Pre-Big Bang

[Little Bang]

Everyone has seen the long lighters used for lighting candles. Lets assume that I have one and I pull the trigger that lights the flame. For the sake of this thread I'm going to say that time inside the flame is such that one second for me is like a million years in the flame. Further, lets say that on one of the atoms inside the flame an intelligent race has evolved. This race can study their flame universe and deduce a great deal of information about it. Is there anyway they could ever know little Bang pulled the trigger that ignited their universe?

[freeztar]

No, because you are "outside" their universe.

[Little Bang]

I agree Freez. So you think there is no way for us to ever know what event ignited our universe except as an imaginative exercise?

[freeztar]

Pretty much.

In terms of modern cosmology, you could say that since physical laws have no meaning during and before the Planck epoch then we can never be certain how things came to be.

[Moontanman]

Originally Posted by Little Bang

I agree Freez. So you think there is no way for us to ever know what event ignited our universe except as an imaginative exercise?

My favorite theroy is that universe is like huge four dimensional sheet. Imagive two shets hanging on a cloths line. their mutial gravity pulls them together and boom the big bang takes place very where. The the energy released drives them apart just to repeat the process. Of courst assumes a mutidimesional mutiverse where the concept of the beginning of time doesn' exist.

[HydrogenBond]

One thing that has perplexed me, is the time reference of the original universe, if we assume BB. Wouldn't the earliest years, be highly time dilated such that what we call the first years may have only took a few seconds in the only reference that existed in the universe? It appears we are using a time reference, i.e., earth reference, which did not exist when the universe was forming, such that this time scale is not correct.

Here is an analogy. Say someone was traveling on a rocket near the speed of light, drinking a beer. It took him 10 minutes in his reference to drink that first beer. From the earth reference we say it took him 24 hours, as we try to adjust the time dilation to our reference. We come up with all kinds of theories to fill in those, assumed 24 hours. In such a case, all the 24 hour based theories would be collectively wrong, since the reality of the situation, had little to do with drinking one drop at a time, but big gulps.

The idea of 100,000 years to reach hydrogen is based on a reference that did not exist at the beginning of the universe. The only reference that existed "in reality", caused the hydrogen to appear in far less time. The 100, 000 year fantasy reference, that didn't exist, allows ton's of theories all of which may be out of touch with the reality time that was available.

[InfiniteNow]

Wow... only six posts in and the thread is already off topic.


Just... wow.



Lil'Bang... I agree with Freeztar. The universe is all there is, and anything beyond it (whatever that means...) is purely speculative. We can support various approaches with models and maths, but it would be impossible to test the validity of those models.

You've reminded me a bit of Horton Hears a Who.


"Should I put this speck down?..." Horton thought with alarm.
"If I do, these small persons may come to great harm.
I can't, put it down. And I won't! After all
A person's a person. No matter how small."


Where can I get one of those universe starting lighters?

[freeztar]

Originally Posted by HydrogenBond

One thing that has perplexed me, is the time reference of the original universe, if we assume BB. Wouldn't the earliest years, be highly time dilated such that what we call the first years may have only took a few seconds in the only reference that existed in the universe?

That's a very interesting thought. Nonetheless, we can't think of events within the Planck epoch in terms of referential frames (I'm assuming this is what you meant by "reference") because gravity was equal with all other forces in terms of "strength", hence things did not abide by referential frames as we know them from relativity today, in our physical, "makes sense" universe.

It appears we are using a time reference, i.e., earth reference, which did not exist when the universe was forming, such that this time scale is not correct.

Tell that to CMB.

Here is an analogy. Say someone was traveling on a rocket near the speed of light, drinking a beer. It took him 10 minutes in his reference to drink that first beer. From the earth reference we say it took him 24 hours, as we try to adjust the time dilation to our reference. We come up with all kinds of theories to fill in those, assumed 24 hours. In such a case, all the 24 hour based theories would be collectively wrong, since the reality of the situation, had little to do with drinking one drop at a time, but big gulps.

I'm not sure I completely understand your analogy, but it seems like your just talking about different perceptions according to referential frames?

The idea of 100,000 years to reach hydrogen is based on a reference that did not exist at the beginning of the universe.

Correct, it is based on calculations *since* the beginning of the universe, or more correctly, after the Planck epoch.

BTW, where are you getting 100,000 years from?

A few minutes into the expansion, when the temperature was about a billion (one thousand million; 109; SI prefix giga) Kelvin and the density was about that of air, neutrons combined with protons to form the universe's deuterium and helium nuclei in a process called Big Bang nucleosynthesis.[27] Most protons remained uncombined as hydrogen nuclei. As the universe cooled, the rest mass energy density of matter came to gravitationally dominate that of the photon radiation. After about 380,000 years the electrons and nuclei combined into atoms (mostly hydrogen); hence the radiation decoupled from matter and continued through space largely unimpeded. This relic radiation is known as the cosmic microwave background radiation.[28]

Big Bang - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

[Little Bang]

A crime scene is a lot like the BB. We can never go back to the event where the crime occurred. We can however, put together possible events that fit what have deduced back to the BB.