What happened before the big bang?

page: 8
10
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by jiggerj

Originally posted by RoScoLaz
somebody lit a very big fuse?




Yep. And when the firecracker explodes, all of its contents race away from the center. Physicists should be looking for a huge space of nothing where the Big Bang originally banged. The one thing that stops the contents of the firecracker from flying forever outward is gravity. In space, however, there is no resistance, so all of the matter would just keep flying outward, leaving the original, and emptied, blast zone also expanding outward.


Because of inflation meaning space that wasn't there before comes into existence. There is no way to tell let's do a thought experiment. Let's say we lived in a galaxy on the edge of the visible universe. We notice all the galaxies are heading away we look one direction no galaxies the other all racing away. Wouldn't are natural conclusion be that that the center is somewhere behind us? Every point looks like the center so you don't have a reference point to start with in 3d space.




posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 08:32 AM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People
reply to post by ImaFungi
 


As Maslo said above, a shape that curves back on itself would not have boundaries per se.

Let's expand my illustrations to be the surface of a balloon (just the surface - NOT inside the balloon or above the balloon's surface. In this illustration, those places do no exist. The entire universe is the surface of the balloon.)

As you blow up a balloon, any two given spots on the surface of that balloon would be moving away from each other as that surface expands. There is no center of expansion; it doesn't matter which points you pick -- the expansion always looks the same from any and every point on the balloon.

Again, we are using a 2-D plane to attempt to explain 3-D space, so the balloon analogy is not perfect, but it gets the basic idea across of how a space with now edges can expand from from no specific center point. The Big Bang is the expansion of space itself, not only the matter in space.

The Big Bang was not an expansion of stuff INTO our universe, because our universe did not exist before the big bang (there was no universe for stuff to expand into). It was an expansion OF our universe.


edit on 6/18/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)


We know space is flat and not curved meaning the universe is huge and you can never end up back where you started.



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 09:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr
We know space is flat and not curved meaning the universe is huge and you can never end up back where you started.


While a flat non-connected space is the current leading model of space that fits the WMAP microwave background measurements, there are still other positively-curved connected-space models that fit the measurements, such as the The Poincaré Dodecahedral model.

The Poincaré Dodecahedral Space Model



There are some problems with the infinite flat universe model of the universe that can be explained using the Poincare finite model, such as the breakdown of the temperature correlations seen in the WMAP between narrower angular scales and wider angular scales.

Article (note: the link opens directly to a PDF file):

Dodecahedral space topology as an explanation for weak wide-angle temperature correlations in the cosmic microwave background

excerpt:

The current ‘standard model’ of cosmology posits an infinite flat universe forever expanding under the pressure of dark energy. First-year data from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe (WMAP) confirm this model to spectacular precision on all but the largest scales1,2. Temperature correlations across the microwave sky match expectations on angular scales narrower than 60° but, contrary to predictions, vanish on scales wider than 60°. Several explanations have been proposed. One natural approach questions the underlying geometry of space—namely, its curvature and topology. In an infinite flat space, waves from the Big Bang would fill the universe on all length scales. The observed lack of temperature correlations on scales beyond 608 means that the broadest waves are missing, perhaps because space itself is not big enough to support them. Here we present a simple geometrical model of a finite space—the Poincare´ dodecahedral space—which accounts for WMAP’s observations with no fine-tuning required....


I'm not saying I think space is flat or curved or connected or infinite -- I'm just saying we don't know for sure. This Poincaré model of a closed/connected shape for space has been gaining some interest lately because it explains some of the discrepancies of the flat infinite model. It also seems to be a great model for predicting the observations made of gravity.

It may be the case that the flat model works for local geometries, but when looking at the universe on a global scale (a scale which could be immense), that apparent flatness is only an illusion given the massive scales, and gives way to a positive curve -- and a positive curve means a connected and finite universe.


edit on 6/20/2013 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 03:28 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr

Because of inflation meaning space that wasn't there before comes into existence. There is no way to tell let's do a thought experiment. Let's say we lived in a galaxy on the edge of the visible universe. We notice all the galaxies are heading away we look one direction no galaxies the other all racing away. Wouldn't are natural conclusion be that that the center is somewhere behind us? Every point looks like the center so you don't have a reference point to start with in 3d space.


Maybe I'm just tired because I can't imagine this. I'm in that furthest galaxy and what I'm seeing is space filling in between the galaxies. It's not that the galaxies are moving in a direction that resulted from the force of the Big Bang blast. So, what I'm seeing has no connection to the blast at all. How do we know that the dark energy started moving stuff at the moment of the big bang?

Consider the earth's atmosphere. The air surrounding the globe isn't all moving in the same direction. There are different currents. How do we know that all the galaxies aren't caught in one current out of many?



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 04:51 PM
link   

What happened before the big bang?


If I understand correctly - big bang after big bang. Supposedly we have a big bang, the universe expands, then it contracts, then it bangs again, then it expands again, then it contracts again ... and so on and so on ....



posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 06:26 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

What happened before the big bang?


If I understand correctly - big bang after big bang. Supposedly we have a big bang, the universe expands, then it contracts, then it bangs again, then it expands again, then it contracts again ... and so on and so on ....



No thats an oscillating universe which we show cant happen not enough gravity to pull everything back together.Here is the theory of a multiverse there are 2 types first one is that universes are created all the time we just cant see them. Heres what i mean we have a mad scientist he figures a way to create a universe in his lab. Hed see a tiny flash then nothing else our universe wouldn't be pushed aside. What happens is a bubble is created in space time closest to explain this is each universe is right here we just cant see it. The second theory is space time is so vast that big bangs happen just to far away for us to ever see the light and so far away if we did see it we could never get there. Both have similar consequences however. One possibility is there are multiple different universes with different laws, and some are not right for life and so life doesn't evolve, and some are right for life and so creatures evolve and make measurements and ask deep, existential questions like how did the universe start.

Some of the odder ones being that a reality with infinite space and infinite universes would necessarily have to repeat itself sometimes, leading to the conclusion that copies of Earth and everyone on it exist somewhere else out there.




posted on Jun, 20 2013 @ 06:36 PM
link   

Originally posted by FlyersFan

What happened before the big bang?


If I understand correctly - big bang after big bang. Supposedly we have a big bang, the universe expands, then it contracts, then it bangs again, then it expands again, then it contracts again ... and so on and so on ....



I've heard of this idea, and I like it. Only, it's not contracting. shrugs



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 05:53 PM
link   

Originally posted by rnaa
reply to post by ImaFungi
 




Define 'nothing'.


That's the whole point. I gave three possible definitions of 'nothing' in a previous post. Pick one. Each one is guaranteed to give rise to the universe as we know it.

Now you can go all Zen-like and start saying that no matter how you define it, it isn't that. That is a useful meditation process, but it isn't helpful in a science discussion. And it isn't actually useful in a 'western' religious discussion either, because there is no equivalent mantra in western religion.

The fact is that however you define it, 'nothing' is unstable.



Something exists. Something is not nothing. Nothing can not be something. If nothing can be something, then what was thought to be nothing, was something.

0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0+0 etc. = 0000000000000000000000000000000 etc.

in order to =1 or 2 or 3 or 435439690439063 ... what existed could have never been real complete nothingness. If what existed was not real complete nothingness, then something existed.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 06:02 PM
link   

Originally posted by Soylent Green Is People

But perhaps there is NO center and there is NO edge. Therefore, there are no galaxies "in the center" that have not moved far at all, and there are no galaxies "on the edges" that have moved billions of LYs.

Again, consider the balloon (this time, consider a balloon with dots drawn on it). As the balloon expands, the dots all get farther away from each other, but there is no dots "at the center not move at all" -- because there is no center to the surface of the balloon, AND there were no dots "towards the boundaries" that moved a greater distance, because there is no boundary to the surface of the balloon.

If you have an spherical surface, please tell me where the center is of that surface [remember, we are only talking the surface], and tell me where the edges are. You can't, because there are no edges and no center.



Its very telling that the only way you can make your idea sound at all plausible is by making an analogy that does not relate to reality in any way. Is reality 2-d? If reality exists in 3-d, then why not use a 3-d model? Oh, its because if you did, you would see my point and then have to think about it.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 06:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by dragonridr

Because of inflation meaning space that wasn't there before comes into existence. There is no way to tell let's do a thought experiment. Let's say we lived in a galaxy on the edge of the visible universe. We notice all the galaxies are heading away we look one direction no galaxies the other all racing away. Wouldn't are natural conclusion be that that the center is somewhere behind us? Every point looks like the center so you don't have a reference point to start with in 3d space.


Is it possible that our measurements are messed up? The earth spinning, the earth revolving, the sun revolving, the galaxy rotating, galaxies we observe rotating, the light from all galaxies going in every which way, also being bent and lensed. Is it possible there are errors in the thinking that all galaxies are moving equal distances away from one another over time, and potentially at an accelerated rate. Accelerated rate even noticeable after only measuring galaxies for 100 years or however much?

Also about the theory of always increasing quantities of space, or cosmological constant or dark energy. I think I can imagine how these might work, and be related and proportional to the amount energy/matter has worked over time, which is related how far the energy and matter has traveled through space and time since the beginning/singularity of the universe. Another way of putting this I think is; If all the galaxies that exist right now were placed very close to one another and given know momentum, just placed in the vicinity, I dont think 'space' would continue to expand. (One might say the opposite would occur with the help of gravity). As time increases, and therefore the age of energy increases, or it can be said entropy increases, space also seems to have increased. So perhaps there is a very closely linked relationship between the energy of what space actually is and the energy of what energy actually is.

Any way what I wanted to ask regarding this seemingly never ending spatial handkerchief out of the pocket of the cosmic magician, was how 'space' is created digitally? On computers, in simulations, in our imaginations. in any informational context space is needed, to separate the stuff from the other stuff. When you have a dream, say you are at a party at a big mansion, with fields and gardens, and plenty guests, and you are moving around, and looking around. Where is that space contained and how is it produced? Is it 1 bit of information that contains the whole scenescape of the dream? Or is it pixels some how? Is it illusory 3-d? Or is it real 3-d? When you move in the dream how is that new space being generated? I guess I would be curious how if were to simulate space in a computer, what kinda algorithm would be necessary to generate space, or how in programs space or spaces are utilized and made.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 06:30 PM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


If the universe is flat, would that mean that when the big bang happens, the material 'spread out' horizontally a lot more then 'up or down'? What would have made the universes material spread in 2 dimensions length and width, more so then height? ( I am aware that depending on an observers position on the outside of a flat universe it could appear that the universe spread out more up and down then side to side, but the question would still be relevant as to, why?)



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 06:36 PM
link   
I would think that before the big bang there was a (+nothing) and a (-nothing) and after awhile (like almost forever) they were attracted to each other by a (nothing) and that made them explode into the universe we see.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 10:24 PM
link   

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by dragonridr
 


If the universe is flat, would that mean that when the big bang happens, the material 'spread out' horizontally a lot more then 'up or down'? What would have made the universes material spread in 2 dimensions length and width, more so then height? ( I am aware that depending on an observers position on the outside of a flat universe it could appear that the universe spread out more up and down then side to side, but the question would still be relevant as to, why?)


A flat universe doesnt mean it looks flat its still 4 dimensional. What its referring to is if light had to curve such as a closed universe we can detect the curve.In a closed universe ight would eventually end up whereit started. As it is point a light in a direction and it keeps a straight course this shows spacetime to be flat in all directions.Also means if we can get a ship to go 99.9999999 percent of lightspeed we dont have to account for space curvature in guidance big advantage when moving that fast.



posted on Jun, 21 2013 @ 10:53 PM
link   
reply to post by gortex
 


"Big bang, big crunch, you know there's no free lunch. Kneel down and pray, here comes your judgment day."

-Bad Religion

Those guys have asked the same questions and have thrown some answers around, probably a good place to start seeing as how the frontman, Greg Graffin has a Ph.D in biology.



posted on Jun, 22 2013 @ 11:37 AM
link   
reply to post by dragonridr
 


What would detecting the curve entail? Would it appear similar to red shifted light? The idea of general spatial curvature seems a bit silly (or at least confusing to me), do you think you can explain how space could be oriented as a curve compared to itself? Also what is meant by the theories of gravity dealing with curved space? Is this just a way of saying the space surrounding a mass is less dense then the average and general space between galaxies and masses?



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 03:49 AM
link   
reply to post by ImaFungi
 





What would detecting the curve entail?


In the most extreme case, we would see multiple apparent copies of the universe in every direction, like a hall of mirrors. Thats if the radius of curvature is lower than the radius of observable universe. Even a less curved universe would affect things such as apparent angular size of galaxies, apparent luminosity, or the pattern in cosmic microwave background. So far observations point to no curvature (infinite radius) or very small curvature beyond detection capabilities (= very large radius).



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 11:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by ImaFungi
reply to post by dragonridr
 


What would detecting the curve entail? Would it appear similar to red shifted light? The idea of general spatial curvature seems a bit silly (or at least confusing to me), do you think you can explain how space could be oriented as a curve compared to itself? Also what is meant by the theories of gravity dealing with curved space? Is this just a way of saying the space surrounding a mass is less dense then the average and general space between galaxies and masses?


Well to answer your question first there is mass distribution throughout the universe. Wmap showed us the matter in the universe and how it distributed.Theres an equation called Friedmann equation i wont go into the math but to sum it up we determined the universe is on the average homogeneous and isotropic. Meaning matter is evenly distributed throughout the universe. The next big clue is supernovas using Pythagorean theorem we take 3 points in space (supernovas) and using geometry we can show curvature. If we chose 3 points on earth took those distances will see a discrepancy in the distances simply because the earth is curved. And finally there's insufficient mass to curve the universe according to Einstein's theory he showed space time to be flat until density is sufficient to curve space. We simply dont have enough mass out there to be a closed universe. Explaining this is hard without going inot math.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 11:33 AM
link   
I think...the best answer is the easiest one. We can't fathom what happened in the beginning because, we're caught in an infinite loop. A computer loop?

The chicken or the egg idiom comes to mind. If you use the analogy of a computer program, it all makes sense.

An infinite loop (also known as an endless loop or unproductive loop) is a sequence of instructions in a computer program which loops endlessly, either due to the loop having no terminating condition, having one that can never be met, or one that causes the loop to start over.



posted on Jun, 23 2013 @ 11:37 AM
link   

Originally posted by gortex
reply to post by UnknownKnower
 





What caused the first bang or the first crunch?

Maybe there was no first big crunch and no first big bang , maybe its an infinite loop with no beginning and no end , maybe that's how time is


ah ha! Yes, but now take that one step further



posted on Jun, 26 2013 @ 07:42 AM
link   

Originally posted by FlySolo
I think...the best answer is the easiest one. We can't fathom what happened in the beginning because, we're caught in an infinite loop. A computer loop?

The chicken or the egg idiom comes to mind. If you use the analogy of a computer program, it all makes sense.

An infinite loop (also known as an endless loop or unproductive loop) is a sequence of instructions in a computer program which loops endlessly, either due to the loop having no terminating condition, having one that can never be met, or one that causes the loop to start over.






Where not in a loop because it would violate the rules of entropy. Its like dropping a glass and have it break it can't put itself back together so you can drop it again.





new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 5  6  7    9  10  11 >>

log in

join