The Big Bang Theory: Was There No Space?

[robsharp14]

im beginning to doubt that the big bang created space and time, but I am beginning to think that time and space was already in existence but once the big bang happened space began to expand outward and still is. Time was moving at an extremely rapid pace before the big bang but after the big bang time began to move very slowly. I don't know about this theory though it was kind of thought of at random

 

[marcus]

im beginning to doubt that the big bang created space and time, but I am beginning to think that time and space was already in existence ...

That much of what you are saying is certainly in line with an active area of research these days.

On the order of a hundred research papers get written each year about this idea.
There are new ideas and models mostly post-2000 or post-2005. The older idea of Hawking (which is pre-2000) where there was no pre-bang universe does not get studied much anymore.

The trouble is, there is no popularization or almost none, of the mainstream current work in quantum cosmology.

A popular book came out this month, but I haven't seen it yet so can't say what I think of it.

Maybe someone will glance at it in a bookstore and say how they like it:

It is called "Once Before Time"---which sounds like it's a "once-upon-a-time" story of the universe. There really should be 5 or 6 popular books to choose from, so everybody could find one to his or her taste and level of knowledge.

As I say, I can't recommend this not having seen it yet, but here is the amazon page:
https://www.amazon.com/dp/0307272850/?tag=pfamazon01-20
It just came out, so it is the expensive hardcover version. The cheaper paperback will probably appear in about a year.

The author is part of a group at Penn State where they run computer models of an earlier universe that collapses (not to a point, not to infinite density) to very high density which then by quantum effects generates an expansive force which causes it to re-expand and undergo a period of very rapid expansion, inflation. The model has some explanatory power, it can help explain some of what we see. But still needs a lot of testing. For now just one of several competing ideas.

 

[Eyelegal]

I think time is likely to have been going on for a very very long time before the "big bang", probably similar to the rate that we experience it, but disturbed by matter. I like to picture this on the wavy 2d sheets postulated by m theory, and have always thought they resemble einsteins view of spacetime as a sheet with mass causing distortions in the form of gravity, similar to the waves on the 2d sheet in m theory?

What robsharp said is interesting, time could exist forever but is redefined in each universe created, possibly by the amount of matter present/gravity produced. Time could move slower or faster here than it does outside of universes and inside others.

This could mean that say outside universes is a 4d space, 3 spatial 1 time, sheets float in 2d space inside this 4d space (with another dimension for the strings that make up the sheet), and the sheets define their own 4d space with time having the same general property as before but moving at a different rate depending on the structure of the universe. So they exist in their own space and time within another space and time?
I don't study or understand the mathematics behind these theories, just my random thoughts on current knowledge. Forgive me if it makes no sense.

 

[Kevin_Axion]

I agree with marcus, mainstream media focuses too much on ideas like string cosmology, where as quantum cosmology (LQG in particular) has been having much greater success in this subject area. I'll also admit that M-Theory actually explains more about what possibly exists beyond our universe and lacks an explanation of the one we live in.

 

[Eyelegal]

I agree with marcus, mainstream media focuses too much on ideas like string cosmology, where as quantum cosmology (LQG in particular) has been having much greater success in this subject area. I'll also admit that M-Theory actually explains more about what possibly exists beyond our universe and lacks an explanation of the one we live in.

We have a reasonable idea of how our our universe was formed up to an instant after the big bang don't we? We just don't understand what happened before that? If its a multiverse like m-theory predicts won't there end up being two theories which communicate in some way, one for our universe and one for the space in which universes are created? Or is one theory really meant to be able to explain everything?

 

[Kevin_Axion]

The Big Bang says nothing about the creation of the universe, only fractions of a second after.

 

[familia]

I guess were looking for one theory to explain everything but as time goes by we keep finding new facts about the physical reality we live in therefore we keep proving and disproving the theories and refining one to explain all phenomenons found to date right now if I'm not mistaken
we have two theories that explain almost everything from black holes to quanta but all physicists are trying to combine the two to create one

 

[Chronos]

The holy grail of physics [at present] is to unite general relativity with quantum mechanics - quite a challenge. I think both theories are good approximations, but, incomplete. Until we figure out the incomplete parts, unification is not possible.

 

[yoda jedi]

im beginning to doubt that the big bang created space and time, but I am beginning to think that time and space was already in existence but once the big bang happened space began to expand outward and still is. Time was moving at an extremely rapid pace before the big bang but after the big bang time began to move very slowly. I don't know about this theory though it was kind of thought of at random

there are theories and theories of time so maybe...
there is not only a beginning of time, there is also an end...


...But the very fact that time was born has a fascinating corollary: it may disappear. In billions of years time could cease to be, according to Prof José Senovilla of the University of the Basque Country, Bilbao, and his colleagues, who published their findings in the journal Physical Review D...

 

[robsharp14]

this makes me think of a theory that stated the energy pops in and out of our dimension without any cause or something like that. I can't remember what this theory is called...oh well

 

[familia]

i think u r referring to quantum theory

 

[universe11]

Most of the radiation energy in the universe is in the cosmic microwave background...

Do you know the value of this energy?

 

[marcus]

Most of the radiation energy in the universe is in the cosmic microwave background...

Do you know the value of this energy?

I've calculated it several times but don't know it by heart. You can calculate it if you want.

You probably know the Stefan-Boltzmann law for black body radiation.

Find the watts/square meter power density of a surface at 2.725 K.

Then divide by c/4.

Dividing watts/m² by c/4 should give joules/m³.

The overall mass energy density of the universe is in fractions of a nanojoule per cubic meter and the CMB energy density is a small part, so it should come out femtojoules per cubic meter, I guess. Or fractions of a pico. You can find it with Stef-Boltz.

 

[robsharp14]

i wonder if your able to use this energy...maybe not yet becouse of the entropy

 

[universe11]

I found it is 6*10**(-5) of the density of the Universe!

This means is 6*10**(-5) of the mass of the Universe ( 10^53 kg)

 

[yoda jedi]

i think u r referring to quantum theory

me two.

 

[universe11]

The new model, developed by Paul Steinhardt of Princeton University in the US and Neil Turok at Cambridge University in the UK, will be controversial. It requires that time existed before the Big Bang, assumes that the universe is older than the 14 billion years we think it is, and says that the universe regularly undergoes repeating "cycles" of big bangs and big crunches (Sciencexpress 1126231).
http://physicsworld.com/cws/article/news/24844

How were explained the Big Crunches?

 

[robsharp14]

that's the one! thanks

 

[Imax]

Before the Big Bang, time and space did not exist. Trying to ask what happened before the Big Band is like trying to ask what’s north of the North Pole?

 

[marcus]

Before the Big Bang, time and space did not exist. Trying to ask what happened before the Big Band is like trying to ask what’s north of the North Pole?

Penrose says that this was precisely the prevailing expert view before 2005.
You might like to listen to his talk at Cambridge in fall of 2005.

Anyway, fashions change. Cosmologists no longer think that (what you said) on the whole. There are a number of newer models that go back pre-bang. At least one is approaching the test stage (assuming NASA can get its next microwave background mapping mission funded.)

Say if you would like some links to professional research papers or any help navigating the literature.

The main overview you can get by scanning the list of recent papers in "quantum cosmology". Here's a keyword search. They are almost all about cosmology that goes back pre-bang and has no singularity. At least the first 50-100. I haven't looked at the whole list.

http://www.slac.stanford.edu/spires/find/hep/www?rawcmd=dk+quantum+cosmology+and+date+%3E2006&FORMAT=WWW&SEQUENCE=citecount%28d%29

I defined the search to find all "quantum cosmology" that appeared after 2006 and to order them with the most highly cited first. So you get the papers first which other researchers have most often referred to in their papers---a rough measure of how valuable/important the paper is.
The first 50 or 100 in some sense defines the field.

 

[alphachapmtl]

marcus seems to be right about "quantum cosmology".
See this fascinating article:
The Birth of Time: Quantum Loops Describe the Evolution of the Universe
ScienceDaily (Dec. 17, 2010)
http://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2010/12/101216095014.htm

... a new theoretical model of quantum gravity describing the emergence of space-time from the structures of quantum theory.
... loop quantum gravity (LQG). The theory holds that space is weaved from one-dimensional threads.
... The starting points for the model are two fields, one of which is a gravitational field, the other a scalar field.
... time emerges as the relation between the gravitational field (space) and the scalar field - a moment in time is given by the value of the scalar field.
... the passage of time emerges as the property of the state of the gravitational and scalar fields and the appearance of such a state corresponds to the birth of the well-known space-time.

 

[jtbell]

I see no science in this discussion since it was revived in March. Thread closed.