Anura Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Is the big bang the beggening of time provable. I think we just can't calculate with our human instriments exactualy how time got started. Or even if it did have a start. Someone please unconfuse me here. If that's even posible. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 This should shed some light for you on the current state of ideas on this subject: http://www.einstein-online.info/en/spotlights/big_bangs/index.html Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iNow Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Great link, SJ. Thanks to Martin for being the facilitator who introduced it to me the first time. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 Great link, SJ. Thanks to Martin for being the facilitator who introduced it to me the first time. Same for me too, I pulled it out of his Cosmo Basics sticky. I have to hand it to Martin for linking to interesting stuff that is both concise and understandable to those of us who are not fluent in high math and cosmological physics. For a mathematician he does a great job of keeping the mathematics to a minimum! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airbrush Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 It is silly to assume that our time is an absolute. Our time may have begun with the big bang, but time in general is probably eternal. You think our universe is all there is, or ever was? You think our universe popped out of nothing? Not likely. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted June 8, 2010 Share Posted June 8, 2010 It is silly to assume that our time is an absolute. Our time may have begun with the big bang, but time in general is probably eternal. You think our universe is all there is, or ever was? You think our universe popped out of nothing? Not likely. This is what I've explained to him in a PM exchange that BB represents T=0 because it's convenient for cosmologists to do so but time most probably extends much before it possibly infinitely and also that T=0 is is just a point in the Universe's evolution. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 This is what I've explained to him in a PM exchange that BB represents T=0 because it's convenient for cosmologists to do so but time most probably extends much before it possibly infinitely and also that T=0 is is just a point in the Universe's evolution. It is hard to imagine though, the way we (obviously my opinion of the way we) generally think of time, as being possibly infinite. Much more so than space. If space is infinite we have to be somewhere...so here we are... But the nature of time as we (me again) see it, the past comes first, and we burn it forever as we go. So the puzzle is how did we get to now, if infinite time was necessarily before it, just to arrive at the current now... ... where on the other hand "why isn't it already next year" isn't a problem in understanding, even if we consider time to go on forever forward. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 It is hard to imagine though, the way we (obviously my opinion of the way we) generally think of time, as being possibly infinite. Much more so than space. If space is infinite we have to be somewhere...so here we are... But the nature of time as we (me again) see it, the past comes first, and we burn it forever as we go. So the puzzle is how did we get to now, if infinite time was necessarily before it, just to arrive at the current now... ... where on the other hand "why isn't it already next year" isn't a problem in understanding, even if we consider time to go on forever forward. If Space is infinite wouldn't it be reasonable to think that Time was also infinite because it would take an infinite amount of time for an infinite amount of space to manifest? Even at the moment of expansion the Universe, although much smaller, was still infinite in extent, apparently. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airbrush Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 Fascinating discussion, thanks for those intriguing contributions. The difference between finite and infinite, is an infinity. Is everyone in agreement that the universe is probably infinite and so time would be also? Or at least it seems that way. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 If Space is infinite wouldn't it be reasonable to think that Time was also infinite because it would take an infinite amount of time for an infinite amount of space to manifest? Even at the moment of expansion the Universe, although much smaller, was still infinite in extent, apparently. This makes sense in that it seems consistent with itself. But any reasonable line of thinking seems to be unreasonable at some point. Everything seems to collapse like a house of cards. Current thinking (last I read) is uncertain as to whether space was infinite at T approaching 0 (expansion). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Airbrush Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 With inflation there is no telling how fast a universe can expand, perhaps with infinite speed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
J.C.MacSwell Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 Fascinating discussion, thanks for those intriguing contributions. The difference between finite and infinite, is an infinity. Is everyone in agreement that the universe is probably infinite and so time would be also? Or at least it seems that way. I think Space could be infinite. Seeing how there are infinite points on a 1 cm line, infinite lines on a 1 square cm plane, and infinite planes on a 1 cm cube, add a dimension and you have infinite space (3-space), however bound, if that makes sense. But time, with a beginning, infinite, or "other/something else" I would pick "other". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
StringJunky Posted June 9, 2010 Share Posted June 9, 2010 (edited) It is hard to imagine though, the way we (obviously my opinion of the way we) generally think of time, as being possibly infinite. Much more so than space. If space is infinite we have to be somewhere...so here we are... But the nature of time as we (me again) see it, the past comes first, and we burn it forever as we go. So the puzzle is how did we get to now, if infinite time was necessarily before it, just to arrive at the current now... ... where on the other hand "why isn't it already next year" isn't a problem in understanding, even if we consider time to go on forever forward. If the Universe is subject to expansion/contraction cycles and everything is destroyed during the contraction phase we are at a definite point in time in this cycle relative to the contraction/expansion equilibrium point which is the BB (T=0). This model accommodates why we are here at this point .. because it's taken this long for us to evolve from T=0 and an infinite number of prior cycles could have occurred beforehand...infinite time becomes conveniently segmented and we are in the midst of one of those Epochs. In this model it's not possible for life to evolve from one epoch and traverse into the next one is it? That's how my mind handles infinite time, our position in it and why now anyway. Edited June 9, 2010 by StringJunky Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mr Skeptic Posted June 19, 2010 Share Posted June 19, 2010 If Space is infinite wouldn't it be reasonable to think that Time was also infinite because it would take an infinite amount of time for an infinite amount of space to manifest? Even at the moment of expansion the Universe, although much smaller, was still infinite in extent, apparently. No. To give an example, suppose there was simple work that could be done as easily by one man or by several, taking the same number of man-hours to do. If the job takes 1000 man-hours, you could have 1000 men working 1 hour, or 1 man working 1000 hours, or 100 men working 100 hours, etc. Now if you went up to infinity, 1 man working infinite hours, could do the same work as infinite men working 1 hour. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Baby Astronaut Posted June 19, 2010 Share Posted June 19, 2010 I think Space could be infinite. Seeing how there are infinite points on a 1 cm line, infinite lines on a 1 square cm plane... Wouldn't planck be the natural limit to infinite subdivisions? No. To give an example, suppose there was simple work that could be done as easily by one man or by several, taking the same number of man-hours to do. If the job takes 1000 man-hours, you could have 1000 men working 1 hour, or 1 man working 1000 hours, or 100 men working 100 hours, etc. Now if you went up to infinity, 1 man working infinite hours, could do the same work as infinite men working 1 hour. Isn't that 100 men working 10 hours? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now