Customer Discussions > Science forum

No One has satisfactorily answered the question: What came before The Big Bang? How did the Big Bang Come From Nothing and From Nowhere to "Create" This Universe? What happened Before Space and Time and Matter?


Sort: Oldest first | Newest first
Showing 1-25 of 80 posts in this discussion
Initial post: Jan 9, 2013 3:48:29 AM PST
DRM says:
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Jan 9, 2013 4:39:00 AM PST
[Deleted by the author on Mar 31, 2013 10:24:28 AM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2013 5:22:29 AM PST
No one knows what happened "before" 10^-43 seconds "after" the singularity, the point of infinite energy density one gets if one runs the movie of cosmic expansion "all the way back". This singularity probably never existed; it is unphysical and an artifact of the equations of general relativity. The fact that there is an infinity here (infinite energy density) indicates that the equations of general relativity are no longer describing the physical reality going on. This is because one needs a quantum theory of gravity to describe what's going on in this domain, and we don't have a generally accepted validated quantum theory of gravity.

So anyone can speculate about what happened "prior" to 10^-43 seconds "after the singularity", but no one knows. Our current validated physical theories no longer apply, and it's an unknown.

This topic keeps coming up, and I don't know why, because the answer is always the same.

Posted on Jan 9, 2013 6:07:44 AM PST
Brian Curtis says:
It keeps coming up because some theists are desperate to find a foothold to prop up their notion of a necessary god. Which has nothing to do with science, of course.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2013 6:17:02 AM PST
Some people want the authority and respect for their beliefs that come along with the results of scientific investigation without doing the hard work of actually earning that authority and respect.

Posted on Jan 9, 2013 6:23:11 AM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 9, 2013 6:27:08 AM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2013 10:51:36 AM PST
Brian Curtis says:
"The Big Bang itself is a religious theory, it was proposed by a Catholic priest."

Non-sequitur. I just ate a cookie baked by a Lutheran, does that mean she's cranking out Lutheran cookies?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2013 11:57:03 AM PST
Re OP: Nobody knows. The question of what became "before" the big bang may not even make sense: it seems that the big bang was the beginning of both time and space, so the question would not even make sense.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2013 12:02:02 PM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2013 12:05:20 PM PST
Re Forests, above: "how could there be a beginning of time and space?" You are foolishly trying to apply common-sense concepts to domains to which they do not apply.

Posted on Jan 9, 2013 12:22:38 PM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2013 1:17:37 PM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

Posted on Jan 9, 2013 1:47:03 PM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2013 3:06:14 PM PST
Re Singh, above: "This Universe cannot exist without You." Drivel.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2013 3:36:07 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 9, 2013 7:42:31 PM PST
Forests

No matter the thread, your anti-scientific thinking is evident.

Yes, the Big Bang was proposed by Georges Lemaître, a Catholic priest, but it was NOT a religious theory. It was NOT based on the Biblical creation myth. When the Pope heard about the theory, he started saying that it was consistent with the story in Genesis. But Lemaître never said that, & in fact he objected strenuously & got the Pope to stop trying to associate the two.

What's more, the theory was falsifiable, since it predicted both the expansion of the universe & the cosmic microwave background radiation. Hubble discovered the expansion of the universe in the 1930s & Penzias & Wilson (at Bell Labs) found the cosmic microwave background radiation in the 1960s.

Your claim that there is "no actual evidence" to support the BB theory is silly & wrong. Period.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2013 3:41:48 PM PST
DRM

If M-theory (brane theory) is correct, then membranes existed before the Big Bang, & collisions between them are what form Big Bang(s). The trouble is that the theory hasn't made any testable predictions yet, so some would argue it's not even science. Time may tell.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brane_cosmology

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Membrane_(M-theory)

Posted on Jan 9, 2013 6:29:42 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 9, 2013 6:34:28 PM PST
S. Friedman says:
"What came before The Big Bang? How did the Big Bang Come From Nothing and From Nowhere to "Create" This Universe? What happened Before Space and Time and Matter?"

Me:
I don't have the answers to any of these. And no aspect of the way I live my life is influenced by my not having these answers.

So what?

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2013 6:31:48 PM PST
You'll have a chance to try again in a few days when the poster posts a new thread asking exactly questions. On the Science, Religion, and Christianity fora.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2013 6:36:32 PM PST
S. Friedman says:
Yeah, I know. Perhaps more puzzling is why someone would try offering scientific answers to people not capable of understanding them.

The analogy I've offered before: It's like trying to explain the infield fly rule to someone who's never heard of baseball.

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 9, 2013 7:46:20 PM PST
S Friedman

"Perhaps more puzzling is why someone would try offering scientific answers to people not capable of understanding them."

I always figure there are lurkers. Maybe people will start with Wiki & go from there, you never know.

Posted on Jan 10, 2013 1:05:46 AM PST
[Deleted by Amazon on Mar 15, 2013 7:33:26 PM PDT]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 10, 2013 6:52:58 AM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 10, 2013 10:01:30 AM PST
[Customers don't think this post adds to the discussion. Show post anyway. Show all unhelpful posts.]

In reply to an earlier post on Jan 10, 2013 12:06:00 PM PST
Last edited by the author on Jan 10, 2013 12:56:18 PM PST
Shiv

As lots of people cease to exist and the universe doesn't end, it would support the idea that any particular individual (Edited for change) does not make or break the universe.

Posted on Jan 10, 2013 12:54:35 PM PST
Brian Curtis says:
My grandmother was alive once; now she's not. The universe still exists without her.

Ergo, existence does not depend on the presence of observers. QED.
‹ Previous 1 2 3 4 Next ›
[Add comment]
Add your own message to the discussion
To insert a product link use the format: [[ASIN:ASIN product-title]] (What's this?)
Prompts for sign-in
 


 

This discussion

Discussion in:  Science forum
Participants:  25
Total posts:  80
Initial post:  Jan 9, 2013
Latest post:  Jun 28, 2013

New! Receive e-mail when new posts are made.
Tracked by 1 customer

Search Customer Discussions