Since the big bang was the result of all the energy (not matter) being concentrated in a point the size of a pinhead, and the Hubble constant makes the big bang occur ~18 billion years ago, What was happening ~18 billion years and 1 day ago?

Nox

Absolute nothingness, they would have you believe all of creation was a result of spontaneous generation and that by mere chance, not only was existence formed, but life sustaining conditions and from that, life.

How many non-living things can create life? I am pretty sure the number is close to 0.

"Absolute nothingness"

How are you sure that nothingness was the first state? If you give nothingness a 0, and something a 1; the possiblity that either could have been at the begining is 50/50. I find it amazing how many people assume that nothingness MUST come before something. When both states are equally possible. Im not saying that one or the other existed at the begining of time, im just saying there is a possiblity that something was in existance at the begining of time.

"How many non-living things can create life?"

Im under the notion that life is an inherent property of matter. Given enough time and proper conditions life will spring up anywhere. Life is not what is special about this planet, its what is special about the universe.

And for all theists out there, this would mean god made the laws of physics to produce life, and forever create life in great diversity. This would seem more like a godly achievement than life on one small little planet. It would mean life through out the universe.

Some scietists say, that our universe is just one of many. And when there's an infinite amount of universes, the odds that some of them can produce life, is quite high. That drops the god out his place quite easily. Life is merely one form of energy, no greater than others, only different. I pesonally hate that idea, I'd prefer even god to that, but however, I cannot ignore the theory.

Assuming there really is numerous universes, could "God" (or anything comparable to it) be one of universal laws on some of them? Some universes would be concious, some others not?

There's a book - can't remember the name - where there was a species, which had proved that their race didn't have a soul, though some others did. They had worshiped gods and goddesses like any other race, but their case, no one heard them. As long as they thought, that no race would have more than this life, they were okay, but when they found out, that some really did go to heaven, they all killed them selves, because they thought they weren't good enough to live and nobody wanted them.

Just figured, how would we react on that?

I'm no physicist but the current theory is M-Therory. Untill a few years ago maths stipulated that there really was nothing before the big bang. Einsteins' laws of relativity stipulate that space, time and matter are intrinsicly interlinked, therefore in a space-time singularity the laws of physics and reason simply collapse. (I belive I posted a more detailed explanation of this elsewhere on this community.)
Now, however, there is M-Theory. (You must excuse me if I seem a little vague here I only have a weak grasp of this theory.) M-Theory is the unification of 'String' theory and 'Super Gravity' theory. String theory proposed that the everything is composed of small strings (small is a blatant undersatement.) these strings oscillate in multiple dimensions to produce sub-atomic particles- the raw material of reality. The key to understanding strings from the laymans perspective is the dimensions of the oscillations. Reality is composed of multiple dimensions, primarilly the first five are comprehensible without, in a basic sense serious mathematics, these being: length, bredth, width, time and space. Strings, however require more dimensions in which to function. The extra dimensions are, I belive quantumn, thus literaly 'very, very small'. String theorists used to stipulate that the were ten dimensions necessary for their theory to function. However certain developments in the field using the ten dimensional maths raised some anomalies. These being that there were five string theorems that followed the same rules in the ten dimensional sense. This of course put the whole credibilty of string maths into doubt.
Here enters 'Super Gravity Theory'. This theory is pretty much identical to string theory except that it stipulates that there are 11 dimensions. The reason for this is gravity itself and in essence the curious fact that gravity is such a weak force. All other forces in reality can be considered to be 'strong', gravity, oddly does not fit this profile. Example: when you consider the difference in mass between yourself and the Earth, the Earth is not realy exerting much force on you. In simple terms if some one with the muscular mass of the Earth were to punch you... well lets just say you would not be feeling very well. The reason for this curious weakness, the 'Super Gravity' theorists argued was that gravity originates in the 11th dimension (enter complicated maths here until you are satisfied.) The transition from the 11th to the more comprehensible 5 dillutes the 'strength' of gravity. The point of this is that if you apply 11 dimensions to string maths you come up with one encompassing formula rather than five. This is nicely tidy and has some profound implications. Primarily that gravity passaes across the dimensions, therefore it must also pass through the space time singularity. This indicates that now, physics does not collapase at the singularity but there is 'stuff' before.
Ok, I admit, this is where I'm going to struggle to get this across... All I can say is go and read some maths or cosmology journals... What all this suggests (yes, in terms of maths) is that there is/was a before- Membrane-Teory. The 11th dimension is the (an) answer to why and how the big bang occured. Not only that, it happens all the time and there are many other universes/reality's with different packets of laws/physics. The 11th is a multi-verse. It is composed of 'membranes'. When the membranes collide reallity and laws come into being. In theory you can now create a Universe/reality in a lab (though after the initiation process it will develop beyond our sphere of reality.) I'll probably be better answereing questions from here on in posts rather than confusing you further.


[This message has been edited by Autoptic (edited 04-08-2002).]

Autoptic, I really wish I had the time to read and understand what you have wrote but I will later. Thanks for the information.

Perhaps "God" is energy.

1+(-1)=0

CuriousMonky...

Sorry, I'm going to be flippant about that 'god' statement... quote. B5: We are the universe trying to work itself out.

very interesting theory.

Are there any books you can suggest that relate to this topic?

Yeh, i saw that episode of Horizons also Autopic..... But im not sure im ever going to believe what scientists say about the beggining of the unvierse, where they can only use science and maths to back it up. Kind of Biased i see it.
My deffinition of the universe has been EVERYTHING, every single atom, single essence of energy, anything that existed. So if energy was there, to make a big bang, the big bang happened in the already existing universe.
If before the universe there was truly nothing, no energy, matter movement, absolutely nothing, then time didnt exist... Time is a measurement after all, nothing to measure, no measurement. Anyhow if there was nothing until the big bang, then time started there, so in the way Humans think, Time being a constant, the universe has been there since the start of time, therefore it has always been there. Someting must have always been there, there is no begining...

quote:

---

Originally posted by soullace:
very interesting theory.

Are there any books you can suggest that relate to this topic?

---

I would suggest 'Dragons Egg'

An excellent book (fiction) written by an astrophysicist that definitively points out that our perceptions of space, time and even religion are strictly subjective.

When you reach that place then anything is conceptually possible.

By the way, to answer the question at hand, our universe exists entirely within the combustion chamber of the number 5 cylinder in a '68 Camaro. So as you see, prior to the big bang, the matter that surrounds us now existed in the same place (for one 1/4 cycle) until it was compressed and ignited thereby producing the power stroke. The current theory is that the universe is expanding - 'A good time to be alive'. Much better (and fashionable I might add) than existing in the exhaust stroke which has the latent connotations of a 'Has-been' existence.

i didn't read all the previous posts,

so this may have been mentioned already.

the theory most accepted by scientists at this moment is superstring theory.

the entire unviverse is a 10 dimensional universe,

very tightly packed, likened to a bedsheet that is two small for the bed.

in locations where the "tension" of the bed sheet falls apart,

you have a big bang, 4 dimensions expanding towards infinity, and 6 dimensions contracting towards infinity,

when the rate of expansion falls below the pull of gravity, it will contract back to it's perfect 10 dimensional state.

this is theorized to be going on all over the 10 dimensional universe, allowing for multiple and multiple universes, and when contracts back chances are that same spot will experience another big bang.

that's a nutshell explanation, though, for a real break down check out michiu kaku's hyperspace.

Y'all have watered my eyes.

Locke said:

Assuming there really is numerous universes, could "God" (or anything comparable to it) be one of universal laws on some of them?

Interesting comment since a well known religious text says that "In the beginning was the word, and the word was god." Implies that god is inaminate.....a law perhaps?

Autoptic,

A few years ago, a Scientific American article said that Quantum Theory broke down after the 16th dimension. Not to worry, my feeble brain can't comprehend the definition that was given for the next dimensiion past time......"imagine a ball in relation to a line." I need help in relating that to a solid concept.

Nox

Sorry to have to add another post.

THC,

Great comment. However, if the theory is true, we need to redefine infinity. Infinity would be a ray, not a line.

Nox

quote:

---

Originally posted by soullace:
very interesting theory.

Are there any books you can suggest that relate to this topic?

---

A book "Superstring theory", 400 and more pages, *really* good. Can you imagine the imagination and work behind the name choice !!!

Actually before the big bang I think that time did not exist because there was no need for it. So before the "big bang" the energy was still concentrated in that little pinhead

If so, what was the magic that, all of a sudden, made it explode?

Nox

Autoptic, I am not neglecting your reponse but I am putting something to gether for this topic. I could still take a couple more days.

[This message has been edited by CuriousMonky (edited 04-10-2002).]

I dont believe that our universe sprang from nothing. Even though its easier to believe there was a begining to it all, the idea of infinity is actually much more plausible if your think about it. Imagine that the universe began at the number one (it doesnt matter where we are now). Now think about what numbers are. All they are is our tool to chart infinity which has many different uses. You could break the number 1 down to 0,1 and then 0,01, 0,001 and so on for infinity. This applies to time also. Anyone agree?

Oh yea, besides that, time is the only thing that can set things in motion. So if time didnt exist before the big bang then that pinhead of concentrated energy would have remained static. Time is a constant, theres no begining or end, no doubt in my mind.

Time is not a constant, it changes in relation to conditions.

If I were in a ship and hit light speed and I either had infinite energy propelling myself, or I had no mass (the requirements to sustain light speed) and assuming I come out of this experience intact, I could go light speed for a billion Earth years and then when I come out of the light speed I would be the same age as when I activated it while everyone I knew on Earth, and most likely all of humanity would be long dead.

So time for me "stopped" or "suspended" while it continued on Earth. The faster you go, the slower time is for you, when you hit light speed your in stasis.

Time is a property, time and space are linked, matter exists in space. So in order for matter to exist there has to be space, and time and space are linked, so I am going to go and assume that this all has origin.

So before all of this, there was stasis. There was no change, nothing could happen because it was on pause and if there is no change, which requires time, then nothing can ocurr.

So whatever flipped the switch that activated time had to have been from outside the stasis continuum, outside all of everything, not in a separate dimension/universe, not anything, and it just flipped the switch somehow so everything could go into motion.

It had to exist...outside of existence, if you catch what I am trying to say. Just somemore make-your-head-explode-thinking-about-it thoughts.

The special theory of relativity does talk about time slowing down as you approach the speed of light. However, (another however) the speed of light is an absolute, according to theory. But the characteristic blue glow in the atomic pile cooling tanks is because of the shock waves of particles traveling greater than the speed of light. The point being, (with a play on Johnny Cochran's words) if the special theory was wrong about one thing (absolute speed of light) then it's wrong about something else (time slowing down as you approach the speed of light).

Having said all that, I don't think that time is anything other than a constant. True, we may not have anything to measure it against (energy in stasis), but that doesn't mean that time doesn't march on.

Nox

If everything suddenly stops in our universe somehow..... then there is no time. when it restarted, assuming it did, it would never had stopped..... if u c what i mean, there would be nothing we could compare it with 2. Unless there our other dimensions... But if they do not exist, we would not know time stopped, it wouldnt have stopped... hmmmm, ive just come 2 a point where im going 2 contradict myself totally.... well, some of u will c what im getting at, hopefully

I think I understand.

But would all universes and all dimensions have to stop simultaneously for time to stop?

Or would time continue, but be without a reference point?

Are we getting too esoteric?

Nox

quote:

---

Originally posted by Nox:
The special theory of relativity does talk about time slowing down as you approach the speed of light.

I don't think that time is anything other than a constant.

that doesn't mean that time doesn't march on.

Nox

---

Why can't both be true? If taken in perspective, time will exist as a constant for Dark Magneto in his ship at light speed and as a constant for the squatters back on Earth that have taken over his apartment.

As he slows to sub-light speed (and puts his seat and tray table in an up-right position) upon his return to Earth, he transitions to another perspective. An effect similar to that of light being sucked into a black hole. Light existed as a constant elsewhere before it was crushed by gravity.

Was the sum of the matter in our universe contained in a black hole prior to the big bang?

Does the universe run through cycles of implosion and explosion? Do the black holes eventually pull themselves into a single point and then explode again?

Does it explode or is the matter shat out the other side of the black holes whereby other universes are experiencing their big bang?

Did Dark Magneto lose his deposit?

The black hole concept fascinates me. At one point I envisioned the entire universe being sucked into a singular black hole. This would generate a new big bang and the the Buddists and their wheel would be correct. Then I read about the black hole "engine" giving off energy perpendicular to its accretion disk. That's when I gave up that theory. However (there's that word again), I am interested in hearing what you have to say.

Nox

I don't get that part where the mind is different from the brain. Please explain that to me.

actually nox, it's the formation of heavy elements is an old one.

nuclear fusion turn hyrdogen into helium,

that's really all you need some kind of fusion or incredible impact that makes two matching molecules one, and you now have a different element.

the understanding of this process is how the periodic table of elements includes man made elements.

Lost,

I've got the concept of fusion in stars...stops at iron because it requires more energy to fuse above that. The theory that I'm familiar with on the heavier elements related to super novas.

My comment concerned the formation of the heavier elements as a result of collapsing dimensions...now that's heavy duty.

What I was questioning was whether the concept about the formation of the heavier elements was a part of super-string theory. If so, I wanted to read up more about it.

Nox

Dark, could you answer my question? Just incase you don't remember its:

"I don't get that part where the mind is different from the brain. Please explain that to me."

What j0 said in another thread.
First of all, you cant ask what was before the Big Bang, because if thats the case, what was before God?

Second, you cant think of anything before the Big Bang. The Big Bang was the beginning, nothing is there before the Beginning, thus it is called "The Beginning".

Iscariot,

Unless, you happen to believe that a Big Crunch preceeded the Big Bang.

That possibility is totally consistant with Buddish philosophy.

Nox