Alan McDougall Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Hi All, The Arrow of time at the moment of the Big Bang. As it is well known and proved time slows relative to the force of gravity surrounding the object on which it is measured. Thus time moves a tiny bit less of Jupiter with a heavy gravity field than it does on earth with a lighter gravity field My question is at the moment of the Big Bang "gravity was infinite" because the singularity was an "infinite mass", thus according to the known laws of physics time should have stood still but luckily somehow it did not? What are your ideas or answers to this question? Regards Alan Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 There is no such thing as a flow to time. This is a basic principle of relativity. Just thought you should know, regards Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Levy Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Very good question! Just think about a black hole. even light can't escape from it. Now, let's think about supper massive black hole. Let's put millions over billions of supper massive black holes in a singular point and add to it the whole observed universe mass. At last phase, let's add also the dark matter which is about 20 times bigger than the observed mass. So, what is the chance that someting will escape??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 ''My question is at the moment of the Big Bang "gravity was infinite" because the singularity was an "infinite mass", thus according to the known laws of physics time should have stood still but luckily somehow it did not?'' In all kind of understanding, when curvature becomes involved, I guess one could say it was infinite. Time however in our relativistic format did not exist. The reason why is because at the beginning of time, there was no geometry. The stuff we associate to in relativity. The universe arose from a ''point'' so time as we know it could not exist since time is part of the geometry where things move about.... In a sense, time is not really fundamental. Very good question! Just think about a black hole. even light can't escape from it. Now, let's think about supper massive black hole. Let's put millions over billions of supper massive black holes in a singular point and add to it the whole observed universe mass. At last phase, let's add also the dark matter which is about 20 times bigger than the observed mass. So, what is the chance that someting will escape??? Good question indeed, your answer hardly hits the topic. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Levy Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 (edited) In Wikipedia it is stated: "While the Big Bang model is well established in cosmology, it is likely to be refined in the future. Little is known about the earliest moments of the Universe's history. The equations of classical general relativity indicate a singularity at the origin ofcosmic time, although this conclusion depends on several assumptions" We should focus in: "the earliest moments of the Universe's history". The Big bang theory had been established based on "several assumptions". . We must understand the those earliest moments and assumptions (or even pre-earliest moments)... By understanding the pre-starting point we would also get an answer to your question: moment of the Big Bang Let's start by verify the source of the energy which has started the whole process… We might find a real breakthrough in our history, if we could get better understanding on those assumptions. Edited June 30, 2012 by David Levy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 (edited) In Wikipedia it is stated: "While the Big Bang model is well established in cosmology, it is likely to be refined in the future. Little is known about the earliest moments of the Universe's history. The equations of classical general relativity indicate a singularity at the origin ofcosmic time, although this conclusion depends on several assumptions" We should focus in: "the earliest moments of the Universe's history". The Big bang theory had been established based on "several assumptions". . We must understand the those earliest moments and assumptions (or even pre-earliest moments)... What about the source of the energy which has started the whole process… We might find a real breakthrough in our history, if we could get better understanding on those assumptions. Aye, quantum mechanics is right, and our understanding of current relativistic classical dynamics are right (which both have been tested to a fantastic degree) then everything I said above is true. Wikipedia doesn't disagree with me, it seems you have quoted that to disagree in some way. Breakthrough's I can understand. But these are hardly ... or simply ''assumptions''. What I said are educated facts. The big bang has indeed been based on several assumptions... I'd actually go as far to say it has been based on more. Edited June 30, 2012 by Aethelwulf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Very good question! Just think about a black hole. even light can't escape from it. Now, let's think about supper massive black hole. Let's put millions over billions of supper massive black holes in a singular point and add to it the whole observed universe mass. At last phase, let's add also the dark matter which is about 20 times bigger than the observed mass. So, what is the chance that someting will escape??? This is a flawed comparison, the universe did not erupt in some empty space from a black hole no matter how big. Space and time it's self expanded, it did not expand into anything. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 (This thread) explains how particle normally cannot be confined to a single position. If we take quantum mechanics seriously, we seriously have a big problem at the very first instants of time. The reason why is because Big Bang faces a problem of unification if it treats all objects converging from a single point which I added a lot of math to, to satisfy my general point(s) http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/66999-the-problem-of-unification-made-a-non-problem/ I do however argue, that perhaps the beginning of time was ''special''. I didn't highlight however that the order of events could be smeared. The reason why because time (which is often associated to the order of events) is in fact smeared. This is a flawed comparison, the universe did not erupt in some empty space from a black hole no matter how big. Space and time it's self expanded, it did not expand into anything. Indeed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 http://www.scienceforums.net/topic/66999-the-problem-of-unification-made-a-non-problem/ I remember reading this post I thought you made some good points, at least the ones i am capable of understanding I was disappointed no one else took it up in discussion. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Levy Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 I personaly think that there is a black hole in the big bang theory!!! (Or a super massive black hole). How could we get into any real theory without deeply understanding the process which generate the big bang!!!! For me, we all take it as an axiom. For example, we could also state that 1 + 1 = 3, and based on that we could come with new matematics. I realy can't understand how the whole world accepts this theory without understanding the first steps which generate the big bang.... What is the chance that there was someting before the big bang? What is the chance that there was a matter or ever a dark matter before the big bang? What is the chance that there was a big bang (or several big bangs) before the big bang? It is almost a holy big bang. Shall we start pray to the big bang??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 I remember reading this post I thought you made some good points, at least the ones i am capable of understanding I was disappointed no one else took it up in discussion. then please do. I know we have had ''bad confrontations'' but I am not one to hold grudges. I personaly think that there is a black hole in the big bang theory!!! (Or a super massive black hole). No there cannot be... well... there can be a kind of structure like a black hole if the universe arose in a excited-energy phase... but the universe did not arise in a black hole structure since the universe did not arise in any kind of geometry. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Levy Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 (edited) Did anyone read the Bible??? There was chaos before the first creation. In this story we realy don't understand what was before... Don't you think that it's a simmilar story??? We should all start a new religion. The BIG BANG!!! The HOLY BIG BANG!!! Actually the big bang started before the creation in the Bible. So which one has more powerfull??? Edited June 30, 2012 by David Levy Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Did anyone read the Bible??? There was chaos before the first creation. In this story we realy don't understand what was before... Don't you think that it's a simmilar story??? We should all start a new religion. The BIG BANG!!! The HOLY BIG BANG!!! Do you really think that adding religion to this improves it in anyway? then please do. I know we have had ''bad confrontations'' but I am not one to hold grudges. I am honestly not equipped to comment constructively on that... but I would eagerly read what others who are qualified have to say... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
David Levy Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Just a quick question - Why you don't ask yourself about the process which generate the big bang??? Why do you take for granted this story??? Some time ago pepole belived that the earth is the center of the universe... Is there any chance that one day in the future we will find some key points about the first steps in the universe which could change dramaticly this theory??? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 (edited) Just a quick question - Why you don't ask yourself about the process which generate the big bang??? Why do you take for granted this story??? Some time ago pepole belived that the earth is the center of the universe... Is there any chance that one day in the future we will find some key points about the first steps in the universe which could change dramaticly this theory??? Moon had a good point. This is a science subforum. Please, if you have question on possible religious under-toned posts, redirect them into the speculations area. It really is there for people to speculate without scientific evidence or rather, proofs. Just a quick question - Why you don't ask yourself about the process which generate the big bang??? Why do you take for granted this story??? I do every day. I deal with equations which involve the kind of singularities you might think about from a Schawrtschild metric that have similarities. And no, I don't take the BB for granted, I think there could be serious problems with it. Edited June 30, 2012 by Aethelwulf Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Moontanman Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 Just a quick question - Why you don't ask yourself about the process which generate the big bang??? Why do you take for granted this story??? I am honestly not sure what you mean by this... Some time ago pepole belived that the earth is the center of the universe... Is there any chance that one day in the future we will find some key points about the first steps in the universe which could change dramaticly this theory??? Of course there is a chance, i always try to keep an open mind in these things, but that chance that standard theory might be wrong always makes me wonder why people hang their religious belief on something that might change. I think it is the Catholic Church that has officially accepted the big bang as the way the universe was formed but there are other schools of thought, one of them postulates that there might be a greater "megaverse" that our universe is just a small part of, if I remember correctly it's called brane theory and our universe is the result of colliding branes in that "bulk" dimensional space, this would mean that time does indeed exist independent of space/time as we know it. I'm not sure what this says about time, would it indicate that time is a property that is independent of our universe or does it mean that time passes simply due to change occurring and has no reality independent of change? Anyway you look at it hanging your religious hat on the idea of a big bang could cause you to have to question your beliefs rather critically. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Aethelwulf Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 I liked the last post just because of the opening post... ''of course there is a chance.'' Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
robheus Posted June 30, 2012 Share Posted June 30, 2012 What is "at the moment of the big bang" is supposed to mean? The big bang theory I am aware of, doesn't have a specific moment. Perhaps you mean the fictuous point in time/space of our past light cone known as the singularity? But that is just an extrapolation, based on GR, and not to be understood as a "real point" of our history. The reason: GR breaks apart at that point, and QM effects have to be taken into account. For that reasons, other models had to be developed to shed light on that issue as the contemporary big bang theory could not explain it. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
juanrga Posted July 1, 2012 Share Posted July 1, 2012 Hi All, The Arrow of time at the moment of the Big Bang. As it is well known and proved time slows relative to the force of gravity surrounding the object on which it is measured. Thus time moves a tiny bit less of Jupiter with a heavy gravity field than it does on earth with a lighter gravity field My question is at the moment of the Big Bang "gravity was infinite" because the singularity was an "infinite mass", thus according to the known laws of physics time should have stood still but luckily somehow it did not? What are your ideas or answers to this question? Regards Alan And this singularity has been taken by some to mean that time was born with the Big bang. However, that model of the Big bang is classical. It is based in extrapolating backward in time the approximated equations of general relativity. Near the Big bang, gravity is so intense that quantum gravity effects cannot be neglected and general relativity is a bad approximation. When quantum gravity effects are taken into account, you find that there was no initial singularity and that times flowed just fine. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan McDougall Posted July 1, 2012 Author Share Posted July 1, 2012 (edited) There is no such thing as a flow to time. This is a basic principle of relativity. Just thought you should know, regards In physics they speak about the "Arrow of Time" time moving from the past into the future of maybe just from the present into the future.Time is intertwined with movement and entropy, one cannot exist without the other. So I dont agree that time does not flow because it does, just look at your clock to confirm this fact. Of course time is relative and subjective and a non-constant. Thus how could the universe emerge out of the singularity without time?, emerging means moving and thus leads to the start of entropy of our universe. How could this happen if time did/could not exist then in the infinite gravity field that was present at the moment of the Big Bang? Edited July 1, 2012 by Alan McDougall Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alan McDougall Posted July 1, 2012 Author Share Posted July 1, 2012 (edited) What is "at the moment of the big bang" is supposed to mean? The big bang theory I am aware of, doesn't have a specific moment. Perhaps you mean the fictuous point in time/space of our past light cone known as the singularity? But that is just an extrapolation, based on GR, and not to be understood as a "real point" of our history. The reason: GR breaks apart at that point, and QM effects have to be taken into account. For that reasons, other models had to be developed to shed light on that issue as the contemporary big bang theory could not explain it. I agree you moment is an expression of time but I had to use this word to express what I mean in my question, you are right the sigularity point when time did not exist because gravity was infinite. Edited July 1, 2012 by Alan McDougall 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