observations using Vilnius's Molėtai Astronomical Observatory, from which they calculated its source as a planet 1.3 times the mass of Jupiter. Its host star burns at about half the temperature of our own, and the gas giant sits four times farther than Earth's distance from the sun. According to the researchers, the planet's discovery so far from the Milky Way's central bulge, in a region that is comparatively sparse in heavier elements needed to form planets, offers a fresh hint of the unlikely places where planets can be found. "When the first planet around a sun-like star was discovered, there was a great surprise that this Jupiter-type planet was so close to its star," Edita Stonkutė, another Vilnius University astronomer and leader of the microlensing project that found the planet, said in the statement. "As data accumulated, we learned that many types of planetary systems are completely unlike ours — the solar system. We've had to rethink planetary formation models more than once."

Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Why cats prefer sleeping on their left side
Cats prefer to sleep on their left side to protect themselves from predators, a study has found. The pets sleep for up to 16 hours a day and often curl up or stretch out for a snooze in opportune places. But the way the animal settles down is not random, and there is an evolutionarily hard-wired logic underpinning it, according to a study from the Ruhr University Bochum in Germany. Scientists found cats lie on their left side around two-thirds of the time, which shows that it was done deliberately. They looked at clips on YouTube of more than 400 sleeping cats and logged which side they were sleeping on. Data revealed that 266 of the cats (66.5 per cent) were on their left side, leaving scientists to conclude this was a survival trait from their history in the wild. Sleeping on their left side means when they wake, their left eye is able to see the local area unobstructed by the cat's own body. This visual information is then processed by the right side of the brain. This hemisphere is what processes threats and is responsible for escaping danger as well as knowing an individual animal's position. This puts the cat at an advantage compared to if it was to sleep on its right side – when the information is processed by the left side of the brain, which is less specialised to aid a swift escape. This leftward preference is just one of the many ways in which cats protect themselves. 'Sleep is one of the most vulnerable states for an animal, as anti-predator vigilance is drastically reduced, especially in deep sleeping phases,' according to the study. 'Domestic cats are both predators and prey (e.g. for coyotes) and sleep an average of 12–16 hours a day. 'Therefore, they spend almost 60-65% of their lifetime in a highly vulnerable state. To reduce predation risks, cats prefer to rest in elevated positions so that predators are more visible to them and the cats, in turn, are more visually concealed from predators. 'In such a spot, predators can access cats only from below. Thus, their preference for resting in an elevated position can provide comfort, safety, and a clear vantage point for monitoring their environments. 'We hypothesised that a lateralised sleeping position further increases the chances of quickly detecting predators (or to identify careless prey) when awoken.' Pregnant cows are known to prefer their left side while sleeping for a similar reason, experts believe. The scientists also found that the pawedness of a cat, whether it preferred its left or right side, is likely not to blame for the sleeping preference. A 2017 study found that male cats tend to prefer their left paws and females are more right-paw dominant. 'We are inclined to believe that the significant leftward bias in sleeping position in cats may have been evolutionarily driven by hemispheric asymmetries of threat processing,' the scientists add in their paper, published in the journal Current Biology. Broaden your horizons with award-winning British journalism. Try The Telegraph free for 1 month with unlimited access to our award-winning website, exclusive app, money-saving offers and more.