|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2007 11:19 am
The idea that the universe erupted with a Big Bang explosion has been a big barrier in scientific attempts to understand the origin of our expanding universe, although the Big Bang long has been considered by physicists to be the best model. As described by Einstein's Theory of General Relativity, the origin of the Big Bang is a mathematically nonsensical state -- a "singularity" of zero volume that nevertheless contained infinite density and infinitely large energy. Now, however, Bojowald and other physicists at Penn State are exploring territory unknown even to Einstein -- the time before the Big Bang -- using a mathematical time machine called Loop Quantum Gravity. This theory, which combines Einstein's Theory of General Relativity with equations of quantum physics that did not exist in Einstein's day, is the first mathematical description to systematically establish the existence of the Big Bounce and to deduce properties of the earlier universe from which our own may have sprung. For scientists, the Big Bounce opens a crack in the barrier that was the Big Bang. Loop Quantum Gravity was pioneered and is being developed in the Penn State Institute for Gravitational Physics and Geometry, and is now a leading approach to the goal of unifying general relativity with quantum physics. Scientists using this theory to trace our universe backward in time have found that its beginning point had a minimum volume that is not zero and a maximum energy that is not infinite. As a result of these limits, the theory's equations continue to produce valid mathematical results past the point of the classical Big Bang, giving scientists a window into the time before the Big Bounce.  Spreading through a bounce: A state that initially has small fluctuations (left)
bounces and develops larger fluctuations (right). Time proceeds along the
horizontal axis, with the volume plotted vertically.
|
 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sun Jul 01, 2007 5:37 pm
Have they delt with time? We define time as certain measurments--how long it takes an atom of cessium to decay for example, but at the Planck level time cancells out. At more macro levels time proceeds in one direction Time's Arrow, but we have yet to discover why this is so. Time could flow in any direction, there are no physical laws yet discovered that forbid it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jul 07, 2007 4:17 pm
most people believe that before the univrese there was only chaos, and from that some thing or god emerged
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:24 am
Most people? Being who, exactly? I admit that I'm not as well educated about the worlds religions as I probably should be but I know of no belief system that contends that any god rose from chaos.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Aug 30, 2007 9:24 pm
Things will not calm down, Daniel Jackson. I saw Stephen Hawking give a lecture on this in March, and he brought up this question. His answer was that it's like asking "what's south of the south pole." It doesn't really make sense. They will, in fact, calm up.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 6:19 am
Many religions have the universe start with chaos. This is followed by some entity giving order to the chaos.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Oct 26, 2007 8:52 am
germanicus2 Many religions have the universe start with chaos. This is followed by some entity giving order to the chaos. lol, what if it started with order, followed by some entity giving choas to order.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 24, 2008 1:58 am
Yeah I've never heard of that either...a god-like entity rising from the chaos and giving order. In Christianity, Judaism, Catholicism, etc, God always was and ever will be. Far from the realm of the understanding our minds are capable of, since we are obsessed with time, and can't imagine a universe without it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Mon Jun 16, 2008 4:56 am
Firstly, let me say that I'm pro-Hyperstring Theory...
Okay, what I think is that the concepts of "beginning" and "ending" are completely human concepts. "Our lives begin and end, so, thus, everything must have a beginning and ending" is what we operate off of. We can't comprehend that there may NOT be a beginning and ending to everything.
If matter can neither be created nor destroyed, just changed (Law of Conservation of Matter), then how could all of the matter in our universe just suddenly and inexplicably appear? The same goes for the Law of Conservation of Energy.
I think that one of two things caused what we know of as the Big Bang...
1. the contact of "planes" or "membranes" (I'm blanking on the given name at the moment; need to get some more coffee soon...) (part of Hyperstring Theory)
2. okay...this is easier and harder to get across (since I don't have to put everybody onto/teach a theory, but it can take some wrapping-your-mind-around-it-edness (XD) to get...)
Everybody here knows what black holes are, right? Good, now, it was once believed that they are "created" and can never be "destroyed". Then, we discovered that black holes exist only for as long as they have matter to "feed" off of; if they can't "feed", they "explode", releasing massive quantities of energy and matter.
Well, what if all the matter in our universe ended up in one, GARGANTUINE black hole? It wouldn't be able to feed! The Big Bang was, to put it bluntly, "everything coming from "nothing"". What if that "nothing" is just all of the matter in the universe compressed down to an immeasurably small size? The energy would be there, as would the matter, so, when the black hole can't find anything to feed off of and explodes, couldn't THAT be the Big Bang?...
This would mean that, instead of "beginning" and "ending", the universe as we know it is periodically "renewed" or"reborn"...
So...what does everyone think?...
I've run this second, "pet theory" of mine past several people, but haven't gotten any serious feedback...
And no, I don't know if any scientist/theorist has previously come to these conclusions...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 2:32 am
Sapphina Most people? Being who, exactly? I admit that I'm not as well educated about the worlds religions as I probably should be but I know of no belief system that contends that any god rose from chaos. While I don't know if any current religions believe this, I know that the Greek myths had the wolrd starting this way. But... that kinda hasn't been practiced in a long time. I really have no opinion on the way the universe was created. However... black holes. I've never heard that they explode when they have nothing to feed off of. I thought it was just that they shrank until they disappeared, with all their energy and mass blowing away? Or something like that. I'm probably using the wrong terminology and ideas. n.n"
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Jun 21, 2008 10:02 am
Ok 1st of all, the black hole theory of rebirth of our universe used to be part of a Big Crunch Theory. Everything would eventually fall back into one giant black hole which would then re-explode and start the whole cycle all over again.
This is why cosmologists are so eager to find out why the universe is expanding outward at a speed greater than they think gravity can pull it back. I forget what this part of the theory is called Big Chill? Because eventually the universe will just dissappate into heat, the lowest form of energy.
2nd of all, yes Stephen Hawking postulated that Black Holes do actually dissolve away if they run out of matter to feed them. In fact it was proven that black holes do emit a type of radiation called: Hawking Radiation.
I would think this would put to rest the eternal Big Bang/Big Crunch theory since we have no evidence at all of black holes exploding but we do now have evidence that points to them just fizzling away. The idea of a black hole exploding is pretty preposterous anyway if you look at it. If the gravity is so intense that light cannot escape, what force could possibly cause it to suddenly spew all it's accumulated matter out in a rapid expansion?
As for String Theory/Hyperstring Theory, elegant though those may be, they may not be falsefiable which means that science can never prove them. A sad fact of science, it may have the correct answer and not be able to prove it. I read an amazing article by the creator of String Theory about that a couple of years ago. If I have time I'll try to find a link to it.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Fri Jun 27, 2008 10:45 am
Sapphina Ok 1st of all, the black hole theory of rebirth of our universe used to be part of a Big Crunch Theory. Everything would eventually fall back into one giant black hole which would then re-explode and start the whole cycle all over again. This is why cosmologists are so eager to find out why the universe is expanding outward at a speed greater than they think gravity can pull it back. I forget what this part of the theory is called Big Chill? Because eventually the universe will just dissappate into heat, the lowest form of energy. 2nd of all, yes Stephen Hawking postulated that Black Holes do actually dissolve away if they run out of matter to feed them. In fact it was proven that black holes do emit a type of radiation called: Hawking Radiation. I would think this would put to rest the eternal Big Bang/Big Crunch theory since we have no evidence at all of black holes exploding but we do now have evidence that points to them just fizzling away. The idea of a black hole exploding is pretty preposterous anyway if you look at it. If the gravity is so intense that light cannot escape, what force could possibly cause it to suddenly spew all it's accumulated matter out in a rapid expansion? As for String Theory/Hyperstring Theory, elegant though those may be, they may not be falsefiable which means that science can never prove them. A sad fact of science, it may have the correct answer and not be able to prove it. I read an amazing article by the creator of String Theory about that a couple of years ago. If I have time I'll try to find a link to it. Concerning the "Big Chill" and the universe's gravity not being strong enough to keep matter together, the problem is apparent in the way you said it; they are really ONLY looking at gravity. It is the most easily grasped and anylyzed "force", but there are others that aren't being as well considered and many that we just don't know enough about. Electromagnetism is a "stronger" force than gravity, but we aren't factoring it in so much. How do we know there aren't other dimensions that are bending the nature of "reality" and science where they approach ours? Or that gravity might be an interdimensional force while others are "tied down", making it appear less "strong", yet be no less influential? There is some evidence that points to large black holes "exploding". Yes, as it "feeds", it has immense gravitational forces that keep the matter contained under extreme pressures. Party balloons are like black holes in this way; continue applying pressure and "filling" it, and the air/matter will be contained, and the moment that you release it, it belches out the air/matter. But, if you got a large enough black hole, you could have that release of matter be so violent that it becomes explosive (I mean, there's gonna be some hydrogen in there, so there's potential at the very least). As for the status of Hyperstring Theory, yes, it is near impossible to "disprove", though it is similarly hard to "prove". It lies in the realms of theoretical physics, and will remain there for a long time. However, that doesn't mean that it has no validity. Personally, I am a fan of the Theory partially because it is the first theory to actually unite the macro physics and quantum physics into one elegant explanation. If I go on for much longer, I won't be at all coherent, so I'll cut my losses halfway through XD
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Wed Dec 03, 2008 7:22 pm
There was this article I saw a while ago with three alternatives to the big bang or theories that expand on it. http://discovermagazine.com/2008/apr/25-3-theories-that-might-blow-up-the-big-bang
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Sat Dec 20, 2008 7:24 pm
_Venom8_ Yeah I've never heard of that either...a god-like entity rising from the chaos and giving order. In Christianity, Judaism, Catholicism, etc, God always was and ever will be. Far from the realm of the understanding our minds are capable of, since we are obsessed with time, and can't imagine a universe without it. The ancient religions of mesopotamia believed that the Gods came from primordial chaos, like a swamp. Likely metaphoric. The best way to explain something you can't comprehend is with things you can.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Posted: Thu Jan 22, 2009 12:06 pm
Zhis is a subject Vhat scientists stay awake and stare up at zhe ceiling at night over. Vhat REALLY happened? It's very hard to really know. Religion just tells zhat GOD created everyzhing, thus god ist zhe big bang. Heh, zhat vould be zhe answer zhat most humans vould tell. I zhink, just my zhoughts, Zhat zhere vas not just complete emptiness. Zhere had to be elements, or something involved. But zhen you vould ask yourself, Vhere zhe hell did zhe elements and tiny atoms and dark matter, and so on, come from? Ve can only just theorize it. An, eradicated guess. Science is just endless questions, Zhat 95% of zhe questions vill not have an answer for. Ve vill never know unless time travel is passable, vitch I zhink it ist. If zhe people studying zhis find out how zhe universe works, MORE. Zhen someday ve vill finally have a solid answer. Till zhen, only theories.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
