Probing Question: What happened before the Big Bang?

Pennsylvania State University ^ | 03 August 2006 | Barbara Kennedy

[PatrickHenry]

The question of what happened before the Big Bang long has frustrated cosmologists, both amateur and professional.

Though Einstein's theory of general relativity does an excellent job of describing the universe almost back to its beginning, near the Big Bang matter becomes so dense that relativity breaks down, says Penn State physicist Abhay Ashtekar. "Beyond that point, we need to apply quantum tools that were not available to Einstein."

Now Ashtekar and two of his post-doctoral researchers, Tomasz Pawlowski and Parmpreet Singh, have done just that. Using a theory called loop quantum gravity, they have developed a mathematical model that skates right up to the Big Bang -- and steps through it. On the other side, Ashtekar says, exists another universe with space-time geometry similar to our own, except that instead of expanding, it is shrinking. "In place of a classical Big Bang, there is in fact a quantum Bounce," he says.

Loop quantum gravity, one of the leading approaches to the unification of general relativity with quantum physics, was pioneered at the Institute of Gravitational Physics and Geometry at Penn State, which Ashtekar directs. The theory posits that space-time geometry itself has a discrete "atomic" structure, Ashtekar explains. Instead of the familiar space-time continuum, the fabric of space is made up of one-dimensional quantum threads. Near the Big Bang, this fabric is violently torn, and these quantum properties cause gravity to become repulsive, rather than attractive.

While the idea of another universe existing prior to the Big Bang has been proposed before, he adds, this is the first mathematical description that systematically establishes its existence and deduces its space-time geometry.

"Our initial work assumes a homogenous model of our universe," Ashtekar acknowledges. "However, it has given us confidence in the underlying ideas of loop quantum gravity. We will continue to refine the model to better portray the universe as we know it and to better understand the features of quantum gravity."

***

Abhay Ashtekar is holder of the Eberly family chair in physics and director of the Institute for Gravitational Physics and Geometry in the Eberly College of Science. He can be reached at ava1@psu.edu.

The finding reported above was published in Physical Review Letters in May 2006. The research was sponsored by the National Science Foundation, Alexander von Humboldt Foundation, and the Penn State Eberly College of Science.

[Alamo-Girl]

LOLOLOL! It certainly does. Thank you for your engaging post!

[RunningWolf]

What they do here is not science. They might call it science but its far far from that.

W.

[ahayes]

We don't know, because everything that we know about spacetime breaks down under the conditions of the Big Bang. It's similar to a black hole--you get a singularity where our laws no longer apply. This is one reason people are searching for a unifying theory that puts all of the information together and is capable of explaining what happens at a singularity.

[pageonetoo]

What they do here is not science. They might call it science but its far far from that.

What they do herein, is called a "mutual admiration society". It's like MENSA. Unless you speak their dogma, you are anathema to any conversation. If you agree with them, or pat them on the back, they will wag their tails vigorously, and lick you all over your face!

It's like some other pretty smart animals I know! At least dogs take the time to sniff butts to see what the other guys been eating. These guys just attack the juggler and say they are right. They're the same type that eat their young, too!

Let them have their air of superiority angive them room on the sidewalks. Roll out the carpets, and give them a parade. They will solve all the worlds problems, and show us how smart they are...

These people have to project from their feelings of inadequacy, to prove to others how worthy they are of faint praise. Of course, they demand that praise.

Let them take this thread from news and current events, and place it into philosophy where it properly belongs.

[RunningWolf]

That image there is an apt reprensation to the cult of evo, built upon lies and a very sad state of affairs it is.

[pageonetoo]

That image there is an apt reprensation to the cult of evo, built upon lies and a very sad state of affairs it is.

Oh, it's not built upon lies. /s

It is a monument to modern science and enlightment. It speaks of the very essence of modern elites, who earned their decoder rings at MIT or genuflect to the altars of Microsoft. They "know" they hold the keys to the universe, if they can just find the keyhole...

Note the armored car in front! Not-for-profit!

[CarolinaGuitarman]

"apt reprensation" (hiccup!) Placemarker

[Luis Gonzalez]

Do YOU claim to understand God?

[RightWhale]

MENSA . . . dogma

That's news.

[RightWhale]

Indeed, and gravity is even harder to screen than is EM radiation. There might be a region inside a perfectly uniform sphere where gravity is zero, but very few perfectly uniform spheres (in a uniformly gravity free space environment yet) have been discovered in nature.

[Unassuaged]

Ummmm, what were we talking about again?

[NCC-1701]

Something to do about what happened before a rather large explosion.

[sirchtruth]

We don't know, because everything that we know about spacetime breaks down under the conditions of the Big Bang.

Ok, how do we know it "breaks" down, and what the conditions were of the BB?

I'm not following...unless you are talking about dimensions yet discovered?

[pageonetoo]

Some people see the world as they would want it to be, effective people see the world as it is.

Effective is just another descriptive word, lost in your affected sea of superiority.. .

Do you claim to understand the UNIVERSE?

I am a student of life. It keeps me sane... Please don't ping me any more. I walked away a long time ago, and gave you a forum for your discussion. But it seems all you can do is attack those with whom you disagree, in an attempt to get yourself noticed one more time. I think there is a diagnosis for that in the DSM.

Have a nice life.

[Luis Gonzalez]

"One other thing, probably 90%+ of the people in this country believe that God had some hand in the beginnings of the universe."

There was a time when an equal number of people in the world believed that illnesses were in fact demonic possession, and that possessed people should be put to death. Today, we know this to be false, and we understand illnesses, both physical and mental, their causes, and possible cures.

Reaching that level of understanding in no way diminished belief in God; there are many, many good Christian doctors out there.

There was a time when heliocentrism was dubbed an idea that could not be held as truth by the Church, and even called heresy by some within it. We now know better.

Does understanding the way things work somehow diminish belief in God?

It hasn't thus far...why would it do so now?

[Luis Gonzalez]

Why did you not answer my question?

I did not atack you...I asked a simple question.

Do you claim to understand God?

[Luis Gonzalez]

To the best of my knowledge, my post #368 was my first post ever to you...I may be wrong, I've been here for quite sometime.

In your first response to me, you accuse me of being lost in my "affected sea of superiority", and even of having some sort of mental illness, then you claim that all I know how to do is attack those with who I disagree.

Pot...kettle...black...

I asked whether you claimed to understand God, since you seem to make understanding something a benchmark to belief.

So then, in you believe in God, then you must understand God.

I did not believe that a human mind was capable of understanding God, so I saw yours as a flawed argument.

Now, I ask again...do you claim to understand God?

[PatrickHenry]

Does understanding the way things work somehow diminish belief in God? It hasn't thus far...why would it do so now?

Different intellectual systems. Science depends on learning new things, and it expects -- demands -- that old ideas be adjusted to accommodate new information. That's how science progresses. All bright young PhD candidates yearn to overthrow incorrect ideas, and are rewarded for doing so.

Theology is very different. Change is not desired, and it's actively discouraged. Adherence to well-established doctrine is rewarded.

Some people have no problem dealing with both of these different systems of thought. Others have to go with one or the other, exclusively, but are tolerant of different viewpoints. And some -- a malignant few -- want to literally stamp out other viewpoints. I guess it's always going to be like that.

[pageonetoo]

Now, I ask again...do you claim to understand God?

What do you think, Luis? Do you think you are first cousin to an amoeba? Do you look at an elephant cow and get an erection?

What do you beleive, Luis? Is it so important to ping me with your display of "intelligent conversation", that you need to be validated by me?

I believe, Luis, in a God that has been respected by men from ages past. I believe in a God that can suspend any law of nature, and stand the sun still. I am a primitivist, Luis. I believe that my God made all that you see in front of you now. He allowed some guy to take credit for the details!

I am typing on a Man G4 Powerbook, Luis. I think Apple makes the best stuff. I bought a Mac Mini a few months ago, so I could sacrifice at the altar of Microsoft... and run Flight Simulator. Man, I hated it when MS stopped supporting us Mac users.

But, some enterprising fellows decided to make a new era available to computer users. Isn't technology great? I can now fly a 747. They just won't let me into the airports, now!

I was trained by the US navy, in elementary electronics, and computers. I spent time on a Destroyer circa 1966-68. We had a beast called a Mk1A, that took up a lot of space. It was filled with cams and gears. It could take the inputs, and use the stability added by a gyroscope, and accurately make changes for targeting.

I got out of the navy in '68, and went to college. I bought a TI calculator, with red LED's, and 12 digits. It was phoenomally more powerful than the beast I had used to fire big guns.

I know science, and I know faith. I know that in order to accept science, you must first have faith. The computer screen isn't filled with 1's and 0's. It has graphics, and neat features. Men get credit again.

But, I still haven't seen a single scientist that can figure out where life began. There's lot of conjecture, and debate. I doubt most of it has validity, but it makes for nice converstion among fellows, and gives a poor guy something to do on Saturday noght...

Go away, and quit trolling, Luis.

[pageonetoo]

Try to explain this, Luis!

It is not harmful to the computer. It needs explanation. Click for full screen to enjoy it best.