The universe before it began

Seed Magazine ^ | 5/22/06 | Maggie Wittlin

[Stone Mountain]

I thought we already decided our universe is destined to expand forever; in which case such a universe is not that similar to ours.

I'm not sure that there's a consensus on that. I think it depends on the amount of "black matter" in the universe - if there is enough, then eventually, the universe will cease to expand and eventually retract into intself because of gravity. If there isn't enough matter for gravitation to do this, then the universe will keep expanding. At least this was the way I remembered it...

[onedoug]

You mean, created "again".

[Reactionary]

"Since the "current" universe seems to be flying apart and showing no signs of an eventual contraction, what prevented the "prior" iteration from doing the same thing?"

Who knows? Perhaps it's the case that it only appears to be expanding and that time may, in fact, be running in reverse at the present moment.

You got me. :)

[Reactionary]

I guess this solves it.

Karma is a deadly business indeed.

[ARridgerunner]

Yes.

Please read #45, Allan. I know you find Physics boring, but a comment from the Mathematicians would be appreciated. (8)

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

So, as the distribution of elements that 'ought' to appear from the 'original' big bang -aka the Singularity- didn't appear, the theory goes that there was a Bang, a contraction and then another Bang, and another contraction and then another Bang (I believe the guess is 5 Bangs to get to where we are today).

The density of material at the instant the "big bang" is such that no elements are possible. The universe, post bang, starts as a sea of energy. Initial expansion allows cooling and the formation of subatomic particles. As things continue to cool, neutrons, electrons and then finally elemental hydrogen forms. There is no mechanism to carry over anything from the previous expansion/contraction cycle. Time starts at zero with the bang and there is no significance to time before T=0

The elements from hydrogen to iron are formed in the first generation of hydrogen burning stars. The remainder of the elements are forged by later generations of stars going nova. All the elements present in this universe can be accounted for by thermonuclear processes post big bang.

The expansion/contraction of the universe could have been beating like a cosmic clock for uncountable cycles. Or this could be the first "tick" for all we know. Because nothing can pass through the singularity, not matter, not energy, not information. Time truly starts over each expansion.

You may think of it as the ultimate "Mulligan".

Regards,
GtG

[Sacajaweau]

Like you say: Limiting it to ONE additional universe makes no sense. Mathematics can be an endless string....WE interfere with it by putting our own mind limitations to it.

[Sacajaweau]

I'm not absolutely sure but I think the Black hole theory has been revised.

[Kenny Bunkport]

What is the technical explanation for God's creation of the Universe?

He spoke and it was. That's how powerful his word is.

[Kenny Bunkport]

According to this theory, yes. But, since we can't look back beyond the signularity of the Big Bang, this is just another piece of fancy speculation pranching around as "science."

[jwalsh07]

Hence the word "theory."

This is no more a theory than my grapefruitcentrism is a theory. Both are hypotheses and neither can be falsified but mine has the advantage of keeping time/space jumpers from falling ill to scurvy.

[GregoryFul]

The heavier elements are formed in the crucible of stars and supernovae.

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

I think it depends on the amount of "black matter" in the universe - if there is enough, then eventually, the universe will cease to expand and eventually retract into intself because of gravity. If there isn't enough matter for gravitation to do this, then the universe will keep expanding. At least this was the way I remembered it...

You are right but there three possible results.
1) not enough matter and the universe keeps expanding without bound
2) too much matter and the universe eventually stops expanding and begins to contract into the "big crunch"
and (kind of like the three bears)
3) just the right amount of matter so that the expansion slows at an ever decreasing rate that approaches (but never reaches) zero. This results in a non-cyclic universe with a finite, bound volume.

Observational data seems to indicate that the rate of expansion is slowing, which eliminates number one. My personal favorite is number three because it seems to me to be the sort of thing G_d might do. Put in just the right amount of mass to blow a permanent bubble of space time.

Regards,
GtG

[Junior]

Now we know where the dirt came from...

[Gandalf_The_Gray]

PS I have long suspected that G_d is a young child playing in a sand box, several dimensions up the road from here. The reason we haven't seen him around lately is his parents have called him in from play time for supper, and then off to bed.

Our universe is the sand castle he build to while away a sunny afternoon.

Regards,
GtG

[TChad]

... WTF did THAT universe come from... ?

It's big bangs all the way down.

[PatrickHenry]

Thanks. But it's probably too late to deploy the ping list.

[Grateful One]

Just postulate another universe and hope nobody notices?......................

Well put, Publius6961!

[null and void]

But not in black holes?

Black holes are out of sight...

[Larry Lucido]

My question for the creationists (and I'm a believer in Genesis as allegory):

If God is eternal, and the universe is 6000 years old (or 16 billion years old, or whatever), . . . . .


. . . what was God doing for the eternity before that?