Before the big bang
markin ball
Posts: 1,075
http://www.npr.org/blogs/13.7/2012/01/1 ... c=fb&cc=fp
The below was written by Marcelo Gleiser, a theoretical physicist.
I thought it would be fun to start the year addressing some questions that many people have about the universe. Mind you, some of these are far from simple, true to what Milan Kundera once wrote, "the only truly serious questions are the ones that even a child can formulate."
The big bang model asserts that observational evidence is consistent with a universe that originated from a dense and hot initial state some 13.7 billion years ago and that it has been expanding and cooling ever since. It's important to understand that this claim is not a "belief"; it's based on solid pieces of evidence.
The expansion is measured by studying light (visible and in other wavelengths, such as infrared and radio) emitted by distant galaxies. This light is "stretched," or Doppler shifted, into longer wavelengths like the folds of a pair of bellows. The amount of stretching indicates the recession velocity of the galaxies.
This expansion is a stretching of space itself. Galaxies are not like shrapnel from a bomb. Otherwise the universe would have a center point form where it all started. And in the universe every point is as important as any other point, the ultimate geometrical democracy: like the surface of a ball or of a very large (say infinite) table. Imagining different galaxies as coins glued to the ball, an observer in one will see all the others moving away from her. But this will be true of all other observers; no one is more central. Our universe is like that, but harder to visualize: evidence points to a flat geometry in three dimensions (the tabletop is 2-dimensional.)
Here people ask, "but if the universe is expanding what is it expanding into?" It turns out that the problem is how we picture the expansion, as a ball or a table growing into the surrounding space. Space grows as it stretches: nothing needs to be "out there." In truth, however, we are limited to only seeing so far out, due to the finiteness of the speed of light.
Our "horizon" is roughly 42 billion light-years, the distance light travelled in 13.7 billion years. (It would have been 13.7 billion light-years if there were no expansion. But the stretching of space gives light a boost and it manages to travel 3 times as far.) So, there is plenty of space "out there," beyond our horizon: we just keep on expanding and growing into the adjacent regions. (But see below.)
However, as we go back in time, the ball (or local regions of the table) becomes smaller and galaxies squeeze onto one another. Heat intensifies to such a level that all bonds that keep matter together break: no more molecules, atoms, atomic nuclei; even protons and neutrons get broken down to their constituent quarks. If we keep going back, we quickly reach a time when energies were beyond what we have tested. So, whatever happened between the "beginning" and about a trillionth of a second after the bang relies on theoretical speculation.
Here, there are two schools: one says that the beginning happened when the universe transitioned from a timeless quantum fluctuation into the expanding blob we live in. History starts at the bang, so to speak. Another says that we live in a multiverse, a possibly infinite assembly of all kinds of disconnected universes, with different properties. Ours would be but one of these. In this case, the universe, big bang and all, would be a tiny piece of a timeless cosmic entity. This is where science meets the poetic imagination. And the best part is that it may be true. If only we could test it one day.
The below was written by Marcelo Gleiser, a theoretical physicist.
I thought it would be fun to start the year addressing some questions that many people have about the universe. Mind you, some of these are far from simple, true to what Milan Kundera once wrote, "the only truly serious questions are the ones that even a child can formulate."
The big bang model asserts that observational evidence is consistent with a universe that originated from a dense and hot initial state some 13.7 billion years ago and that it has been expanding and cooling ever since. It's important to understand that this claim is not a "belief"; it's based on solid pieces of evidence.
The expansion is measured by studying light (visible and in other wavelengths, such as infrared and radio) emitted by distant galaxies. This light is "stretched," or Doppler shifted, into longer wavelengths like the folds of a pair of bellows. The amount of stretching indicates the recession velocity of the galaxies.
This expansion is a stretching of space itself. Galaxies are not like shrapnel from a bomb. Otherwise the universe would have a center point form where it all started. And in the universe every point is as important as any other point, the ultimate geometrical democracy: like the surface of a ball or of a very large (say infinite) table. Imagining different galaxies as coins glued to the ball, an observer in one will see all the others moving away from her. But this will be true of all other observers; no one is more central. Our universe is like that, but harder to visualize: evidence points to a flat geometry in three dimensions (the tabletop is 2-dimensional.)
Here people ask, "but if the universe is expanding what is it expanding into?" It turns out that the problem is how we picture the expansion, as a ball or a table growing into the surrounding space. Space grows as it stretches: nothing needs to be "out there." In truth, however, we are limited to only seeing so far out, due to the finiteness of the speed of light.
Our "horizon" is roughly 42 billion light-years, the distance light travelled in 13.7 billion years. (It would have been 13.7 billion light-years if there were no expansion. But the stretching of space gives light a boost and it manages to travel 3 times as far.) So, there is plenty of space "out there," beyond our horizon: we just keep on expanding and growing into the adjacent regions. (But see below.)
However, as we go back in time, the ball (or local regions of the table) becomes smaller and galaxies squeeze onto one another. Heat intensifies to such a level that all bonds that keep matter together break: no more molecules, atoms, atomic nuclei; even protons and neutrons get broken down to their constituent quarks. If we keep going back, we quickly reach a time when energies were beyond what we have tested. So, whatever happened between the "beginning" and about a trillionth of a second after the bang relies on theoretical speculation.
Here, there are two schools: one says that the beginning happened when the universe transitioned from a timeless quantum fluctuation into the expanding blob we live in. History starts at the bang, so to speak. Another says that we live in a multiverse, a possibly infinite assembly of all kinds of disconnected universes, with different properties. Ours would be but one of these. In this case, the universe, big bang and all, would be a tiny piece of a timeless cosmic entity. This is where science meets the poetic imagination. And the best part is that it may be true. If only we could test it one day.
"First they ignore you, then they ridicule you, then they fight you, then you win ."
"With our thoughts we make the world"
"With our thoughts we make the world"
Post edited by Unknown User on
0
Comments
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
The "universe" is only what we can observe, directly or indirectly. Maybe there is something that our universe is pushing into? Or maybe our 3D brains are not capable of understanding it, spatially speaking. "Something" and "nothing" become such difficult concepts when dealing with this stuff. I think its possible that eventually we may come up with math to describe some of this but we as humans will not be able to imagine or comprehend what it looks like.
"With our thoughts we make the world"
Yes I agree
When a space sHip enters our solar system which way is up. And down
Is Australia from down under, actually on top
Maybe the big bang is actually just an explosion on a much larger planet / space time
The big bang is an explosion. We have explosions all the time. Maybe those are creating their own universes
Scale
What is big
What is tiny
When you look down at the smallest thing you can see, do you wonder what the smallest thing that you can see can see it self and so on and so on
We recognize that the universe is so massive we cannot imagine its size
What about the other way
How small does small go
Deep
Hmmmmmm
:ugeek:
Enjoy, it's a fun 44 minutes..plus its in 720p
A man that stands for nothing....will fall for anything!
All people need to do more on every level!
True. Believing in abstract ideals allows people to justify anything, including mass murder and the destruction of the Earth's environment.
ever watched the dogfighting in starwars?? theyre coming in from all over the joint. not to mention the opening scene when the star destroyer basically comes in over the top of us from behind(if the movie was 3D)
take a good look
this could be the day
hold my hand
lie beside me
i just need to say
Damn. Byrnzie beat me to it
I'm with ya......but it is still fun to talk about. And, it is also fun to acknowledge one's lack of knowledge and sit and listen to people with knowledge. That is one of my favorite activities, but one that most in American society--due to egos and the foolish assumption that we are born with all the knowledge we need.
But yeah, the idea of the universe, is so far beyond the realm of comprehension for 99.99999999999% of humanity.
Theist hardly have the market cornered when it comes to mass murder, Stalin and Mao come to mind.
I think the virtual annihilation of the native Americans tops what these two achieved. Still, all Ideals are dangerous. They make people believe that the end justifies the means.
Dude you are not thinking big enough, you know that the god who created the universe in 6 literal days and created everything from people to marihuana, then from all the people he created he selected a small nomadic tribe in the middle of nowhere to do his PR in the world far before cameras existed, well to make a long story short in some point in the future he sacrificed himself to save his creation from himself but then he never died so we can see him after we die to keep praising him for all eternity because he feels alone.
See? That's what I call an open mind!
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Why not (V) (°,,,,°) (V) ?
How do you know that isn't true?
Fargo 2003
Winnipeg 2005
Winnipeg 2011
St. Paul 2014
I was watching this, and before reading anything I was thinking how lame it was that this nararator was trying so hard to sound like Morgan Freeman.
Well the evidence points to all that being a fairy tale, also common sense.
Neil deGrasse Tyson
Why not (V) (°,,,,°) (V) ?