Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Right and if this was the case, everything that existed at that point in time was just that subatomic pinhead meaning it wasn't some speck suspended in a vast void, there was no void, because a void by definition means nothing could be contained in it. However, if the Universe was compacted into the size of a subatomic pinhead, what could have caused the massive amount of energy required to expand it to the vast Universe we see today?
The Big Big Theory postulates the Universe had a beginning. I think it is more logical that the Universe has no beginning, it has always existed, and is the de facto backdrop of our existence.
Well it's all just proposed theories no matter side your on of this subject however my thoughts are that the universe ''may'' have always existed however there still could had been a big bang. If the universe was compacted into an sub atomic pinhead then it still was existing just only in that scope of size and so all the big bang did was to expand it out to it's current size and continuing on to an unknown size until either stopping or recontracting possibly back into it's original sub atomic pinhead size at some unknown point of time.
As for ''what'' caused the initial explosion obviously know one knows however we see chain reactions all the time through out the universe and so why not an universal law of chain reaction whether on earth, a supernova or even the so called big bang.
The observations of the Universe expanding are based on light sources that are 13 billion years old. There is no way to tell if the Universe is expanding right now.
I've been thinking about this as well. 13 billion years ago was immediately after the big bang, so of course the universe was rapidly expanding then. So how do scientists know what the other side of the universe is doing right now? I've never heard a good answer to this.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RottenChester
Also, as the Sun rotates around the galaxy and brings the Earth along with it, wouldn't it seem the Universe is expanding if the Earth is traveling further away from an observed star or galaxy.
The sun doesn't have enough velocity to impact far away red-shifts. Its relative motion is enough to produce a red-shift so we know that either our part of the universe, their part of the universe, or both are expanding quickly. Or were expanding quickly.
Consider also that photon wave/particles pass though billions and billions of miles of vacuum. If they are particles, then space would not be a vacuum, would it? If they are waves or vibrations, what do they vibrate in a vacuum? How about gravity or magnetism? Those exist in total vacuum as well, otherwise the space station would have gone off on a tangent into deep space.
"Outer space is not a perfect vacuum, but a tenuous plasma awash with charged particles, electromagnetic fields, and the occasional star. No vacuum is truly perfect, not even in interstellar space, where there are still a few hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter."
Well it's all just proposed theories no matter side your on of this subject however my thoughts are that the universe ''may'' have always existed however there still could had been a big bang. If the universe was compacted into an sub atomic pinhead then it still was existing just only in that scope of size and so all the big bang did was to expand it out to it's current size and continuing on to an unknown size until either stopping or recontracting possibly back into it's original sub atomic pinhead size at some unknown point of time.
As for ''what'' caused the initial explosion obviously know one knows however we see chain reactions all the time through out the universe and so why not an universal law of chain reaction whether on earth, a supernova or even the so called big bang.
At some point, dark energy started causing the expansion.
I've been thinking about this as well. 13 billion years ago was immediately after the big bang, so of course the universe was rapidly expanding then. So how do scientists know what the other side of the universe is doing right now? I've never heard a good answer to this.
The sun doesn't have enough velocity to impact far away red-shifts. Its relative motion is enough to produce a red-shift so we know that either our part of the universe, their part of the universe, or both are expanding quickly. Or were expanding quickly.
Yep, the universe is currently still expanding, and doing so at an increasing rate.
At some point, dark energy started causing the expansion.
This implies dark energy existed prior to the Big Bang. If so, this means dark energy existed before the creation of the Universe.
According to the law of conservation of energy, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, therefore if dark energy is real, it has always just existed.
"Outer space is not a perfect vacuum, but a tenuous plasma awash with charged particles, electromagnetic fields, and the occasional star. No vacuum is truly perfect, not even in interstellar space, where there are still a few hydrogen atoms per cubic centimeter."
So... you are backing down from disputing the Casimir effect, and now recognize that "nothingness" as we perceive it today is NOT nothingness. In case you missed it, you just accepted that Newtonian physics is only a model, and it doesn't work in all situations. Next, consider that the "nothingness" before the big bang might have similar (but not the same) stuff going on in it to our current idea of a vacuum.
You mean this? :
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v479/n7373/full/nature10561.html (broken link)
How can they be sure they are converting virtual photons into directly observable real photons instead of just creating photons?
Quote:
Originally Posted by harry chickpea
So... you are backing down from disputing the Casimir effect, and now recognize that "nothingness" as we perceive it today is NOT nothingness. In case you missed it, you just accepted that Newtonian physics is only a model, and it doesn't work in all situations. Next, consider that the "nothingness" before the big bang might have similar (but not the same) stuff going on in it to our current idea of a vacuum.
What I'm saying is the Universe has always existed, therefore no Big Bang is required. It's a tough concept to grasp because our minds perceive everything to have a beginning and an end. However as you and I point out "nothingness" is not nothingness, therefore something has always had to exist.
I didn't realise that there was nothing before the Big Bang as wasn't all the equivilant energy of our universe compacted into the size of an sub atomic pinhead?
It could have been compacted into a size smaller than that --- with a spatial dimension of zero, and was therefore nothing, yet just as tangible as it seems today. After all, the interface between the past and the future has a dimension of zero, yet it seems very real to the human observer and manifests itself quite "concretely".
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
