It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Surely according to the Big-bang theory there has always been a universe??

page: 1
0

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 17 2006 @ 06:21 AM
link   
The big-bang theory states that the universe formed from an explosion of super-super condensed matter. Basically, that all the matter in the universe was compressed together into something smaller than a pin-prick, and then, it exploded, and is still growing today.

Surely this means that there has always been a universe, just that it was really, really, really small? Making the Big-Bang nto the beginning, but a huge inflation from a tiny state of steady stillness.

Ive given this quite a bit of thought, but i am no expert, (Im doing A-level physics). So am i right? Am i wrong? Facts? Opinions? Thanks.

P.S. I do not believe in the Big-Bang theory


.

[edit on 17-9-2006 by Out of the Box]




posted on Sep, 17 2006 @ 07:55 AM
link   

Originally posted by Out of the Box
The big-bang theory states that the universe formed from an explosion of super-super condensed matter. Basically, that all the matter in the universe was compressed together into something smaller than a pin-prick, and then, it exploded, and is still growing today.

Surely this means that there has always been a universe, just that it was really, really, really small? Making the Big-Bang nto the beginning, but a huge inflation from a tiny state of steady stillness.

Ive given this quite a bit of thought, but i am no expert, (Im doing A-level physics). So am i right? Am i wrong? Facts? Opinions? Thanks.

P.S. I do not believe in the Big-Bang theory

[edit on 17-9-2006 by Out of the Box]


All the evidence suggests that the big-bang occured.

But do a bit of research into Turok and Steinhardt's cyclic model.

en.wikipedia.org...



posted on Sep, 17 2006 @ 09:26 AM
link   

Originally posted by Out of the Box
The big-bang theory states that the universe formed from an explosion of super-super condensed matter. Basically, that all the matter in the universe was compressed together into something smaller than a pin-prick, and then, it exploded, and is still growing today.

Smaller than a pin prick is an understatement, and explosion is probably not the best descripition of the expansive event.


Surely this means that there has always been a universe, just that it was really, really, really small? Making the Big-Bang nto the beginning, but a huge inflation from a tiny state of steady stillness.

I don't think this is implicit in the theory at all. In fact, some speculate that the singularity popped into existence via a 'quantum fluctuation.' IOW, the singularity and thus the universe are not hypothesized to have always existed.

Also describing the singularity, a point of infinite density, and infinite curvature of spacetime, occupying the space of a Planck Length, as a 'pin prick' of 'steady stillness' is not accurate.


Ive given this quite a bit of thought, but i am no expert, (Im doing A-level physics). So am i right? Am i wrong? Facts? Opinions? Thanks.

P.S. I do not believe in the Big-Bang theory

You're not right according to the opinion of most of mainstream science... not that they can't be wrong about this, or that they've never been wrong before.

You should read both Bye Bye Big Bang, and The Big Bang Never Happened



posted on Sep, 17 2006 @ 09:50 AM
link   
The big bang theory is no longer widley accepted as a valid theory in the physics department anymore.

But this is the answer your looking for:


Surely according to the Big-bang theory there has always been a universe

True.
According to the official Big bang theory, The Universe HAS always existed.


The big-bang theory states that the universe formed from an explosion of super-super condensed matter. Basically, that all the matter in the universe was compressed together into something smaller than a pin-prick, and then, it exploded, and is still growing today.

True.
According to the official Big bang theory(along with most theories in modern physics,) the energy that is present in the universe now, was present back then too. This, together with the sheer pressure and gravity of this one sub-particle was so powerful, it exploded. Read on.


Surely this means that there has always been a universe, just that it was really, really, really small? Making the Big-Bang nto the beginning, but a huge inflation from a tiny state of steady stillness.

False. According to the official Big bang theory, that is.
The theory states that the universe is expanding because of the explosion. The theory also states that the universe is expanding at a slower rate. It is said that it is slowing BECAUSE of the big bang itself.
The gravity of any given object is strongest at the center. The universe is no different. It's center being where the bigbang took place. The Gravity will eventually stop the universe from expanding, and will start to pull the universe into itself.
Eventually the universe will be so condensed it will be made up of one single sub-particle. But the sheer pressure and gravity of this one sub-particle will be so powerful, it will explode, causing another bigbang.

So in conclusion, Yes The universe has already existed.
The big bang is NOT an event, it is a Cycle.



posted on Sep, 17 2006 @ 12:13 PM
link   
Well if what Gear said is true doesn't it mean that the universe had to of begun with a big bang before all of the others after it so it's actually true? Actually if God put the condessed matter there and existed first before time and space and everything else he would of been the universe which would make the theory that the universe always existed valid. Further more, if all God is an %100 unmovable and unchangable concience and can't create something in nothing since nothing doesn't exist anywhere because it can't God could of only created the 3rd dimension within himself and that's why he's every where and why all of us are actually God.



posted on Sep, 18 2006 @ 03:52 PM
link   
To those of you who have replyed: Thanks for all of your opinions


Thanks Gear that is pretty much how I understand the big bang theory, that after a big crunch, the big bang would have to happen again
.

I realise that 'our' universe was not the beginning of everything according to the Big Bang theory, but what started the first ever universe? Or was there not a 'first-ever' universe? (if that is possible).


Originally posted by melatonin
All the evidence suggests that the big-bang occured.

But do a bit of research into Turok and Steinhardt's cyclic model.


As i understand it, the idea of the cyclic model is still in its very early days, and does not fit in with other major theories of the particles that make up our universe (such as string theory) as yet.


Originally posted by mattison0922

Originally posted by Out of the Box
The big-bang theory states that the universe formed from an explosion of super-super condensed matter. Basically, that all the matter in the universe was compressed together into something smaller than a pin-prick, and then, it exploded, and is still growing today.


Smaller than a pin prick is an understatement, and explosion is probably not the best description of the expansive event.


Yeah, sorry, i could have worded that better, but i guessed most people on here (nay, all people on here) would get the jist of what i was saying.


Originally posted by Elimaku
Well if what Gear said is true doesn't it mean that the universe had to of begun with a big bang before all of the others after it so it's actually true?


Hmm, im not too sure about that. One part of me says that the 'first' big Bang would be different to all of the others as it is the start of all time, but another part says that time must end with the big crunch, and restart again with the next big bang. It all depends on what your definition of time is.

Is time how we measure how long it takes for certain things to go on around us, purely within our own minds to help us in perception of our environment? Or is it a dimension in itself, a part of the universe where things happen relative to each other? (maybe this deserves a topic of its own?)


Originally posted by Elimaku
Actually if God put the condessed matter there and existed first before time and space and everything else he would of been the universe which would make the theory that the universe always existed valid. Further more, if all God is an %100 unmovable and unchangable concience and can't create something in nothing since nothing doesn't exist anywhere because it can't God could of only created the 3rd dimension within himself and that's why he's every where and why all of us are actually God.


Not really. If God existed 'before space and time and everything else', He could not be part of the universe, because He would have existed before the universe.


Originally posted by Elimaku
Further more, if all God is an %100 unmovable and unchangable concience and can't create something in nothing since nothing doesn't exist anywhere because it can't God could of only created the 3rd dimension within himself and that's why he's every where and why all of us are actually God.


No, we are not God, we did not create the universe. So depth (the 3rd dimension) was created inside God, whereas the other two dimensions are not God? I dont see how that could work to be honest.

Anyway, slightly off track there, lets not get a religiou/spiritual discussion going.



new topics

top topics
 
0

log in

join