What was before the BigBang?

Watch
jsMath
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#21
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#21
(Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
True, many people mistakenly imagine the Big Bang as producing some sort of ear-deafening sound, when actually, it was completely silent.

Well to be fair, science does not say that there wasn't anything before the Big Bang. There may have been a state of being without space and time.
Then you agree with Plato's philosphy in away...
Because Plato believed in an abstract world before this world that is timeless and dimensionless...

Actually Some scientists believe nothing was before the BigBang, because quantum mechanics proves so according to them...
0
reply
jsMath
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#22
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#22
Is there really sufficient empirical evidences to prove the BigBang, or do we have some data and observation but they are incomplete to form a genuin theory, so there is some sort of scinetific propaganda?

What do you think?

Note: am avoiding technicality and not using terms like inflation, singularity...etc.
Trying to keep the topic in its simplest informal form.
0
reply
Plantagenet Crown
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#23
Report 5 years ago
#23
(Original post by jsMath)
Is there really sufficient empirical evidences to prove the BigBang, or do we have some data and observation but they are incomplete to form a genuin theory, so there is some sort of scinetific propaganda?

What do you think?

Note: am avoiding technicality and not using terms like inflation, singularity...etc.
Trying to keep the topic in its simplest informal form.
The Big Bang is supported by large amounts of evidence.
0
reply
nucdev
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#24
Report 5 years ago
#24
(Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
We don't know yet, the question itself may not even make sense considering that it's believed time originated with the Big Bang.
Interesting view which I agree with. I would go further though and say that space, time and causation all came about with the Big Bang.

So ALL the questions of what was there before, what caused it etc. are illogical questions.



"But, after all, who knows, and who can say
From where it all came, and how creation happened?
The gods themselves are later than creation,
so who knows truly from where it has arisen?

That, the first origin of this creation,
whether It formed it all or did not form it,
Whose eye controls this world in highest heaven,
It knows, or perhaps even It does not!"
1
reply
chr1sb3ll
Badges: 0
Rep:
?
#25
Report 5 years ago
#25
I don't know anywhere near enough scientifically to voice an opinion with any degree of accuracy or certainty, but my own personal opinion would be along the lines of a big bounce type idea, where the universe is continuously expanding, collapsing under its own weight, retracting into a big crunch and starting the process again.

But I doubt we can ever prove such a thing, and I do wonder if its the scientific version of believing in god? How religious people refuse/choose to believe there isn't just nothing after we die, that scientists cannot believe there will ever just be nothing existing full stop. So we create theories, which are unlikely to be proved just like religions.

Bah....I don't know!
1
reply
Plantagenet Crown
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#26
Report 5 years ago
#26
(Original post by jsMath)
Then you agree with Plato's philosphy in away...
Because Plato believed in an abstract world before this world that is timeless and dimensionless...

Actually Some scientists believe nothing was before the BigBang, because quantum mechanics proves so according to them...
No, I'm not saying I necessary believe in Plato's philosophy, just saying that it's a possibility.

And do these scientists mean nothing in the scientific sense or the philosophical sense, because science is quite clear on the stance that actual nothing doesn't exist, that there is energy and quantum fluctuations in every inch of the universe, that a true void is non-existent.
0
reply
jsMath
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#27
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#27
(Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
The Big Bang is supported by large amounts of evidence.
I was accurate in what i said: are those evidences sufficient to form a theory, because as you can see there are different opinions on how to interpret those evidences.

When you apply newtonian and einsteinian physics and mathematics, you can almost get a similar result in modelling the Universe in form of matter and photons.


But when you enter the world of wave mathematics, singularity quantum physics and mathematics the results are different.

I derived all the models and the results stunning...
0
reply
Plantagenet Crown
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#28
Report 5 years ago
#28
(Original post by jsMath)
I was accurate in what i said: are those evidences sufficient to form a theory, because as you can see there are different opinions on how to interpret those evidences.

When you apply newtonian and einsteinian physics and mathematics, you can almost get a similar result in modelling the Universe in form of matter and photons.


But when you enter the world of wave mathematics, singularity quantum physics and mathematics the results are different.

I derived all the models and the results stunning...
The Big Bang is a scientific theory, this is undisputed, and it's a theory precisely because of all the empirical data that confirms matter and energy arising from an infinitely dense point.
0
reply
steeplings
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#29
Report 5 years ago
#29
I don't think anything's been proven. I remember reading something a few months back about how the mainstream is starting to adopt a new theory as to what 'was' before the Big Bang. All we know is that the universe is expanding and that sufficient proof exists for the Big Bang actually happened. I'm not an expert.
0
reply
The Warsmith
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#30
Report 5 years ago
#30
Probably a universe filled with dwarves.
0
reply
jsMath
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#31
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#31
(Original post by Plantagenet Crown)
The Big Bang is a scientific theory, this is undisputed, and it's a theory precisely because of all the empirical data that confirms matter and energy arising from an infinitely dense point.
I said in the first post that sicntist believe in different form of nothing, for example preexisiting form of energy level but not absolute nothing.

Those who believe nothing existed before the big bang justify their answers using quantum and relitivity.
This is why according to them it is an invalid or an illogical question to ask what was before the big bang.
But to some others they can't beleive nothing is the cause of something.

Either there exist something before the big bang or not, if there exist something or there is a pre-existing thing, then either that thing is abstract (no time, no space), or another Universe with different singularity or black hole or whatever...

dense Univers is explained using relativity and some my apply the concept of inflation, but others believe in a bouncing Universe...

So evidences are explaind in a different ways, conclusions are different...
0
reply
jsMath
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#32
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#32
If you form an illogical question for example this very question:

Is it rational or logical to ask where is the Universe? asking about the location of all universes, or our universe.

Where was that infinitesimally small dense universe, which was the singularity of all forces of nature located? Where were those forces before the big bang?

Such questions many will ask and need scientific explination.
Even if they are illogical they can lead to logical answers.
Some sort of proof by contradiction, so either you prove a contradiction or not... in both cases you can publish a paper!
0
reply
ToLiveInADream
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#33
Report 5 years ago
#33
Super Junior.

/thread.
1
reply
jsMath
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#34
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#34
Let's say for the sake of argument that infinitesimally small dense universe was an object?

According to some theorists: there did not exist space and time, so would the question of where was that object a valid question or not? In this case the question is invalid, but if no time and space exist, then did that infinitesimally small object exist in no time and space, or did exist in nothing?
Note: No time and space does not imply nothing, it can imply something that exist but its abstract of time and space.
Nothing in philosophy is different from nothing according to some scientific definitions. Because in some schools of philosophy there is only absolute nothing, but in others schools there are other classifications beyond the scope of this post.
The cyclic concept of universe is invalid philosophyically because you'll keep going back to square one, If universe 1 was the cause of universe 2... then what was the cause of universe one, that is a loop, unless you apply quantum physics to break that loop... but then you turn the same argument to quantum physics and test the loop.

In other words, in order to form a mathematical model we will need to start with equations indepndent of time and space, but evolves into being dependent of time and space, and this is a new mathematical approach...
0
reply
booksandcats
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#35
Report 5 years ago
#35
nothing bc it never happened
1
reply
jsMath
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#36
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#36
(Original post by booksandcats)
nothing bc it never happened
lol nothing happned huh! Should i take your word and throw all the maths in the bin. lol
0
reply
booksandcats
Badges: 17
Rep:
?
#37
Report 5 years ago
#37
yh definitely
0
reply
steeplings
Badges: 5
Rep:
?
#38
Report 5 years ago
#38
(Original post by ToLiveInADream)
Super Junior.

/thread.
"Super Junior" reminds me of something Italian but I can't work out what.
0
reply
jsMath
Badges: 8
Rep:
?
#39
Report Thread starter 5 years ago
#39
(Original post by booksandcats)
yh definitely
Really, you don't say, actually if you say so!
0
reply
rainbowtwist
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#40
Report 5 years ago
#40
nothing was before the big bang because time and matter were created along with the big bang
Before it, time didn't exist so nothing was there - not in the sense of how we view nothingness but there was no matter of any kind
I suppose this is quite hard for humans to comprehend bc we can't experience it :/

I like the idea of the multiverse theory though - it's sounds kinda cool that our universe could be an off shoot of another
With this theory I guess your answer would still be nothing though as our universe wouldn't exist yet but another did (if that makes any sense haha)

But the big bang is the most favoured as there's more evidence for it so my answer is nothing
1
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Back
to top
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Current uni students - are you thinking of dropping out of university?

Yes, I'm seriously considering dropping out (41)
16.02%
I'm not sure (8)
3.13%
No, I'm going to stick it out for now (92)
35.94%
I have already dropped out (4)
1.56%
I'm not a current university student (111)
43.36%

Watched Threads

View All