 |
|  |
 |
|
Edan
|
|
From what I know, Scientists have no idea of what was around before the big bang (from what I remember, they can only have data to reconstruct what the univere was like miliseconds after the big bang), although amoung the descriptions I've heard are that all the matter in the universe was compressed into the space the size of a pin head. I've heard speculation that time (or indeed, many of the rules of physics that we know and love) might not have existed back then (or existed in a different form). Also, since the universe may revert back into that state if and when there is a big crunch (when all matter gets compressed back together), there's the possibility that there was a whole other (or series of other) universes before ours. But, again, that's just speculation.
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Soul Survivor
|
|
UChicago
May 2003 time: 05:29
|
|
there is no 'before' the big bang, the big bang created time
another idea that i find troublesome, there had to be a tiny imbalance between matter and anti-matter like a trillion and one to a trillion
in the beginning, there was only one force, but as the universe expanded and cooling down it broke up into 3 forces, and then subatomic particles were formed as a result of the strong force, then matter from the electroweak force and then stars, galaxies because of gravity
the electrons thing is quantum mechanics which so far is pretty seperate from the whole big bang theory, which AFAIK is based on relativity and other subsequent theories
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Soul Survivor
|
|
UChicago
May 2003 time: 05:29
|
|
more explanation to that previous post.
According to current theory, nothing that happened 'before' the big bang (if such a thing did exist) would have no impact on what happened after the big bang, because there was no causality, no laws of physics. The universe was infinitely small and infinitely dense, all matter, energy, dimensions, everything, was wrapped up in a singularity. There was no space, no time, nothing but this singularity, the big bang started everything.
Because of the big bang the universe started expanding and cooling, for the first few moments there was nothing we could recognize, still no matter, energy or even gravity etc. As the universe expanded the different forces we know seperated creating subatomic particles, it is believed that there was a slight imbalance between matter and anti-matter, after all if there wasn't an imbalance we wouldn't be here discussing it - after all a universe which doesn't create beings to observe it doesn't exist.
thats a basic summary, and done from memory, so don't kill me if it isn't 100% accurate
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Soul Survivor
|
|
UChicago
May 2003 time: 05:29
|
|
problem with these theories.... 100 years ago they would have been considered crazy, 100 years from now they will be considered crazy
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
 |
|
Soul Survivor
|
|
UChicago
May 2003 time: 05:29
|
|
anything by hawking is good, his books are pretty well written, and not too difficult to follow
a rock or tree aren't aware of their own existence, they can't "notice" anything..... observer is the key word
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Boris Godunov
|
 |
Portland, OR
Aug 2001 time: 00:29
|
|
I think the mental barrier for most is that everyone is locked, understandably, into a mentality that there must be a cause and effect for everything, and that something had to come from somewhere. Since the laws of our universe are structured this way, it's hard to break from that linear thinking. But keep in mind that the laws of the universe were created at the Big Bang, so without it, they aren't necessarily applicable. That's why the notion of "before" the Big Bang is meaningless, because without the universal laws governing time and space, there is no such thing as "before" or "after."
Likewise, we seemed locked into this idea that the natural state of things was "nothingness," and "something" sprang from that. This, however, is not really sound thinking. We have no idea that "nothingness" is even a viable concept, since we've never encountered or observed true "nothingness." Even the vacuum of space has "something" in it, such as cosmic rays and dust, particles, etc. It seems to me that it is most logical to assume that, since "something" is here, the natural state of things is "somethingness."
|
|
|  |
 |
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29. Apolyton Time is 00:29. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|