Jump to content

Maybe No Big Bang


ERayR

Recommended Posts

Some exponents of normative religion have denounced the Big Bang in the past, even though there was no justification for that criticism.  Now they will be devastated to find that the universe is eternal -- no beginning and no end -- since only God can be eternal in their version of reality.  What to do?  Denounce Quantum Mechanics?

Link to comment

Wrong title, it should be "Maybe no singularity?" 

 

In a infinite universe, abiogenesis happens naturally all the time, even if abiogenesis is highly unlikely.

Even in an infinite multiverse, the question still obtains:  Are the laws of nature (physics, chemistry, etc.) everywhere the same, or are there infinite sets of laws from universe to universe.  In this universe at least, natural law is of one sort, and it does not include the possibility of abiogenesis/archebiosis.  That does not exclude the possibility of life being transmitted from place to place, nor does it prevent sentient beings more advanced than us from engineering or synthesizing life.

Link to comment

Even in an infinite multiverse, the question still obtains:  Are the laws of nature (physics, chemistry, etc.) everywhere the same, or are there infinite sets of laws from universe to universe.  In this universe at least, natural law is of one sort, and it does not include the possibility of abiogenesis/archebiosis.  That does not exclude the possibility of life being transmitted from place to place, nor does it prevent sentient beings more advanced than us from engineering or synthesizing life.

 

In a infinite multiverse a supreme intelligence (God) exists somewhere

 

 

 

 

Our universe is neither infinite in time nor size.

 

Empirical science ends at the Planck time, scientists don't know what happened before that.

 

Speculations

1. Our Bubble universe came from another Bubble universe

2. Our known universe came out of mysterious quantum vacuum 

3. The Big Bang happened everywhere

4. The Big Bang was a dense point inside another universe. 

 

The words "universe" and "multiverse" are the same thing, to use the right word depends on the model you are talking about.  

Link to comment

Our universe is neither infinite in time nor size. But it has plenty of both to allow for all the forces of nature and chemistry to occur.

 

You might have intended to mean our "visible universe" is finite is size. We have no idea observationally how large the entire universe is (no could we).

 

And it is true that the typical big bang model does run into a singularity and we can count a finite amount of time back to that point. Yet, that singularity is not a technical requirement for our observations to hold. A variant model of the big bang can exist where some kind of physics starts to dominate when the universe was near the traditional singularity but avoids that singularity. That is what this model attempts to do. Is it right? /shrug But it is a demonstration that it may be possible.

Link to comment

You might have intended to mean our "visible universe" is finite is size. We have no idea observationally how large the entire universe is (no could we).

 

And it is true that the typical big bang model does run into a singularity and we can count a finite amount of time back to that point. Yet, that singularity is not a technical requirement for our observations to hold. A variant model of the big bang can exist where some kind of physics starts to dominate when the universe was near the traditional singularity but avoids that singularity. That is what this model attempts to do. Is it right? /shrug But it is a demonstration that it may be possible.

 

I'm obviously not that type of scientist, and don't have a clue as to the math involved in quantum gravity. Yes I know it eliminates the singularity problem, but to me it gives too much room for other problems. One of the problems I have with the no beginning and no end idea is that it is eerily similar to the now discredited Steady State theory. I also disagree with the idea that our universe must end in a Big Crunch. With sufficient matter in a increasingly expanding universe a Big Crunch may not be possible let alone likely outcome. Right now it looks like the universe has enough matter to continue to expand until entropy finally wins and it asymptotes to at or near absolute 0. But as you say "Is it right"? I do not know either, but it should be interesting to find out.

Link to comment

"The universe has no beginning and no end". If something has no beginning(We know there was a beginning, but have no clue as to what if anything existed before the beginning) and no end it must at some point hold steady. So far the evidence is that we will continue to expand for a very long time, but not forever.

 

I don't know enough math to say definitely either way. But Einsteins' model allows for a Big Crunch, and the evidence so far is that it will not happen. It is all very theoretical right now. I wouldn't be surprised if we are all surprised.

Link to comment

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...