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.

 

Have We Found the Universe that Existed Before the Big Bang?

page: 1
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 05:07 PM
link   
November 19, 2010

The current cosmological consensus is that the universe began 13.7 billion years ago with the Big Bang. But a legendary physicist says he's found the first evidence of an eternal, cyclic cosmos.

The Big Bang model holds that everything that now comprises the universe was once concentrated in a single point of near-infinite density. Before this singularity exploded and the universe began, there was absolutely nothing - indeed, it's not clear whether one can even use the term "before" in reference to a pre-Big-Bang cosmos, as time itself may not have existed yet. In the current model, the universe began with the Big Bang, underwent cosmic inflation for a fraction of a second, then settled into the much more gradual expansion that is still going on, and likely will end with the universe as an infinitely expanded, featureless cosmos.






io9.com...


Sir Roger Penrose takes issue with the above view, he believes our universe was born in a high degree of order. He objects that the Big Bang model can't explain why such a low entropy state existed, and believes he has the solution, he thinks that our universe is just one of many in a cyclical chain, with a new universe replacing the current one.

If that is true we could have another Big Bang at anytime and be totally wiped out, everything would start over again and take billions of years to evolve. Here today gone tomorrow, interesting hypothesis.




posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 05:21 PM
link   
This is a very interesting topic. In some of my astronomy classes, we've talked about the idea that the universe recycles itself just like everything else in the universe. Like when a star goes supernova, all that material collects and eventually gravity causes it to create a new solar system. It's really quite fascinating. I once watched on the History Channel a program that was talking about the idea that there were multiple universes now. They used marbles as an analogy, how they just bounce off one another but never collide. I'd be interested in learning more on this topic. Thanks for posting



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 05:52 PM
link   
Your post starts off saying that he's found evidence for this -- but it sounds more like he's just proposing that it's true. We already knew that the levels of entropy and all that are hard to explain -- what's the evidence?



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 05:59 PM
link   
reply to post by Solasis
 


Good question, I can't seem to find any evidence for it either, but as far as I am concerned it's just as plausible as the single Big Bang theory, there is no proof for that either even though it's talked about today as a given, this guy could be right.

Thanks for posting.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 06:12 PM
link   
String theorists believe that two branes or membranes colliding could have caused the Big Bang event. Its pretty heady stuff. There are some very good articles and videos about string theory out there on the web.

Here's an episode of the PBS series Nova on the subject.
edit on 22-11-2010 by Cyberspy because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 06:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by Solasis
Your post starts off saying that he's found evidence for this -- but it sounds more like he's just proposing that it's true. We already knew that the levels of entropy and all that are hard to explain -- what's the evidence?


Evidence found seemed to be this:



Penrose believes these circles are windows into the previous universe, spherical ripples left behind by the gravitational effects of colliding black holes in the previous universe.


Albeit small piece of evidence it's not something someone can just ignore but it's far from meaning that his theory is correct.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 06:42 PM
link   
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


I think this is right but he isn't the first to come up with this theory and I don't think it matters now. Space/time expansion/contraction is relative to all fundamental forces and time expands/contracts with the bounds of the universe. Time as perceived by matter (us) seems not to fluctuate but our understanding of time is jaded for we use matter to base in on, not the ever expanding and soon to be collapsing universe. The basis is that time becomes infinite, by our (meaning human) definition at the beginning, middle and end of our universes existence.
I don't know how to prove this theory, along with everyone else on our planet, but we will someday.


edit on 11/22/2010 by AnteBellum because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 07:40 PM
link   
I think the major problem lay with our perception of the word "Universe".

We don't think Omniverse/Multiverse, something consisting of billions of Bubbleverses within the whole.. each Bubbleverse being a 'Universe' in itself.

My perception.. a scientifically untrained one... is that new Bubbleverses are created when two others touch, releasing massive amounts of energy in a Big Bang scenario.

I gathered this perception via what I call Journeys.. not OOBE, but something far more subtle and expansive that allows one to move through Awareness without restrictions. So in this journey I saw outside our 'Universe' and observed the above scenario for myself. So I await scientific confirmation via observed and theoretical processes... yep.. I'll probably be waiting a long time huh?



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 08:56 PM
link   
A very intresting hypothesis... To an extent it reminds me of the Water Wiggle Toys from way back in the day.

Squeeze water toy / water wiggler / water snake

Using that toy as an example of the universe, its ever expanding, but in a manner that does not create new matter, but recycles the old, cycling it back into the new. It can explain the consistent stability of the universe in terms of radiation, and uniform color background (heat/cold/etc). As far as the Universe being infinite, we do not know this is absolute either based on our limited understanding of our surroundings.

It reminds me of an Infinite Mirror. To people on the outside of the mirror, its not infinite but appears that way when viewed. Imagine if you were inside the mirror, with the infinte effect present, but non detectable because we are inside of it.



Think of it as a blackhole that sucks in everything around it. We still have no concrete proof of what happens once it passes the event horizon and disappears. Maybe it recycles the material, spitting it back out in another location, continuuing the cycle.

Anyways, I am not a scientist, but do have an active imagination lol.
edit on 22-11-2010 by Xcathdra because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 10:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Tayesin
 


This is what I believe, too. But I could never think of a good term when explaining it to people, so thank you for saying "Bubbleverse" because I'm totally using that from now on.


I'm bad at explaining string theory I think, because people just look at me like I'm nuts. The problem with all of this I think is that people haven't even accepted the big bang theory yet and now science is changing, I think that upsets people who try to reconcile their religion with their scientific beliefs. I can't wait until they make further progress with string theory. I for one am agnostic, but string theory makes me believe in a "higher order", if not a "higher power".

String theory aside though, this post is very interesting. I always like new theories pertaining to black holes.



posted on Nov, 22 2010 @ 11:15 PM
link   
reply to post by Tayesin
 





I gathered this perception via what I call Journeys.. not OOBE, but something far more subtle and expansive that allows one to move through Awareness without restrictions. So in this journey I saw outside our 'Universe' and observed the above scenario for myself. So I await scientific confirmation via observed and theoretical processes... yep.. I'll probably be waiting a long time huh?


This is very interesting, it reminds me of that special groups of Gnostic's who were cosmologist, Shamans, Remote viewers and on the same level with Yogi's, they mapped the skies and discovered that we were in a Galaxy over 2000 years ago. The proof that we are in a Galaxy only came in the thirties with Hubble.

I believe that you are able to see universe and behind, I meditate with my third eye and have seen similar things, I don't always understand or know what I am seeing but know it's possible.

Thank you for posting.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:48 AM
link   
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


Hi,

This year a friend sent me a picture. He sad it reminded him of my story, shared above.

I don't know how to embed so here is a link..

s305.photobucket.com...



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 09:57 AM
link   
Here is the your picture, very interesting, can you tell us more about it and what it reminds you of.




posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 10:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


I don't know what the caption says, but I can see that the man is looking outside of his own seen existence and is seeing what lies beyond. It's fascinating that the artist has shown odd workings and symbols outside of our bubble.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 11:06 AM
link   
I think the idea that there was nothing before the universe that we know observe is fatally flawed.

There is no such as nothing. You can't find an example of nothing anywhere. There is always something, even if at a given point in space, all that is there IS space. A object can travel through that given point of space, which means that there is a medium through which energy is sustained and transfered.

Before the expansion of our universe, in what ever form it took prior, it must have existed in a medium of some sort. More than likely that medium was the space that we recognize in our universe and the expansion was of energy.

Logically the idea of nothing makes no sense at all based on everything we know and observe.



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 04:34 PM
link   
How's this for an idea... what if "Big Bangs" are happening all the time, and the "observable" part of the Universe is really but a small corner of the whole. I'm not talking about multiple dimensions, or even other "Universes", but different clusters of galaxies, etc. that are (relatively speaking) just as distant from each other as stars are to other stars...???

In other words, what if there were huge expanses of "nothing" between the different Big Bang clusters...so much so that we can't even detect these other clusters with the most powerful instruments (because the distances are too great, and the light from them may even STILL be on the way to us!

It's a big "what if", but it would certainly be in keeping with what we've seen in the observable Universe. It could be even way more vast than we ever imagined...



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 05:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Gazrok
In other words, what if there were huge expanses of "nothing" between the different Big Bang clusters...so much so that we can't even detect these other clusters with the most powerful instruments (because the distances are too great, and the light from them may even STILL be on the way to us!

It's a big "what if", but it would certainly be in keeping with what we've seen in the observable Universe. It could be even way more vast than we ever imagined...


Why not, your theory is as good as any other, without the ability to observe the far reaches of our Universe how are we to know. What comes to mind when I speculate on this is, maybe there is truly no beginning and no end, hard to wrap your head around that, ah sweet mystery.


Infinity (sometimes symbolically represented by ∞) is a concept in many fields, most predominantly mathematics and physics, that refers to a quantity without bound or end. People have developed various ideas throughout history about the nature of infinity. The word comes from the Latin infinitas or "unboundedness".



en.wikipedia.org...

edit on 23-11-2010 by Aquarius1 because: (no reason given)



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 07:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by Tayesin
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


Hi,

This year a friend sent me a picture. He sad it reminded him of my story, shared above.

I don't know how to embed so here is a link..

s305.photobucket.com...¤t=Flammarion-layeredZ.jpg



Info on your Picture

As far as the cpation goes -

"missionnaire du moyen age raconte qu'il avait trouve le point ou le ciel et la terre se touchent"

rough translation -

"Missionary of the Middle Ages tells us he had found the point where the sky and the ground are touched"

This link goes a bit more in depth.
Second Source with more information



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 07:29 PM
link   
reply to post by Aquarius1
 


he thinks that our universe

Religion.

What one thinks that is not provable is faith based and therefore religion.

The current cosmological consensus

Also this statement is not backed but thrown in for validity, as I am quite sure that he never went and asked everyone on the planet if they belief that pile of quack.
edit on 23-11-2010 by ACTS 2:38 because: forgot



posted on Nov, 23 2010 @ 08:08 PM
link   
reply to post by Aquarius1
 

Ignoring the caption.... it looks to me like a rendition of what can exist outside our "known" universe. With many other universes in view, the many layers of Awareness.. even the cloudy-looking areas that resemble.. almost.. the sea-foam like layer where all the bubbleverses existed in my experiences outside our universe.

And I agree that Gazrock's concepts are just as valid as any other theory.



new topics

top topics



 
9
<<   2 >>

log in

join