Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Before the big bang

  1. Jul 30, 2008 #1
    What type of living organisms were there?
     
  2. jcsd
  3. Jul 30, 2008 #2

    Defennder

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Nothing existed before the Big Bang. How could there be any living organisms? Are you talking about the Cambrian explosion instead?
     
  4. Jul 30, 2008 #3
    How did we reproduce/evolve from nothing...
     
  5. Jul 30, 2008 #4
    We didn't evolve from "nothing"...we most certainly evolved from something. :rolleyes:

    This topic sounds earily familiar to another thread we had a little while ago where someone was trying to connect the Big Bang to evolution of life. As we asserted over and over in that thread, the BB and evolution are seperate topics that have nothing to do with eachother.
     
  6. Jul 30, 2008 #5
    Of course they're different theories, but they're the most accepted theories in their field, yet they contradict each other.
     
  7. Jul 30, 2008 #6

    NoTime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    How do they contradict each other?
    The theories discuss two quite different things.
    Note that it is possible to have a universe that will not support life or for that matter sun and planet formation.
    Since this particular universe has a structure that can support life the discussion of the evolution of life is meaningful.
    In some universe structured differently it would not be.
     
  8. Jul 30, 2008 #7
    If there were no living organisms before the big bang, how are there living organisms after? How did we evolve from something that wasn't there?

    Okay, I'm not quite sure what your point is here. Both theories are accepted for our universe.
     
  9. Jul 30, 2008 #8

    NoTime

    User Avatar
    Science Advisor
    Homework Helper

    I suggest you actually read the Big Bang theory.

    It took a while for the Universe to cool enough to form matter as we know it.
    So even in this universe there were no living organisms for quite some time after the big bang.
     
  10. Jul 30, 2008 #9
    https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=242954
     
  11. Jul 30, 2008 #10

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    Evolutionary theory has NOTHING to do with how the universe was created or how life began (two things that happened VERY LONG times apart from one another as well), it only addresses how organisms have changed AFTER life came to exist. The Big Bang theory addresses how the non-living universe started. They are not contradictory and neither is dependent upon the other either. For example, if someone stumbled across some amazing discovery of some other way the universe came to exist that completely refuted the Big Bang Theory, that would NOT dismiss evolution.
     
  12. Jul 30, 2008 #11
    I agree... and while you're at it, epkid08, perhaps you should look up abiogenesis as well.
     
  13. Jul 30, 2008 #12
    The main point of my topic is not about the theory of evolution or what it states, it's about how can living organisms exist if they had nothing to reproduce from or evolve from, given that "Nothing existed before the Big Bang."
     
  14. Jul 30, 2008 #13

    russ_watters

    User Avatar

    Staff: Mentor

    Then look up abiogenesis, as suggested by BoomBoom.

    You do realise the Big Bang is about how the universe was created, right? It makes no sense to have it in the question at all.
     
  15. Jul 30, 2008 #14

    Defennder

    User Avatar
    Homework Helper

    Try reading this for the formation of life from non-life:
    http://www.talkorigins.org/faqs/abioprob/

    Of course this assumes that we start off with a young Earth to begin with. If you want to know how we came to have an Earth and a solar system to begin with you might want to read the entire Big Bang timeline till the formation of the planet.s
     
  16. Jul 31, 2008 #15

    Moonbear

    User Avatar
    Staff Emeritus
    Science Advisor
    Gold Member

    The framing of your questions indicates that you do not have a good grasp of the theories you're asking about, however.

    As others have pointed out, that is the theory of abiogenesis. Time-wise, Big Bang > Abiogenesis > Evolution

    In the very simplest version (you can look up more details in textbooks so we don't have to write a whole textbook here): The early conditions of the universe after the Big Bang were not conducive to formation of life. Lots of temperature changes and chemical reactions happened first, and eventually those reactions led to an atmosphere with appropriate mixes of gases for supporting life, liquid water on the ground, chemical molecules and compounds sufficiently abundant and concentrated on the ground to form life, and those compounds could come together in chemical reactions that would be the first life forms. Keep in mind that living organisms are mainly big bags of chemical reactions happening in an aqueous environment (our cells have a lot of water in them).

    At this time, there is no reason to believe this happened only once either, unlike the formation of the universe which is believed to have all occurred from a single event (the Big Bang). If all the precursors and environment were right, early organisms may have formed in many different places from those precursors.

    Now, AFTER those first organisms formed, THEN the process of evolution can start. Cells reproducing, mutating, coalescing into colonies, specializations of functions occurring within the colonies, functional specializations becoming more organized into organ systems (plants and animals), and more complex organisms forming.
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Before the big bang
  1. Big feet (Replies: 23)

Loading...