Hi, this is my first post and im not sure if this is the correct section to post this but I'll go ahead anyway.

 

Am I scientifically right in saying that time was created in an instant (going with the big bang theory)

 

Thanks:eyebrow: (sorry if it's a stupid question im awful at science)

Am I scientifically right in saying that time was created in an instant (going with the big bang theory)

 

Thanks:eyebrow: (sorry if it's a stupid question im awful at science)

 

 

"Created" is probably not the best term to use, because then you have to ask yourself if this universe was created in anyway, whether by some event or deity.

 

Time, as we understand it, began the instant the universe started expanding.

 

Or, if you really want to get nit-picky, we start the timeline of our current universe at the big bang. Nobody knows what was going on at or before the big bang, and we are not even sure if our understanding of time even holds.

Thanks . Do you have any links or refferences that I can show when they say im wrong?

Who are you trying to show and why do they think you are wrong?

Some guy who wont beleive anything unless there is a reliable "source" (link)

You seem to be asking if there is a first cause to causation. This has been a philosophical riddle for quite some time (see Thomas Aquinas's Cosmological Argument)

 

The answer is: science has not yet determined this. The prevailing theory suggests that there exists some pre-big bang context where time existed already (see inflation).

 

There's a defensible alternative to the idea of a first cause: causation regresses infinitely (See Hilbert's Paradox of the Grand Hotel)

We have absolutely no empirical evidence to suggest that time is finite (in the past) or infinite. It looks like events which (may have) happened before the big bang (if time existed before) could not have effected those that happened afterwards, but this is not really definite. So one must still admit the possibility that the universe existed before the era in which the universe was very compressed (i.e. the pre-inflationary big bang epoch).

I recently posted about "time before time" elsewhere, as well as on the existence of "time as a dimension".

 

The answer is: science has not yet determined this. The prevailing theory suggests that there exists some pre-big bang context where time existed already (see inflation).

 

Yeah, that is a good answer. Also, the problem with saying "time began" is that you are trying to use time to define time, since time allows for beginning and ends.

 

- Bryan

in order for time to exist you need motion and vice versa. if there was a big bang then there must have been at least a "moment" where all energy ceased to move. in that case time did not exist as the whole universe was still. if the big bang bangs then stuff starts moving again you can have time. So looking at it that way time necessarily started at the big bang.

So, only two possibilities which are both ostensibly impossible. But, one has to be true.

 

One, some deity created ALL (big bang, time universe, etc.). However, something/someone cannot come from nothing.

 

Similarly . . .

 

Two, a big bang set the universe in motion. We cannot fathom the amount of energy present within known galaxies, let alone our universe. However, energy can not be created only transferred.

 

One is true. The "impossible" is possible as we live, breath, and ask these questions.

 

D-