Big Bang Conditions?

[Theland1]

What preconditions do scientists recognise as necessary for the spontaneous origin of the universe, with particular reference to a scalar field?

[ChuckFickens]

Nobody has the slightest clue. any theories are pure speculation.

[Theland1]

Are there certain things you would rule out then?

[R1Geezer]

use of words like pre, before etc indicate that there is a fundemental mis understanding. Nothing useful can come of such a discussion.

[jomifl]

Well I guess there would have to be a god to start it all off then there would have to be lots of angels to do the bits that deities just don't get involved with. Oh and there would have to be a 'somewhere' for it to happen. Since god needed a rib from adam to create eve he would probably need a lot of 'stuff' to work with. God alone knows where that would come from.

[sandyRoe]

In the beginning God created the Heaven and the Earth.
And the Earth was without form, and void....
It's all there, you only have to read your Bible.

[jomifl]

Sandy ..what you are saying is that god is a precondition. He must have needed 'stuff' or were his creative powers waning when he created eve, which is why he has almost none left now. (hence no recent miracles).

[Old_Geezer]

Time for the universe seems to start when the universe first comes into existence.
If cause & effect still holds, then the initial cause is a puzzle, may as well call it God and see if you can go anywhere from there.
But all this implies time is more than an illusion anyway. Who is to say that all the infinite number of apparent instances of time, both those experienced and those not, do not always exist in the single "now" moment?

[beso]

"Time" and "Now" are concepts dependent on the frame of reference and cannot be transferred to other frames. Consequently trying to refer to the start of the Universe is fraught with difficulty.

[ludwig]

// Who is to say that all the infinite number of apparent instances of time, both those experienced and those not, do not always exist in the single "now" moment? //

If you'd ever been shopping with my wife you'd know they don't geezer. The infinite instances of time drag on for bloody ages.

[Old_Geezer]

LOL Been there, in a manner of speaking.
Ah but that's because you are experiencing so many of them, you just don't realise that you are doing it all at once.

[scowie]

imo, the universe had no origin and has always existed and always will. In other words, the Big Bang theory is a load of rubbish and the universe is not expanding at all.

I recommend you watch this documentary.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1yTfRy0LTD0&playnext=1&list=PL35A32C6E877FEAC3

[R1Geezer]

well that's that sorted then scowie, How have cern missed your talents eh? The steady state theory was killed of a generation ago mate.

[scowie]

Fred Hoyle's Steady State theory may have been killled off but that theory was just as kooky as the Big Bang theory. His theory still accepted that the universe was expanding but suggested that it's energy/mass density stayed the same due to new matter being created.

[scowie]

I prefer the plasma/electric universe theory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P4zixnWeE8A

[beso]

Plasma/electric universe theory (in fact only a hypothesis) is nothing more than a case of using technical sounding words that the author doesn't even understand to lend some sense of advanced scientific comprehension.

It is a load of rubbish that nobody with any knowledge of cosmology takes the slightest interest in. It doesn't even model the observed nature of the universe and as such is granted the status of a disproved hypothesis.

[R1Geezer]

oh perlease, not the plasma electric cobblers. You cannot be serious scowie, you've been taken in mate. Pretty well every serious Cosmologist goes with the big bang. They have traced back conditions to flor seconds after. Ok it's still only a theory but it's the best we have at the moment.

[scowie]

It models observed structures in the universe much better than the Big Bang theory does. Plasma physicists can create galaxy-shaped structures in a laboratory. Big Bang theorist cant even do that with a computer simulation without adding fudge factors like dark matter into the mix.

Btw, plasma physicists came up with the plasma universe theory, so you are effectively saying that plasma physicists dont really understand their field.

The Big Bang theory only became the predominant one because it is religion-friendly so the bible-bashing scientific community in america embraced it. It's not like the BB theory made any quantifiable predictions that were later observed. They predicted a greater temperature for the CMBR than was observed (5-50 K).

Btw, if you watch all parts of the 1st video I posted you will see that it paints a pretty poor picture of cosmological study in general. It highlights some pretty disreputable stunts pulled by the BB-supporting professionals (publishing photos that hide quasar-galaxy relationships). It seems professional astronomers have to do BB supporting research if they wanna put bread on the table, in the US at least.

[R1Geezer]

so dark matter is a fudge factor is it, right oh!

[beso]

scowie:

If you get all your information about the achievements of the plasma/electric "theory" and the weaknesses of the BigBang Theory from the proponents of that lame hypothesis of course you will be taken in.

You assertion about the religious underpinnings is completely inane. Did they tell you that one too?

[scowie]

Actually, I read all about the Big Bangs weaknesses long before I had heard of the plasma/electric universe theory. Here's a good site with a summary of them, that i'm sure you will love...!
http://www.metaresear...smology/BB-top-30.asp

I never really liked the idea of an expanding universe, and you've got to admit, it is kind of a crazy concept. You shouldnt be so surprised when people are skeptical of it. Tbh, the plasma universe theory is kind of crazy too in a way, but the BB's reliance on dark matter and dark energy make it crazier, imo.

I reckon some scientists love to sensationalize their field of study and think the craziest ideas are the best. Another example of this is the giant impact hypothesis for the moon's creation. That's got plenty of holes in it too.