The idea that the universe erupted with a Big Bang explosion has been a big barrier in scientific attempts to understand the origin of our expanding universe, although the Big Bang long has been considered by physicists to be the best model. As described by Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity, the origin of the Big Bang is a mathematically nonsensical state — a “singularity” of zero volume that nevertheless contained infinite density and infinitely large energy.
Now, however, Martin Bojowald and other physicists at Penn State are exploring territory unknown even to Einstein — the time before the Big Bang — using a mathematical time machine called Loop Quantum Gravity. This theory, which combines Einstein’s Theory of General Relativity with equations of quantum physics that did not exist in Einstein’s day, is the first mathematical description to systematically establish the existence of the Big Bounce and to deduce properties of the earlier universe from which our own may have sprung. For scientists, the Big Bounce opens a crack in the barrier that was the Big Bang.
As a fan of the late Fred Hoyle, I have to chuckle over folks finally coming full circle – acquiring the mathematics to understand what he comprehended through physics and philosophy.
Something never comes from nothing – and every experience in modern science finds the same.
Interesting idea.
At least they are not giving up on knowledge by just saying, “God did it.” Because that would be a really stupid thing for humans to say.
i have heard of many ideas like this one — it sounds plausible to me
how long till the bible-addicted du readers come along to remind us that all of advanced mathematics (as well as astro-physics, geography, etc.) are bunk because they contradict the christian bible’s timeline?
Anybody know where did the big bang occurred relative to earth (or milky way)? I’d like to go there soon by copter.
Before the Big Bang was the Big Crunch– the previous universe deaccelerating back to its origin. That cycle occured trillions upon trillions of times (God is persistent). This time however the universe has been proven to not retract. The Creator of the Universe got it right this time. Over infinite time, He found the right ratios, the right physical laws and the right chemistry to stop the cycle of birth and death.
Ummm, except that the idea of a big crunch is in direct opposition to what we currently see happening in our universe. We live in an expanding accelerating universe. We are headed to the big rip where the universe is expanding so fast that the clusters, galaxies, stars, and even the atoms we are made up will be eventually ripped appart into sub atomic particles. Then when the density of the universe is low enough again, cosmic hyper inflation recreates all the matter every where again.
I thought Fred Hoyle didn’t like the Big Bang theory (he actually coined the phrase ‘Big Bang’ and meant to ridicule the theory – not name it). He championed the Steady State theory – matter being continously produced thoughout the universe.
Speaking of the big rip. Lauren are you reading? It is confirmed Universal is dumping iTunes exclusivity!
Woo Hoo Universal movies on XBox 360 here we come!
GregA, the universe could behave like a mobius strip. The apparent expansion we observe could be the accelerated contraction we expect.
MikeR – you’re quite correct about Hoyle and the “Big Bang”. His concept of steady state was dialectical rather than Euclidean. The Big Bounce seems similar to me.
Wish I could understand the math, though.
JimR,
I don’t care for hyper-dimensional models. One of the things I really like about inflation theory is it explains really nicely (both in observation and philosophically) how all the matter of the universe can come from nothing. It does have some problems though, like where did all the anti-matter go, and how is the universe super-symmetrical if it is in a constant state of infinite inflation? Which I can (philosophically anyhow the math is way to hard for me) wave my hands and attribute to an incomplete understanding of quantum physics.
I rest easily in my cosmic philosophy now days, because the Hubble Ultra deep field found fully developed super clusters and giant galaxies. (among the light speed quantization errors in the data, but that wont be confirmed until we have more data like the HUDF)
I still remain certain in an almost faith like way, that once you get outside a few hundred light year from earth, the astronomers and the cosmologists really have no f’ing clue. They are still trying to figure out the age of star clusters a 1000 light years away to a precision of a billion years. Cosmically, there are still deep and profound mysteries… Like what is pulling our local univere to the great attractor? When you look in that part of the sky, there is nothing there. Then there is the great wall… Where did that foamy like structure of the universe come from? Everything we know about gravity (which isnt a lot) says that shouldn’t be happening.
So given that universal processes just a gigaparsec out are a total mystery, how can we say, or even guess, what is happening when z=1?
I’m a strong advocate of science but there are certain things in life that we (humans) will never know, and what happened before the big bang is one of them. It seems to me that speculating and theorizing about what happened before the big bang is a waste of extraordinary brainpower. These are the most intelligent people this world has to offer. I’m sure if physicists got together they could make life better for many people here on earth.
11—I wonder. Is the brain that is able to do the math behind parallel universes, bouncing universes, accelerating expanding universe, or the big bang also able to do the engineering behind renewable energy, or like music (for some), does the subject escape them?
Who of you are really good at some aspect of science/tech recognize little ability in some other area? Is scientific inquiry with the basic graduate level education generally pliable?
GregA, interesting reply. I believe one theory is that there is no far off attractor but rather a repeller… dark matter. I do however believe that an answer hill be found eventually and it will be beautifully simple. (like e=mc2).
Johnny, we already have great minds working on all aspects for the betterment of humanity. Looking outward with science has resulted in many improvements and advancements for people. You never know where the best ideas will come from. Understanding all aspects of the sun and solar power is just one.
Fundamathiests will continue to try and explain the existence of the universe is ways that allow it to NOT have a beginning. Keep trying.
#13, If everyone would just go to the answer hill we’d know everything.
🙂
A beginning or infinity… what’s the difference to an scientist? The object is to find the truth and understand. We might eventually determine that the beginning was a pocket pure energy in an unknowable expanse. m=e/c2. No intelligence required for that equation to work.
#13,
There are even some more far out theories in inflationary cosmology where the local universe is being altered by inflationary events that we cant see yet(or ever), that other inflation events are responsible of all the non baryonic matter that seems to permutate the universe. And the gigaparsec sized bubbles throughout the universe may actually be a result of non-baryonic inflation events, and that negative energy may just be neutrinos blowing off of these invisible pocket universes. With neutrinos being a definate enigma… There being way to many to conventionally understand why they are there.
Again, I am not certain it is possible to know some these things, becuase with dark matter you are literally trying to inspect the undetectable and unknowable universe. The only reason we know it exists is because it affects things on galactic scales.. Well that and recent discoverys of there being waaayyyyy to many neutrinos to explain with conventional quantum physics.
And no one is concerned that despite the best intellectual efforts and all the time in the cosmos of the previous universe… no one got out alive? …Or did they?
I wonder how the Big Bounce works? Must it have to wait for every bit of time & space to return back to the singularity, or can it kick off much sooner – as soon as a certain critical point is reached?
I too wonder about the discrepency between our current theories of our ever-expanding universe versus the muliple bounce theory, #8 aside.
11. It may be possible to know things that can’t be tested. For example, it’s possible string theories will only be proven through straight mathematics. The same could be true for the big bounce. If the math is as solid as 1 +1 =2, what can you say?
As for why we might dabble in such inaccessible, arcane science… Such was once the status of the theoreticians discovering straight mathematical theories of relativity. But now we couldn’t have GPS and other critical tools today without such pure research. And to say, “let’s stop here now” is like the patent office closing because it’s felt surely everything useful has been invented.
RBG
Behind it all is surely an idea so simple, so beautiful, that when we grasp it – in a decade, a century, or a millennium – we will all say to each other, how could it have been otherwise? How could we have been so stupid for so long? – John Archibald Wheeler
For those interested, here’s the official site for WMAP:
http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/
0. Eideard: Something never comes from nothing.
Let me tell you about my own little pet theory of the Secret Of The Universe, albeit perhaps a tad naive.
Let’s say prior to our current universe, there exists nothing. I say it is possible to get something from nothing in the same way you can produce the numbers +1 and -1 from a number line beginning at zero. That is: 0 = +1 + (-1). Imagine if, over eons of “time” or something akin to time, the natural electric neutrality of a proto-universe was to eventually randomly separate out into negative and positive charges. And through E=MC^2, matter and anti-matter universes… or such.
Add in an almost infinite succession of “bouncing” universes whereupon the extreme singularity-like conditions are able to slowly add to the electrical polarity and additional matter in the universe in ever-increasing volumes & densities… and you have Something from nothing.
If anyone wishes to award me a Nobel Prize, I’ll be in my trailer.
RBG
“…clearly we need to understand how particles get their mass! In the Standard Model, they get it from interacting with the Higgs boson, so all the masses listed above – and also the Cabbibo-Kobayashi-Maskawa and Maki-Nakagawa-Sakata matrices – really show up when we describe how particles interact with the Higgs.
The Higgs has not yet been seen – at least not with any certainty – but of the 26 fundamental constants of nature, 22 describe it or its interactions with other particles! Isn’t that weird???
I suspect we’re in for some big surprises here…. ”
[I can’t wait for the new collider to come online. Maybe we’ll get to prove the existence of the Higgs boson. That will be an astounding day in physics.]
Large Hadron Collider home: http://www.lhc.ac.uk/
From math.ucr.edu:
http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/constants.html
#22,
High energy particle physics is all well and good until you have an industrial accident and destroy the universe in a poof of false vacuum. Just look at the damage they were able to do with a minor miscalculation of the gauss of those magnets last spring.
But Greg, if they destroy the universe who would care?
#15 – Fundamathiests will continue to try and explain the existence of the universe is ways that allow it to NOT have a beginning. Keep trying.
A fundamathiest?
Is that someone who believes in a literal interpretation of their math book?
#25
Fundamatheists: Some that believes there can’t be a “God” and persecutes anyone who sees evidence to the contrary.
#25,
You know that is funny, because I remember back in some philosophy of math class I has some where, a central idea of math and physics is that it is not exact, Math and Physics are an approximation of reality, they are not a perfect description, and indeed a perfect description is impossible. It is funny how science continues to more fully explain philosophical enigma more fully than religion.
Rectagon, if ever anyone finds real evidence of a god, i’ll be the last one to persecute them.
… so in the meantime…we’ll just our cheeks available…even though we’re starting to run out.
#26 – …sees evidence of a God? That’s like seeing evidence that the invisible pink unicorn is pink. If you could see it, it wouldn’t be invisible and preachers would have no reason to raise money in the name of “the assured expectation of things hoped for,” but not seen. The world would be a much poorer place without TV preachers. No, wait – no it wouldn’t.
As for the Big Bang: “No one is happy with the big bang singularity,” says Martin Bojowald, a theorist at the Pennsylvania State University, University Park. (see New Scientist http://tinyurl.com/39d6fs ) Which shows we’re a bunch of ingrates who can’t be satisfied with anything. Or maybe it just shows the whole idea makes people feel itchy and unresolved. Mathematicians and deep theorists do work that way – something doesn’t “feel” right so they start chipping away at it.
#10 – Grega – Cosmically, there are still deep and profound mysteries… Like what is pulling our local univere to the great attractor? — I read recently that our solar system is actually a member of a small galaxy (local cluster in the direction of Sagittarius?) being stretched out by a collision with the Milky Way. Might that account for some of those bothersome anomalies? see http://tinyurl.com/37brz8 for the only citation I could find offhand.
One thing the report says is – are you here GlobalWarmer? – that the galactic collision is responsible for global warming, or at least for a uniform rise in temperatures in our solar system. Speaking of GregA’s feeling that cosmologists don’t really know nothin’ beyond our own back yard.