ChatterBank1 min ago
Answers
Best Answer
No best answer has yet been selected by sacha.86. Once a best answer has been selected, it will be shown here.
For more on marking an answer as the "Best Answer", please visit our FAQ.
As Geezer has pointer out - the key misunderstanding here is the idea of time.
We only experience time in a very limited way. As you enter a powerful gravitational force time slows.
This is not theory but fact - the satellites that run our SatNavs have to correct for the Earth's gravity slowing time.
Time stops in a black hole and the Big Bang is essentially a black hole in reverse.
Time came into existance at the Big Bang notions of cause and effect cease to be meaningful here. Not an easy thing to get your head around I know.
There are other possibilities, the idea that there have been many Big Bangs has been gaining ground with respected figures in recent years, people like Roger Penrose.
Personally I'm not a fan, of the idea rather than Professor Penrose. I think it evades the main issues without really bringing much to the party. I think it fails the Occam's Razor test.
We only experience time in a very limited way. As you enter a powerful gravitational force time slows.
This is not theory but fact - the satellites that run our SatNavs have to correct for the Earth's gravity slowing time.
Time stops in a black hole and the Big Bang is essentially a black hole in reverse.
Time came into existance at the Big Bang notions of cause and effect cease to be meaningful here. Not an easy thing to get your head around I know.
There are other possibilities, the idea that there have been many Big Bangs has been gaining ground with respected figures in recent years, people like Roger Penrose.
Personally I'm not a fan, of the idea rather than Professor Penrose. I think it evades the main issues without really bringing much to the party. I think it fails the Occam's Razor test.
I have a lot going on Geezer, I'll be a more occasional visitor than regular.
I may have been unfair in saying that recurrent Universes fails Occam's razor. If the fundamental constants that govern the Universe Change with each it's as good a solution as the ideas of Multi-verses.
It might do away with the Inflationary epoch which is unpalatable but supported by evidence.
However it does require that you take a bit of a leap of faith with him and accept the idea that the second law of Thermodynamics is fundamentally flawed.
As holy Cows go that's a big one! It's what says that broken wine glasses don't remake themselves!
Penrose suggests that the background radiation has structure in it, circles infact.
Well - we'll see
If you want an overview have a quick read here:
http://io9.com/569470...e-before-the-big-bang
I may have been unfair in saying that recurrent Universes fails Occam's razor. If the fundamental constants that govern the Universe Change with each it's as good a solution as the ideas of Multi-verses.
It might do away with the Inflationary epoch which is unpalatable but supported by evidence.
However it does require that you take a bit of a leap of faith with him and accept the idea that the second law of Thermodynamics is fundamentally flawed.
As holy Cows go that's a big one! It's what says that broken wine glasses don't remake themselves!
Penrose suggests that the background radiation has structure in it, circles infact.
Well - we'll see
If you want an overview have a quick read here:
http://io9.com/569470...e-before-the-big-bang
There is no such thing as nothing so there has to be something! you couldn't imagine nothing if you tried because even if you think of a black emptiness its still black it's something to imagine so no matter what there's always something.Whatever the term nothing means to you,how ever you want to think of it in your head,It will always besomthing or you could'nt possibly try to think of it or imagen it or ask some one else what it is.
