Skip to comments.Big Bang bashing boffins ‘Big Bounce’ back to BIRTH OF TIME
Posted on 11/30/2012 11:27:15 AM PST by Ernest_at_the_Beach
A group of Penn State physicists says the universe we now see could have arisen from a "Big Bounce" rather than a Big Bang.
The new work by Penn State, led by professor Abhay Ashtekar, director of the Institute for Gravitation and the Cosmos, proposes ways to apply quantum physics "further back in time than ever before right back to the beginning," the university says in a release.
We have a pretty good idea of the large-scale structures of the universe when it was only a few hundred thousand years old. That comes from studying the fingerprint of the ancient universe that's visible in the cosmic microwave background radiation (CMB), which has been intensely mapped and studied since its discovery in 1964.
However, the CMB which marked the "inflationary" period of the universe poses its own much-argued mystery: why isn't it smooth? How did the "lumps" emerge? (And it's a good thing they did, by the way, since galaxies, stars, planets, and people are all a consequence of those lumps).
The nutshell of Ashtekar's proposal is this: if you can apply quantum physics to the structures of the very early universe, it could explain the structures we now see. And that's what Ashtekar's group believes it has done it's created a paradigm that uses the emerging field of "quantum loop cosmology" to explain how quantum fluctuations might have created the pre-inflationary structures which, after the universe's inflationary phase, formed the kernels for the universe we know see.
In the period Penn State is looking at, the universe was dense. Very, very dense: where an atomic nucleus has a density of 1014 grams per cubic centimetre, the density of the ancient universe was a staggering 1094 grams per cubic centimetre.
That kind of "stuff" can't be described by the Einsteinian theories that now describe cosmology so well. As one of Ashtekar's collaborators, post-doctoral fellow Ivan Agullo, explains:
The inflationary paradigm enjoys remarkable success in explaining the observed features of the cosmic background radiation. Yet this model is incomplete. It retains the idea that the universe burst forth from nothing in a Big Bang, which naturally results from the inability of the paradigm's general-relativity physics to describe extreme quantum-mechanical situations.
One needs a quantum theory of gravity, like loop quantum cosmology, to go beyond Einstein in order to capture the true physics near the origin of the universe.
In fact, the early universe was so strange that even time would appear different if you could go there and survive the experience. Instead of the strict causality that rules the classical macro universe, the "quantum loop universe" would have been ruled by probabilities. It may even point to a "Big Bounce", in which the universe arises not from "nothing", but from that super-compressed mass that had a distinct history of its own.
It seems almost unimaginable, but those probabilities the mere chance that in the transition from ultra-dense matter to the inflationary universe, a few quantum particles happened to be clustered rather than uniformly distributed can, Ashtekar's group claims, explain today's universe.
The combination of the new "loop-quantum-origins" paradigm with quantum cosmology equations, they say, show that "fundamental fluctuations in the very nature of space at the moment of the Big Bounce evolve to become the seed-like structures seen in the cosmic microwave background."
Even better, they assert, their theories demonstrate good agreement with what's observed in the CMB.
Before the Big Bang ping!
When God said, “Let there be light!”, I’m sure there WAS A HELLUVA BANG!............
It seems almost unimaginable,...
That’s because it is.
The combination of the new "loop-quantum-origins" paradigm with quantum cosmology equations, they say, show that "fundamental fluctuations in the very nature of space at the moment of the Big Bounce evolve to become the seed-like structures seen in the cosmic microwave background."or CMB
I’ve been around awhile and I don’t remember any of this. Then again, I coulda been napping.
“big bounce” heh? So the Earth could very well have been formed in literally 6 days then after all?
Why is there something rather than nothing?
A day as it is now,....or a day as it was THEN?
We just need ONE example!
Thank you all very much!!
Woo hoo!! And now less than $1.9k to go!! We can do this.
Let's put this baby to bed!!
No good. “Cause and effect” has always been the rule. Probability won’t hack it.
The cosmic microwave background (CMB) is a key prediction of the hot Big Bang model, and the most important observation that discriminates between the Big Bang and the Steady State models. So it is an interesting historical anomaly that this prediction was not put forward and tested by the inventors of either theory, and that the first observers of the CMB were completely unaware of its cosmological significance.
Move down, move down, move down. Why is a raven like a writing desk?
Imagine an observation post which is a stasis bubble in which our laws and time flows exist. We can sit in that Bubble and watch as the universe flashes into existence and time that exists out side of that bubble flows incredibly fast....centuries are mere micro seconds, millenia mere seconds....stars form, burn briefly then flare up and go nova in a minute....geologic processes on various planets progress rapidly, mountains rising falling, oceans receding then progressing...almost like one views a film or dvd going at high speed then slowing, slowing, slowing,..... while you watch the Earth start to form day 1, then day two, you watch as the genesis pattern occurs; from your perspective and experience in stasis, you live literally 6 days while centuries flash by in a blink...but still slowing, slowing, slowing.....7th day God rests and the space/time flows around your stasis bubble have slowed to match that of your stasis bubble....you can step out now! Adam?!
That is what they are talking about with this “big bounce” theory... and if there is any truth to it then it solves the issue of how the Earth was created in 6 days, while appearing older than its apparent history.
Take a first level quantum course, and you’ll find out.
Don’t try to tell God how to do things...he’s done a pretty good job of on his own.
How did the dense atoms come to be? Something that was and then changes cannot be the beginning.
First there was a grapefruit...
And then it exploded. Er, bounced.
>>Well it was before our Time....<<
True. And everything had to come from somewhere. Right? But Bang or Bounce.... does it really make any difference?
“However, the CMB which marked the “inflationary” period of the universe poses its own much-argued mystery: why isn’t it smooth? How did the “lumps” emerge?”
Well, it’s not that hard to figure out, if you actually look at the effect of ALL the fundamental forces and stop looking myopically at gravity when you get to big scales.
We know that most gravitational bodies also emit electromagnetic fields. We know that the universe is filled with gases, which can be easily transformed into plasmas under the right conditions, which will then interact with electromagnetic fields. We know that the interaction of plasmas and magnetic fields can exhibit, in our laboratories on a smaller scale, most of the puzzling phenomena of gaseous bodies in space, include drastic compression of matter to the point of causing fusion (*cough* stellar formation *cough*).
Now, physicists know all these facts, but they don’t want to have to be bothered to examine the obvious conclusions and investigate whether they can explain “mysteries” like the structures in the CMB. They’ve invested a century or more in gravity-only cosmological models, and they aren’t about to abandon them now.
“Does something ever come from nothing?
We just need ONE example!”
Obamacare came from Zero?
Neils Bohr to Albert Einstein
“Albert! Stop telling God what to do!”
The difference between Quantum Physics is identical to the difference between Political Correctness and simply being correct.
First law of Quantum Physics
Second law of Quantum Physics is once a theory is proven by physics, the question is not Quantum, its just Physics.
Third law stems from the above law, Nothing in Quatum Physics is proven.
What are the basic premises ,,...definitons and Axioms...??
According to Big Bang theory God likes to play with IEDs.
If Big Bounce theory is right God just has a bassaball jones.
That is why I always get a kick out of Creationists and Evolutionists arguing. It doesn't take much consideration to find that each theory proves the other.
Neither is completely understood yet but when we get the total answers we will find what Dr. Harry Wolper in the movie "Creator" knew all along: "I tell you Sid, that one of these days we'll look in to our microscope and find ourselves staring right into God's eyes..."
But all three wanted a mechanism to deliver votes.
The cosmologists have been telling us for decades now that the universe sprang forth from ‘nothing’, a miniscule point called a ‘A gravitational singularity or spacetime singularity’.
Well, that’s exactly what we’ve been saying for thousands of years, only in religious terms. The entire universe sprang from the mind of God, in an instant that is incomprehensible to the mind of man..........
The entire history of German metaphysics since Kant is one long voluminous groping about in the dark trying to figure out that example. They spilled a lot of ink. But they couldn’t figure out why something can’t come from nothing. They could have saved a lot of time by simply recognizing: Something (er, Someone...) has always existed.
And after that, lots of lesser things existed and still exist even today....
The dense atoms (heavier than iron) are much younger. They are formed in the interference patterns resulting from a supernova.
My question was philosophical rather than scientific. Seems to me that something that comes from something else cannot be the beginning.
you were meant to be here
What is the difference between Quantum and Physics?
Can you demonstrate in a repeatable experiment a physical proof of a Quantum Theorem?
In my opinion, all penny and a half worth, Quantum Physics ranks right up there with the “science” of many branches of Psychology and somewhat below the practical value of a Doctorate in Advanced Basket weaving. At least with basket weaving, you can prove your theorem. And as a bonus, you can gather nuts that you can eat!
Bonus Question for extra points... How many Quantum Theroems and Psycological evaluations can fit in a nut shell, and how many calories are they worth?
No personal slight intended cause I am just kidding, all are retorical questions, no extra points are available and when TSHTF two out of three courses of study have no practical value in producing calories for consumption. Simply because after the SHTF there will be no leftist masters to channel production into the wasteland of mere speculation via the mighty grant.
As the overall mass of the universe was limited to successivley smaller volumes (density=m/v) in its earlier histories we know by Relativity that time would have passed at successively slower rates therein from the viepoint of Earth today. Thus it can be said that 15 billion years≈6 days.
“Does something ever come from nothing?
We just need ONE example!”
Yes. Study “virtual particle pairs”.
In a vacuum, a particle/antiparticle pair can emerge from, well, nothing. Happens a lot actually. The two usually attract and annihilate, leaving nothing behind. Given a slight perturbation, they can avoid each other and survive. One notable case is “Hawking radiation”, where a black hole absorbs one particle leaving the other to look like it did the impossible: emerge from the black hole.
This has actually been captured and leveraged in a lab.
By moving a pair of mirrors fast enough, these particle pairs can be disrupted and dispersed, generating light from nothing.
|· join · view topics · view or post blog · bookmark · post new topic · subscribe ·|
|Google news searches: exoplanet · exosolar · extrasolar ·|
It was sneezed out of the nose of the Great Green Ocklseizure.
Beware the coming of The Great White Handkerchief.
Quantum Theory is utilized in the operations of transistors and semiconductors. It was also realized that QT could be used to smooth out the quantum noise in atomic clocks. Furthermore, laser technology stems directly from atomic energy levels being discrete and not continuous, emitted in discrete amounts termed quanta. Additionally the idea of quantum entanglement seems supportable by many experiments confirming Bell's Theorem which will also likely lead to advances in quantum computation....
'Seems pretty real to me.
The particles still don’t emerge on their own behest out of nothing; God has something to do with that process! The existence of “nothingness” itself was also created!
“The two usually attract and annihilate, leaving nothing behind”
A speculative thought!
How God continually pumps energy into the whole of the universe!...think of these pairs occuring and disappearing, sometimes scattering when conditions are right, but on a vast scale across creation...each giving off bursts of gamma and xray energy as they annihilate each other or light energy when special conditions separate the particle pairs. Each pair by itself winking in an out would hardly warm an electron but we could never imagine in the aggregate the total amount of energy these pairs would impart across the universe. Who says these pairs occur only in vacuums? They would occur in solid matter, vacuums, liquid, gas ect... inside of our own bodies, everywhere continuously!
“In Him we live and move and have our being.. He is not far from any of us” the Bible says. These virtual particle pairs may well be one direct physical signature of God’s influence in our universe! ( Christ, of course, being God’s thumbprint pressed directly into our matter universe)
Now you say these pairs leave nothing behind...well they leave energy signatures or else they could never be detected!