What happened before the Big Bang?

[Fred Derf Veteran]

I don't think you have a very good understand of time. Time is not linear as classical view states. It is a relative measurement. I tend to agree that time is measure of entropy of the universe. Before big bang the entropy was zero, hence time did not exist or rather it was not ticking yet.

Exactly, if you don't have stuff from which to measure time against then it is meaningless. Before the big bang, one millisecond and one billion years would all be the same.

[Joel]

Are you serious? You cannot SEE wind in those pictures, you can only see the dirt or particals the wind is affecting!!

If you think wind can't be proven to exist, tell it to the people affected by tornadoes and hurricanes.

[JEN2]

I'd love to see a source for Quantum Mechanics supporting Parallel universes, as far as i know this is the whoring of string theory done by Brian Greene. Or at least you yourself can demonstrate how one is able to derive such a concept using soley QM.

here's some info: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Many-worlds_interpretation

To create a convention bang you may need chemicals and/or gasses. The universal big bang occurred before matter, before elements, before atoms.

Remember that under the ideal conditions matter can be completely converted into energy (using E = mc2). It is likely that during the big bang the opposite occurred.

What happened before the Big Bang may be irrelevant as time may not have existed.

How can the opposite occur without something making it happen? .e.g some sort of laws?

Perhaps, we have a very limited perspective on time.

I believe time only exists within the universe. and that time was created. and that there was no time before the big bang.

And yes, we definately have limited understanding of time.

An electron's velocity & position cannot be measured simultanously, that's quite correct. Schrodinger's famous cat 'thought' experiment, was constructed to explain the fallaciousness in such reasoning (which he couldn't come to terms with as well) in which it explains that the cat ( or in this case, the electron ) can be in a "superposition" that is neither in velocity (momentum) or position ( dead cat, or living cat ). I don't see the correlation to a parallel universe using this, perhaps i might need further studying up on the weird but attractive world of QM. :D

looks like someone beat me to it!

I have to say QM was the most interesting paper I did and university. I loved it! :D

If you think wind can't be proven to exist, tell it to the people affected by tornadoes and hurricanes.

lol, hmmm, you need to read some of my other posts before making comments like that. But just to help you out, I was making a point, and it has nothing to do with me believing that "wind" exists, because its obvious does exist.

[Fred Derf Veteran]

How can the opposite occur without something making it happen? .e.g some sort of laws?

At one point, all of the elemental forces (gravity, nuclear, EM) were one. Before that (or indeed before/at the time of the big bang), a completely different set of laws may have been at work.

I believe time only exists within the universe. and that time was created. and that there was no time before the big bang.

And yes, we definately have limited understanding of time.

does exist.

Time is directly related to the speed of light. The faster you accelerate towards the speed of light the slower you move through time. Before photons were created... well, how could you possibly have time? Or if you did, how could you identify/measure it? It would be meaningless.

[MGS4-SS]

God.

"He" always existed. As a matter of fact God is beyond time, time exists inside of God, God is the 5th Dimension, which is existence itself.

I respect your opinion and all, but I'm giving you the Funniest Post Award.

Time is a human creation, the same as God, as Star Wars, and as the airplane. Each of them to fulfill some part of our life. Time organizes us, God is an excuse for the ones with simple minds (or people who just don't want to search for objective answers), Star Wars to drain our money, and the airplane so we can reach places faster.

[excalpius]

re: String Theory

String Theory is utter nonsense. I've been saying so for three decades and everyone is finally starting to figure out it is simply a gross oversimplified theory of nothing in an attempt to encompass everything.

The multiple/11 dimensions garbage comes from String Theory, not Quantum Mechanics, and it is based on the mathematical masturbation needed to make that logic work. Ignore it, nothing to see there.

< T=0 doesn't matter. This is OUR universe, our existence. There is no "before" or "after" by definition.

There is no way I am opening up a discussion of the unified field theory here, with all the excellent subthreads we have going regarding god, etc. Note that the people who actually know something about the subject are simply restating the information in my original posts in their own words. :)

[+shift. MVC]

Before the Big Bang there was a Mac vs PC flame war that got way out of hand.

LOL

Scientists speculate that there are actually an infinite amount of dimensions.

Think of a dimension as a sheet arranged side by side (kinda like an endless row of PCI cards attached on your computer)

and whenever two of those dimensions meet a "big bang" occurs, and everything in those two dimensions are wiped out, and matter spreads out in all directions again (like the beginning of the universe)

so in a sense, time is endless. there is no beginning, there is no end.

[The_Decryptor Veteran]

I really have no idea, or if there was even a "before" the bing bang, when you go back to that time period, laws start breaking down and a whole load of crap like that. would be very interesting to find out though.

It is my belief that when the Great Green Arkleseizure sneezed (A.K.A. the big bang), the universe came into existance.

So you live in perpetual fear of "The Coming of the Great White Handkerchief"?

[JEN2]

At one point, all of the elemental forces (gravity, nuclear, EM) were one. Before that (or indeed before/at the time of the big bang), a completely different set of laws may have been at work.

I think the most important question here is "How/why did these completely different set of laws come into existance before the big bang"?

[Fred Derf Veteran]

LOL

Scientists speculate that there are actually an infinite amount of dimensions.

Think of a dimension as a sheet arranged side by side (kinda like an endless row of PCI cards attached on your computer)

and whenever two of those dimensions meet a "big bang" occurs, and everything in those two dimensions are wiped out, and matter spreads out in all directions again (like the beginning of the universe)

so in a sense, time is endless. there is no beginning, there is no end.

That is part of M-theory (a subset of string theory). Those "sheets" arranged side by side would be called branes.

M-theory is far from universally accepted. It requires the universe to contain 11 dimensions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M-theory

I think the most important question here is "How/why did these completely different set of laws come into existance before the big bang"?

Before the big bang anything is possible. 1+1 might equal 3. :D

[vincent]

I think the most important question here is "How/why did these completely different set of laws come into existance before the big bang"?

I'm not sure anyone can answer the "why". But in due time the "how" will be answered.

[MonkeyClaw Veteran]

Before the big bang anything is possible. 1+1 might equal 3. :D

It doesn't :blink: Someone has some explaining to do...

[vincent]

looks like someone beat me to it!

I have to say QM was the most interesting paper I did and university. I loved it! :D

No offense, but i doubt you've done a paper on Quantum Mechanics, your posts so far in this discussions lends one who is aware of what QM is, to believe otherwise.

[Corona]

i think i remember watching a PBS documentary about it, theory was about two universes getting crushed to each other and in the process creating big bang also with it creating elements

[vincent]

i think i remember watching a PBS documentary about it, theory was about two universes getting crushed to each other and in the process creating big bang also with it creating elements

No elements were created in the big bang, just a bunch of radiation and elementary particles, hydrogen didn't come until at least a few million years after during recombination.

[snyper]

Isnt the universe expanding, and a theory is that it will expand to a certain limit and contract onto where it originated and repeat the process...?

[JEN2]

No offense, but i doubt you've done a paper on Quantum Mechanics, your posts so far in this discussions lends one who is aware of what QM is, to believe otherwise.

No offence taken. I know I've done the paper and got 98% for it, it doesn't matter if you believe that or not. I don't feel the need to prove myself when I know what I have done.

[Panacik]

My theory on the big bang:

There where two random atoms floating around minding their own business. They met fell in love and sparked a relationship of a life time.

They made babies and they became the first stars and planets. Some of those stars and planets had their babies and the new planets where born.

Eventually more and more developped and are still gowing to this very day.

However since then the initial 2 sparks have started to have marital problems and have decided to split. In the process the husband has gone mad and started to kill the other planets. Sooner or later he will have destroyed everything he and his wife made and there they will be... back to square one and he will be a lad again playing the filed and waiting to find a new female atom to create a new family with.

[JEN2]

At one point, all of the elemental forces (gravity, nuclear, EM) were one. Before that (or indeed before/at the time of the big bang), a completely different set of laws may have been at work.

Time is directly related to the speed of light. The faster you accelerate towards the speed of light the slower you move through time. Before photons were created... well, how could you possibly have time? Or if you did, how could you identify/measure it? It would be meaningless.

I don't think "man kind" can understand the concept of "no time". As in the human mind, "no time" = "no existance". You cannot imagine "no existance". Only if you don't exist can you experience "no existance" but then you cant experience anything because "you dont exist"...

I'm not sure anyone can answer the "why". But in due time the "how" will be answered.

Even if they do answer it, they will probably say something like, there were certain elements or strange laws which existed and dark matter or no matter which for some reason cased the big bang, or they might say, ther was something else there before the elements which caused the big bang. They will always say "there was something there, some sort of laws or something. I don't think anyone can ever explain how those "initial" elements got there in the first place. I think its best if we forget about "why" for now :)

Before the big bang anything is possible. 1+1 might equal 3. :D

I agree, the laws were probably so different, that most likely we will never be able to imagine them. But I always end up asking myself the same "beyond universal" question, How and Why.

I mean for all we know, if we are ever able to travel beyond the universe, we could end up on some superior beings science lab falling out of a controlled test tube environment. :blink:

Edited November 15, 2006 by JEN2

[Captain_Wang]

You make some interesting points, and I do actually agree the whole "it just was" argument for how the initial singularity (or whatever caused the big bang) came to be issue does need to be addressed in some way. Not that I believe people haven't tried.

Edited November 15, 2006 by mashw

[vincent]

My theory on the big bang:

There where two random atoms floating around minding their own business. They met fell in love and sparked a relationship of a life time.

They made babies and they became the first stars and planets. Some of those stars and planets had their babies and the new planets where born.

Eventually more and more developped and are still gowing to this very day.

However since then the initial 2 sparks have started to have marital problems and have decided to split. In the process the husband has gone mad and started to kill the other planets. Sooner or later he will have destroyed everything he and his wife made and there they will be... back to square one and he will be a lad again playing the filed and waiting to find a new female atom to create a new family with.

Problem with your theory, atoms didn't come out of the big bang, only a soup of leptons, quarks and hadrons, the Jokes and funny section is on another part of the forums, unless you missed this part in the header of this section:

"Topics in the forum should have a clear scientific focus and a factual basis."

[Fred Derf Veteran]

No elements were created in the big bang, just a bunch of radiation and elementary particles, hydrogen didn't come until at least a few million years after during recombination.

All of the elements (well, give or take) were created by the big bang, just not directly. All of the ingredients that later formed into the elements were created during the big bang.

[vincent]

All of the elements (well, give or take) were created by the big bang, just not directly. All of the ingredients that later formed into the elements were created during the big bang.

See i don't see it that way, gravity is what was responsible during recombination for the formation of the first hydrogen atoms (1proton + 1electron), the initial universe consisted of the ingredients to make the elements responsible for the first stars But these atoms didn't come out of the big bang.

Of course we could be arguing semantics on this one, but i guess we can agree to disagree:

[TheElite]

"Topics in the forum should have a clear scientific focus and a factual basis."

How can we have a "factual basis" for this topic, when we know NOTHING regarding it?

It's all "I think this..." or "He thinks that..."

[vincent]

How can we have a "factual basis" for this topic, when we know NOTHING regarding it?

It's all "I think this..." or "He thinks that..."

When is the last time you took an astronomy, chemistry, or cosmology class, let alone picked up a book on said subjects? Your argument is extremely weak kid, i suggest you do some research on what the Big Bang is, before trying to argue against it.

Edited November 15, 2006 by ripgut