the Big Bang

Moderators: rowan, Eravial

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

the Big Bang

Postby Angelica » Tue Sep 13, 15:13 2016

Does everyone here believe in the Big Bang theory (not the dumbfuck TV show)? How did it happen? What, if anything, existed 14 billion years ago? Do you believe in multiple universes?

User avatar
Tweek
member
member
Posts: 4977
Joined: Fri Aug 30, 3:02 2002
Location: England
Contact:

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Tweek » Wed Sep 14, 0:49 2016

I'm inclined to believe it; I can't pretend I know how it happened though.

If there can be one universe I can't think of any reason that there won't be others.
ARG!!! I NEED COFFEE!!!

User avatar
Aum
member
member
Posts: 3058
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 23:35 2007
Location: Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Aum » Wed Sep 14, 4:12 2016

Nope, I don't believe in it.
The artist's job is not to succumb to despair, but to find an antidote to the emptiness of existence. -W.A.

User avatar
Nech
member
member
Posts: 423
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 13:50 2015
Location: Canada

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Nech » Wed Sep 14, 4:28 2016

Aum wrote:Nope, I don't believe in it.


Do you have an alternate believe or are just belief-less when it comes to that time period?
Where there's smoke, there's fire. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. So just shut up, and bring some water.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Angelica » Wed Sep 14, 5:53 2016

Do you guys think it's likely that this universe was created by intelligent beings from another universe?

User avatar
Sonic#
member
member
Posts: 5032
Joined: Sat Nov 7, 9:37 2009
Location: Georgia, US

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Sonic# » Wed Sep 14, 5:58 2016

I think the Big Bang theory is the most likely model we have out there, being the one with the most observational evidence. So I believe in the BBT like I do other scientific theories: being open to my assumptions being revised by evidence.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Angelica » Wed Sep 14, 6:16 2016

Sonic# wrote:I think the Big Bang theory is the most likely model we have out there, being the one with the most observational evidence. So I believe in the BBT like I do other scientific theories: being open to my assumptions being revised by evidence.

I agree completely with this. It leaves open the question of what existed before (it's impossible for something to materialize from absolutely nothing), but in my opinion this doesn't diminish its credibility in the slightest.

Pikachu
member
member
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 9:22 2016

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Pikachu » Wed Sep 14, 7:40 2016

Angelica wrote:
Sonic# wrote:I think the Big Bang theory is the most likely model we have out there, being the one with the most observational evidence. So I believe in the BBT like I do other scientific theories: being open to my assumptions being revised by evidence.

I agree completely with this. It leaves open the question of what existed before (it's impossible for something to materialize from absolutely nothing), but in my opinion this doesn't diminish its credibility in the slightest.


It doesn't leave open that question.
There is no "before" as time began at the Big Bang. Time requires space to exist, and space came into existence at the Big Bang.

User avatar
Aum
member
member
Posts: 3058
Joined: Tue Nov 13, 23:35 2007
Location: Ƹ̵̡Ӝ̵̨̄Ʒ

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Aum » Wed Sep 14, 8:37 2016

Nech wrote:Do you have an alternate believe or are just belief-less when it comes to that time period?


I believe that our 4th dimensional perception limits our ability to see the true nature of the universe, thus we apply linear attributes to it. It may be that the universe is timeless.

I understand the logic behind the big bang theory but if there's one thing I've learned about astronomy and astrophysics it's that what we don't know is way, way, WAY more than what we do know.
The artist's job is not to succumb to despair, but to find an antidote to the emptiness of existence. -W.A.

User avatar
rowan
member
member
Posts: 9434
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 11:01 2004
Location: US

Re: the Big Bang

Postby rowan » Wed Sep 14, 9:26 2016

That's true of anything, though, so you might as well say why bother trying to know anything.

To the original question, I would say I am more than happy to talk about what happened after the big bang, and there are theorists trying to get at the question of "before" in a testable way, but we don't have anything yet. I imagine we'll figure it out someday, though IDK in my lifetime.
spacefem wrote:All your logical argue are belong to us!

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Angelica » Wed Sep 14, 10:40 2016

Pikachu wrote:There is no "before" as time began at the Big Bang. Time requires space to exist, and space came into existence at the Big Bang.

How does time require space to exist? Please explain, I'm genuinely interested.

Pikachu
member
member
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 9:22 2016

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Pikachu » Wed Sep 14, 10:56 2016

Angelica wrote:
Pikachu wrote:There is no "before" as time began at the Big Bang. Time requires space to exist, and space came into existence at the Big Bang.

How does time require space to exist? Please explain, I'm genuinely interested.


Because time is the measurement of the sequence of events within 3D space.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Angelica » Wed Sep 14, 11:03 2016

Pikachu wrote:Because time is the measurement of the sequence of events within 3D space.

Wikipedia: "Time is the indefinite continued progress of existence and events that occur in apparently irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future."

That doesn't say anything about space.

User avatar
rowan
member
member
Posts: 9434
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 11:01 2004
Location: US

Re: the Big Bang

Postby rowan » Wed Sep 14, 11:04 2016

Space and time are intricately linked through Einistein's theory of general relativity; one does not exist without the other. General relativity is THE most well tested theory we have.
spacefem wrote:All your logical argue are belong to us!

Pikachu
member
member
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 9:22 2016

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Pikachu » Wed Sep 14, 11:18 2016

Angelica wrote:
Pikachu wrote:Because time is the measurement of the sequence of events within 3D space.

Wikipedia: "Time is the indefinite continued progress of existence and events that occur in apparently irreversible succession from the past through the present to the future."

That doesn't say anything about space.


So? Wikipedia isn't the be all and end all of science you know.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Angelica » Wed Sep 14, 11:22 2016

Pikachu wrote:So? Wikipedia isn't the be all and end all of science you know.

OK, but where's your source for your claim?

Taurwen
member
member
Posts: 150
Joined: Sat Jul 2, 9:33 2016

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Taurwen » Wed Sep 14, 11:24 2016

My understanding from readings (I am not a physicist so my readings are pretty dumbed down) Is not that time and space are linked, but that they are the same thing. Time is just the primary dimension, and the we have the three others (Length, height, width). We need time, it's intrinsic, the other three are just the three that stuck in the first moments after the big bang but there's no reason why they had to be, we could have a dozen dimensions and none of then needed to be the ones we have. Except Time, you always start with the base dimension of time.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Angelica » Wed Sep 14, 11:25 2016

That doesn't mean the existence of time is dependent on the existence of other dimensions.

Pikachu
member
member
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 9:22 2016

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Pikachu » Wed Sep 14, 11:41 2016

Well it does. Unless you're proposing sequences of events outside of existential reality.

User avatar
Nech
member
member
Posts: 423
Joined: Sun Oct 18, 13:50 2015
Location: Canada

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Nech » Wed Sep 14, 11:49 2016

Angelica wrote:OK, but where's your source for your claim?


I find it kind of ironic that you're asking for a source or citation, when you just blurt out anything that comes to mind and back none of it up with facts. :\
Where there's smoke, there's fire. Just because you can't see it doesn't mean it doesn't exist. So just shut up, and bring some water.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Angelica » Wed Sep 14, 12:08 2016

Pikachu wrote:Well it does. Unless you're proposing sequences of events outside of existential reality.

OK, I see what you're saying now. That makes perfect sense, but how do we know there weren't dimensions outside of 3D space that existed before the Big Bang and may still exist now? It's not at all clear to me that events started with space as we know it. Also, 3D space itself may have existed before the Big Bang; it may have condensed to a single point and then started to expand again.

Pikachu
member
member
Posts: 162
Joined: Fri Apr 22, 9:22 2016

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Pikachu » Wed Sep 14, 12:34 2016

Angelica wrote:
Pikachu wrote:Well it does. Unless you're proposing sequences of events outside of existential reality.

OK, I see what you're saying now. That makes perfect sense, but how do we know there weren't dimensions outside of 3D space that existed before the Big Bang and may still exist now? It's not at all clear to me that events started with space as we know it. Also, 3D space itself may have existed before the Big Bang; it may have condensed to a single point and then started to expand again.


That would violate the second law of thermodynamics. The singularity of the Big Bang is the state of lowest entropy, when the 2nd law states isolated systems increase entropy over time. Entropy being defined as the loss of thermodynamic free energy. The Universe is headed for increased expansion and heat death.

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Angelica » Wed Sep 14, 12:36 2016

Really? I've heard the Big Crunch theory before.

User avatar
rowan
member
member
Posts: 9434
Joined: Fri Feb 20, 11:01 2004
Location: US

Re: the Big Bang

Postby rowan » Thu Sep 15, 9:47 2016

Yanno, you totally ignored the fact that I (as an astrophysicist) said space and time are intricately linked. If you want a citation, I have a lovely book right here. (Also makes a handy doorstop; it is very heavy)

Big Crunch isn't going to happen; the universe's expansion is accelerating not slowing down.
spacefem wrote:All your logical argue are belong to us!

User avatar
Angelica
member
member
Posts: 140
Joined: Sat Sep 10, 8:36 2016
Location: Oxford, UK
Contact:

Re: the Big Bang

Postby Angelica » Thu Sep 15, 11:35 2016

I got that, but I was suggesting that a Big Crunch happened before the Big Bang, in a much denser universe, and that this universe expanded from the singularity at the end of the previous one. Is that possible?


Return to “Science & Technology”

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest