Time frozen before Big Bang
Stephen Hawking says that time supposedly stops when you're inside a black-hole.
And that the Big Bang originated from inside of a microscopic black-hole.
So according to him there was no time before that or anything else.(i.e. no space time continuum) And also that nothing happened at the moment of the Big Bang to cause it to happen in the first place.
He also says that shows that god doesn't exist since there supposedly was literally nothing before that. I don't think that's necessarily true though since god would probably be outside of the space time continuum(if god actually exists). What do others think about this?
It isn't very difficult to visualise. Think of time on the Y axis and the size of the universe on the positive X axis. People can demand as much as they like, "Yes, but what was before time = zero". There simply was no before. The universe spontaneously came into existence. A mathematician has already shown that the universe could arise from nothing anyway and time with it. This graph of Y= X^2 is an analogy of the process. There is no solution where Y < 0 i.e. before time started. Similarly there is no initial cause or God involved, X spontaneously takes the relevant value at time Y.
_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.
From where?
Human common sense always expects a before and after, cause and effect, but common sense completely falls down when we deal with the physics of the very small, very large and very fast. Where does any point on the X axis of the graph come from? At time zero there was no X, so at time = 1 where has X = 1 come from? Here, only mathematics serves to explain what is happening. The universe did not necessarily need to come from anything. Our current universe may be the equivalent of a point on a complex X, Y graph, with no solution before time = 0 and similarly no size, no "anything" at the origin 0,0.
_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.
It is quite a simple, clean and elegant explanation and I find it quite satisfying in a philosophical sense too. It isn't definitely proven yet, but things are certainly pointing more and more in that direction.
_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.
Well "the cause" would probably be that the entire-universe being packed together into something the size of a proton would make it suddenly explode/implode out of nowhere. Then again something so large being condensed together into something so small sounds kinda far-fetched in the first place.
From what we know of the big bang, the universe was indeed packed that densely. Scientists have managed to track back to a tiny fraction of a second after the big bang. If you try to think of it in terms of maths rather than trying to stuff a load of things into a small box, then the density isn't a problem. It is just numbers.
_________________
I've left WP indefinitely.
From where?
Possibly from the fact that 0 = (-1)+1, and that the sum of all energy in the universe (mass and energy being two sides of the same coin) being zero. It only appeared out of nothing in the same sense that virtual particles appear out of nothing (always paired with virtual anti-particles). On the other hand, the universe could have come into existence from a singularity as well.
_________________
“He who controls the spice controls the universe.”
From where?
Possibly from the fact that 0 = (-1)+1, and that the sum of all energy in the universe (mass and energy being two sides of the same coin) being zero.
Not at all. It would amount to two quantities of opposite configuration, thus no zero, but oscillations where the sum is constant and unchangable. The most intriguing implication is an infinite universe.
Nothing doesn't exist. It has to be something there in the first place.
From another thread:
The word "ether" has extremely negative connotations in theoretical physics because of its past association with opposition to relativity. This is unfortunate because, stripped of these connotations, it rather nicely captures the way most physicists actually think about the vacuum. In the early days of relativity the conviction that light must be waves of something ran so strong that Einstein was widely dismissed. Even when Michelson and Morley demonstrated that the earth's orbital motion through the ether could not be detected, opponents argued that the earth must be dragging an envelope of ether along with it because relativity was lunacy and could not possibly be right. The virulence of this opposition eventually had the scandalous consequence of denying relativity a Nobel Prize. (Einstein got one anyway, but for other work.) Relativity actually says nothing about the existence or nonexistence of matter pervading the universe, only that any such matter must have relativistic symmetry.
It turns out that such matter exists. About the time relativity was becoming accepted, studies of radioactivity began showing that the empty vacuum of space had spectroscopic structure similar to that of ordinary quantum solids and fluids. Subsequent studies with large particle accelerators have now led us to understand that space is more like a piece of window glass than ideal Newtonian emptiness. It is filled with "stuff" that is normally transparent but can be made visible by hitting it sufficiently hard to knock out a part. The modern concept of the vacuum of space, confirmed every day by experiment, is a relativistic ether. But we do not call it this because it is taboo.
A Different Universe: Reinventing Physics from the Bottom Down, pages 120-121 (2005)
That's just another way of saying "we don't know."
Treat the number zero as an integer not significantly different from 1 or -1. "Nothing" in the traditional sense is still something.
Or it's another way of saying infinitely small volume and infinite density.
_________________
“He who controls the spice controls the universe.”
If the recent notion by Stephen Hawking is true (i.e. Black holes are not inherently black), time does not stop, it just goes very slowly.
_________________
“He who controls the spice controls the universe.”
If the recent notion by Stephen Hawking is true (i.e. Black holes are not inherently black), time does not stop, it just goes very slowly.
I heard him say that time completely-stops inside a black hole, although he obviously doesn't know that for a fact along with many other things he says.
Similar Topics | |
---|---|
It's that time again |
09 Mar 2024, 5:15 pm |
Pizza time |
06 Feb 2024, 1:26 pm |
Do you think it will ever be possible to go back in time? |
Today, 3:33 pm |
Would I get jail time for this? |
01 Feb 2024, 1:58 pm |