Jump to content

"Beginning" of Universe + Math


Recommended Posts

Okay so time is a dimension of the universe according to current modern theories and it is mathematically valid. Following this math, time and space are one and the same entity at the beginning of the universe. If time and space are one, what does this mean for a universe that is both expanding and progressing through time? Also, what does this mean for the specific inception of the universe? What I mean is, if time and space are one, what does "before" and "after" mean in that context? How does that relate to the "birth" of the universe and what we would call the following moments that include time and space being one? If, when moving back towards the beginning, time and space are inseparable and extremely convoluted, how can we say there's a beginning "before" that?

 

Finally, in another vein, if the universe (and all universes) are the result of a probability function and our existence and perception of the universe a result of the strong anthropic principle, how do we actually define this probability function? I mean, yes it works mathematically, which is why it's accepted. But I always understood math as a model to explain what occurs around us, not the other way around. You can say everything boils down to math, but isn't that just our way of describing the universe in another way? You can call the universe a probability wave function or whatever, but what is this math in real life? You can look at something and break it down to math, but can you look at math and see it as "something"? Are we just math functions calculating other math functions and that's all there is?

 

I'm sorry if I'm flirting with philosophy a bit too much here but I'm just interested in what I'm assuming are the opinions of educated and intelligent human beings (or math functions computing other functions and allowing me to recompute these functions).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Try the pdf downloads on:

http://www.perimeterinstitute.ca/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=798&Itemid=766&p=presentations&with_msl=true&subject_id=8&lecture_id=8568

 

and read

The Trouble with Physics by Lee Smolin particularly the last five chapters.

 

Using 'BBC I Player' watch "Horizon:What happened before the Big Bang" (should be available for next five days). With regard to the mention of the vacuum chamber note that no mention is made of gravitons or neutrinos, which rather makes a mockery of some of the claims.

 

Quantum Physics is a non-causal Mathematical Prediction Theory, the search for a causal-theory is on-going, but as Smolin explains the search is not only ignored by QT experts (Smolin is a leading QT theorist), but is actively rejected in order to preserve the status quo. This, as Smolin explains, is the sad current situation, because no one denies the accuracy of QT, but far to many people deny the need for an underpinning causal theory.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

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 account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.