What Did The Conservatives Achieve In...
Politics1 min ago
Before The'big Bang' Reverse Universe?
Interesting item from 'Universe Today'
http://
It postulates that before the 'Big Bang' there was an identical but 'reversed' Universe. What do others make of this?
http://
It postulates that before the 'Big Bang' there was an identical but 'reversed' Universe. What do others make of this?
Answers
1 to 13 of 13
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by EDDIE51. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
For the foreseeable future, at least, the most interesting things that emerge from asking the question "What came before the Big Bang?" is a lengthy discussion about what "before" even means. Since time, as we understand it, is held to begin with the Big Bang, the question may not even make any sense -- although even nonsensical questions are worth asking, if doing so gives you an opportunity to learn why you shouldn't have asked it. In this case the point is that time is not necessarily infinite, in either direction, and nor does it have to be linear. Or even "universal"; although the differences are virtually non-existent, you and I measure time in different ways. Indeed, your head and your toes don't even experience time in the same way (https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19494-standing-on-a-stepladder-makes-you-age-faster/ ). All of which makes "before" a woolly notion anyway, before going to the extreme conditions of the Universe at the time of the Big Bang.
My best guess is that the question of what came "before" the Big Bang is likely to remain unanswered. Hopefully people won't be discouraged from trying, for sure. The problem is that the Big Bang is, presumably, something we can't replicate in a lab and something that we can't really probe "beyond". On the "other side" of it, if there is one, there wouldn't even be a guarantee that the same laws of physics as in our Universe would hold (although, presumably, they would be at least fairly similar).
Perhaps, with the recent direct detection of gravitational waves, it won't be long before their detection is also confirmed in the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation (reported a couple of years ago, but since retracted, so we're still waiting for it). That, I think, would help to push the threshold of times we can observe from 380,000 years or so after the Big Bang to maybe a few seconds, or even fractions of a second. The closer we can get to observing the Big Bang itself, the better chance we would have of understanding its nature, and in turn what, if anything, came "before" it.
Until then, the best we can do is speculate. It's pretty fun, though, and the speculation can help to drive a greater appreciation of what we *do* know.
My best guess is that the question of what came "before" the Big Bang is likely to remain unanswered. Hopefully people won't be discouraged from trying, for sure. The problem is that the Big Bang is, presumably, something we can't replicate in a lab and something that we can't really probe "beyond". On the "other side" of it, if there is one, there wouldn't even be a guarantee that the same laws of physics as in our Universe would hold (although, presumably, they would be at least fairly similar).
Perhaps, with the recent direct detection of gravitational waves, it won't be long before their detection is also confirmed in the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation (reported a couple of years ago, but since retracted, so we're still waiting for it). That, I think, would help to push the threshold of times we can observe from 380,000 years or so after the Big Bang to maybe a few seconds, or even fractions of a second. The closer we can get to observing the Big Bang itself, the better chance we would have of understanding its nature, and in turn what, if anything, came "before" it.
Until then, the best we can do is speculate. It's pretty fun, though, and the speculation can help to drive a greater appreciation of what we *do* know.
Is it possible that before the "Big Bang" that there was an identical universe to what we have now, that collapsed in on itself
It's known that our universe is still expanding and not slowing but speeding up.
But what if the Big Bang was not a one off event but a continuing series of big bangs over trillions of years, creating new universes . Infinity?
It's known that our universe is still expanding and not slowing but speeding up.
But what if the Big Bang was not a one off event but a continuing series of big bangs over trillions of years, creating new universes . Infinity?
I believe it would be correct to say that the Big Crunch (and cyclic Universe) is "just a model". I'm not aware, at least, of any practical way to distinguish a Universe that had another universe preceding it from a Universe that did not, or at least from a Universe that "began" such a cycle.
The main thing is to ensure that the question is framed properly, which itself is incredibly difficult but totally worth the effort.
The main thing is to ensure that the question is framed properly, which itself is incredibly difficult but totally worth the effort.
1 to 13 of 13
Related Questions
Sorry, we can't find any related questions. Try using the search bar at the top of the page to search for some keywords, or choose a topic and submit your own question.