+Frank B. Subscriber² Posted November 25, 2010 Subscriber² Share Posted November 25, 2010 Scientists glimpse universe before the Big Bang In general, asking what happened before the Big Bang is not really considered a science question. According to Big Bang theory, time did not even exist before this point roughly 13.7 billion years ago. But now, Oxford University physicist Roger Penrose and Vahe Gurzadyan from the Yerevan Physics Institute in Armenia have found an effect in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) that allows them to "see through" the Big Bang into what came before. The CMB is the radiation that exists everywhere in the universe, thought to be left over from when the universe was only 300,000 years old. In the early 1990s, scientists discovered that the CMB temperature has anisotropies, meaning that the temperature fluctuates at the level of about 1 part in 100,000. These fluctuations provide one of the strongest pieces of observational evidence for the Big Bang theory, since the tiny fluctuations are thought to have grown into the large-scale structures we see today. Importantly, these fluctuations are considered to be random due to the period of inflation that is thought to have occurred in the fraction of a second after the Big Bang, which made the radiation nearly uniform. However, Penrose and Gurzadyan have now discovered concentric circles within the CMB in which the temperature variation is much lower than expected, implying that CMB anisotropies are not completely random. The scientists think that these circles stem from the results of collisions between supermassive black holes that released huge, mostly isotropic bursts of energy. The bursts have much more energy than the normal local variations in temperature. The strange part is that the scientists calculated that some of the larger of these nearly isotropic circles must have occurred before the time of the Big Bang. The discovery doesn't suggest that there wasn't a Big Bang - rather, it supports the idea that there could have been many of them. The scientists explain that the CMB circles support the possibility that we live in a cyclic universe, in which the end of one ?aeon? or universe triggers another Big Bang that starts another aeon, and the process repeats indefinitely. The black hole encounters that caused the circles likely occurred within the later stages of the aeon right before ours, according to the scientists. In the past, Penrose has investigated cyclic cosmology models because he has noticed another shortcoming of the much more widely accepted inflationary theory: it cannot explain why there was such low entropy at the beginning of the universe. The low entropy state (or high degree of order) was essential for making complex matter possible. The cyclic cosmology idea is that, when a universe expands to its full extent, black holes will evaporate and all the information they contain will somehow vanish, removing entropy from the universe. At this point, a new aeon with a low entropy state will begin. Because of the great significance of these little circles, the scientists will do further work to confirm their existence and see which models can best explain them. Already, Penrose and Gurzadyan used data from two experiments - WMAP and BOOMERanG98 - to detect the circles and eliminate the possibility of an instrumental cause for the effects. But even if the circles really do stem from sources in a pre-Big Bang era, cyclic cosmology may not offer the best explanation for them. Among its challenges, cyclic cosmology still needs to explain the vast shift of scale between aeons, as well as why it requires all particles to lose their mass at some point in the future. More information: V.G.Gurzadyan and R.Penrose. "Concentric circles in WMAP data may provide evidence of violent pre-Big-Bang activity." arXiv:1011.3706v1 via: Physics World Source: PhysOrg.com Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick H. Supervisor Posted November 25, 2010 Supervisor Share Posted November 25, 2010 Wait...so there was a universe before our universe? Am I reading that right? And when our universe contracts and returns to the original point it will cause another big bang, creating another universe? Granted, I don't plan to be around when that happens, but the idea is...mind boggling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hum Posted November 25, 2010 Share Posted November 25, 2010 Actual Photo, Universe before Big Bang: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Frank B. Subscriber² Posted November 25, 2010 Author Subscriber² Share Posted November 25, 2010 Wait...so there was a universe before our universe? Am I reading that right? And when our universe contracts and returns to the original point it will cause another big bang, creating another universe? Granted, I don't plan to be around when that happens, but the idea is...mind boggling. If true, this theory means that the universe just exists indefinitely. Which also makes the need for a 'creator' of sorts unnecessary. The idea of 'god' just died one more death. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 Wait...so there was a universe before our universe? It postulates the possibility of a chain reaction of Big Bangs leading to creation of other universes, perhaps... Am I reading that right? And when our universe contracts and returns to the original point it will cause another big bang, creating another universe? There's not enough mass to allow that to happen, a big crunch is most likely out of the picture, that's not what this article states. Our universe will most likely end in a big rip. f Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Argi Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 This sounds eerily similar to Stargate Universe... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Growled Member Posted November 26, 2010 Member Share Posted November 26, 2010 Wait...so there was a universe before our universe? Am I reading that right? And when our universe contracts and returns to the original point it will cause another big bang, creating another universe? What causes the universe to contract? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Xinok Subscriber² Posted November 26, 2010 Subscriber² Share Posted November 26, 2010 What causes the universe to contract? Umm, gravity? This was actually the popular view, that the universe would eventually stop expanding and start to collapse into itself. But then they discovered that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, so that idea lost merit and now we have the "Big Rip". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Frylock86 Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 Somehow, even in the half buzzed state I'm in, this made sense. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hum Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 What causes the universe to contract? That's when God falls back to sleep ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Varoon Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 What the scientist are now realizing, the eastern religions have already concluded this. There was never a time were you or I were not! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Tom Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 Wow... +1 for science. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gaffney Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 Actual Photo, Universe before Big Bang: I take it god took that photo ? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Quattrone Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 What causes the universe to contract? When god fart. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hum Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 I take it god took that photo ? Why, yes -- I did :happy: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Nick H. Supervisor Posted November 26, 2010 Supervisor Share Posted November 26, 2010 Umm, gravity? This was actually the popular view, that the universe would eventually stop expanding and start to collapse into itself. But then they discovered that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, so that idea lost merit and now we have the "Big Rip". Ah, I wasn't aware of that. Thanks for the info. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glassed Silver Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 This is interesting. I found the idea of "time not existing before... blaaa blaaa blaaaaaa" very dubious anyways... I always refused that and now, haha... seems like my opinion get backed up! :D And yea... +1 for science, although this isn't really a -1 for religion. Religion and science do not necessarily contradict. Glassed Silver:win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Corris Veteran Posted November 26, 2010 Veteran Share Posted November 26, 2010 This sounds eerily similar to Stargate Universe... That was the first thing that came into my mind too, is that sad? Lol. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Glassed Silver Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 That was the first thing that came into my mind too, is that sad? Lol. You're in the uber-nerd forum, do you really think you get a true answer to that? Glassed Silver:win Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ently Posted November 26, 2010 Share Posted November 26, 2010 My question has always been what was first. If they say it was a big bang, what created the big bang? and then what created the thing that created the big bang? Or even with God.. what created God? (if thats what you believe in which I personally do.. God not religion) etc etc It's soo mind boggling! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vincent Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 Umm, gravity? This was actually the popular view, that the universe would eventually stop expanding and start to collapse into itself. But then they discovered that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate, so that idea lost merit and now we have the "Big Rip". No, it was postulated but never popular, Einstein proposed in his calculations of mass, a static, his cosmological constant, which he then called his biggest blunder when he came across Hubble's evidence that the universe is expanding, turns out his calculation was right, in a sense, it prevents the universe from collapsing upon itself, fast forward to the late 80's and we find that not only is the universe expanding but the rate at which it is doing so is increasing via observational data of Type Ia Supernovae. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+Xinok Subscriber² Posted November 27, 2010 Subscriber² Share Posted November 27, 2010 No, it was postulated but never popular, Einstein proposed in his calculations of mass, a static, his cosmological constant, which he then called his biggest blunder when he came across Hubble's evidence that the universe is expanding, turns out his calculation was right, in a sense, it prevents the universe from collapsing upon itself, fast forward to the late 80's and we find that not only is the universe expanding but the rate at which it is doing so is increasing via observational data of Type Ia Supernovae. No it doesn't. You missed my point, I never said that the static universe was a popular idea. Nobody was denying that the universe was expanding. But it was assumed that gravity would slow the expansion of the universe, eventually reversing it and the universe would inevitably collapse into itself. Of course, that idea lost merit once it was discovered that the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Solid Knight Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 Cyclic universe theory is trippy as it basically acts a giant reset button. Wonder how far the sentient lifeforms (if any) in previous cycles got. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Soulsiphon Posted November 27, 2010 Share Posted November 27, 2010 Very cool read. So basically CMB contains our cosmic, universal, tree growth-rings? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
HeretikSaint Posted December 1, 2010 Share Posted December 1, 2010 I, myself, have always been a fan of M-Theory. M-Theory states that there are many parallel membranes that are constantly moving in a form of linear wave-motions. Every once in a while, the parallel membranes come in contact with one another and the energy released from the two membranes touching creates a "big bang". M-Theory also postulates that our universe is not alone, nor is it unique. If M-Theory is correct, our universe is just a small portion of a multiverse in which "big bangs" happen all the time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts