Time frozen before Big Bang

Page 3 of 4 [ 64 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Previous topic | Next topic

Kraichgauer
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 12 Apr 2010
Gender: Male
Posts: 48,454
Location: Spokane area, Washington state.

09 Sep 2014, 5:22 pm

sonofghandi wrote:

Humanaut wrote:

It doesn't mean that time exists as a phenomenon in itself.

Time exists in itself, but not really the limited way we can experience it. Time is more of a measurement between two points referenced to other measured aspects for a given set of known and measured conditions.

Time "travels" at different speeds in a measurable way even at different heights within the same room, and can be accurately calculated before being measured. Time doesn't really move in one "direction," either. We can only sense it one way as referenced to conditions right here and processed by a set of somewhat questionable organic electric impulses.

Polarized and encoded photons can now be measured "traveling backwards" through time, leading to a very real possibility of breaking through Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle. Although these results are very recent (and need to be independently tested thoroughly), it could possibly once and for all determine whether anti-particles are actually "traveling backwards" through time or just appear to.

You blew my mind, dude! Pass me the doobage! :lol:

_________________
-Bill, otherwise known as Kraichgauer

Kurgan
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 6 Apr 2012
Age: 36
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,132
Location: Scandinavia

10 Sep 2014, 6:36 pm

Stargazer43 wrote:

My thoughts? That it's incredibly arrogant to think that we know anything about what the universe was like before the big bang.

There was no "before" the Big Bang to anything inside the universe, just like there's no "below", "next to" or "above" the universe.

_________________
“He who controls the spice controls the universe.”

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

11 Sep 2014, 1:13 am

Imagine trying to describe zero gravity to someone a thousand years ago, and how skeptical they would be. Intuitively they would see it as bs.

Brane theory goes some way to offering insights into "our" universe. Theoretically there may be as many as 10 or 11 dimensions, with our universe only having 4 of them (3D space + time). Other universes may have more or less dimensions. It's thought that such branes are constantly bubbling out universes. Another theory suggests that universes may be cyclic, though acceleration and entropy are hurdles there.

As for time zero meaning time stops, it comes down to the limits of our understanding. In old flat-earth times, they couldn't conceive the notion of zero gravity. In the same way that we struggle to put our thinking outside of time, pre-Newton thinking struggled to comprehend any alternative to gravity as we know it.

_________________
I'm not blind to your facial expression - but it may take me a few minutes to comprehend it.
A smile is not always a smile.
A frown is not always a frown.
And a blank look rarely means a blank mind.

sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

11 Sep 2014, 8:17 am

Narrator wrote:

As for time zero meaning time stops, it comes down to the limits of our understanding.

One thing to keep in mind is that time doesn't really stop, so much as cease to exist. Hard to explain in words, but it is a huge difference if you speak advanced physics.

There are so many things that we know that can only be understood by being able to "see" the math behind it in your head. We just haven't figured out how to translate a lot of it into language yet. We just haven't invented the right words.

_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche

Humanaut
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,390
Location: Norway

11 Sep 2014, 8:25 am

sonofghandi wrote:

Narrator wrote:

As for time zero meaning time stops, it comes down to the limits of our understanding.

Sure we have. You just have to understand concept formation; understand the concept of time. Frozen time simply means a condition where no relative motion exist, making it impossible to measure it. Think of it as a continuum.

Conceptual thinking is both simpler and more advanced than maths.

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

11 Sep 2014, 8:43 am

sonofghandi wrote:

Narrator wrote:

As for time zero meaning time stops, it comes down to the limits of our understanding.

One thing to keep in mind is that time doesn't really stop, so much as cease to exist. Hard to explain in words, but it is a huge difference if you speak advanced physics.

And in another universe, time may not be one of the dimensions.

Humanaut
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,390
Location: Norway

11 Sep 2014, 9:43 am

I'm calling Poe's Law on the above.

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

11 Sep 2014, 9:52 am

Humanaut wrote:

I'm calling Poe's Law on the above.

I'm only a layman with a love of cosmology, so if I say something you feel is illogical, please feel free to say so. :wink:

Humanaut
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,390
Location: Norway

11 Sep 2014, 9:57 am

Please accept my apologies, then.

The Universe is by definition everything that exists, so there cannot be other universes, but there could of course be other "bubbles," perhaps on a string.

Last edited by Humanaut on 11 Sep 2014, 10:00 am, edited 1 time in total.

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

11 Sep 2014, 9:59 am

Humanaut wrote:

Please accept my apologies, then.

Hey, no probs.

Humanaut
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,390
Location: Norway

11 Sep 2014, 10:03 am

Since you are interested in cosmology: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984JApA....5...79A

sonofghandi
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Apr 2007
Age: 46
Gender: Male
Posts: 3,540
Location: Cleveland, OH (and not the nice part)

11 Sep 2014, 10:45 am

Humanaut wrote:

Please accept my apologies, then.

The Universe is by definition everything that exists, so there cannot be other universes, but there could of course be other "bubbles," perhaps on a string.

Wow. That is a much better and more concise statement that sums up soemthing that can take several semesters of higher education to teach some people much better and with a tiny fraction of the words I would ever be able to.

_________________
"The surest way to corrupt a youth is to instruct him to hold in higher esteem those who think alike than those who think differently" -Nietzsche

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

11 Sep 2014, 10:55 am

Humanaut wrote:

Since you are interested in cosmology: http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984JApA....5...79A

An interesting paper. Some things I agreed with, others I wasn't convinced about.
But I need to spend longer to read it properly. (I skimmed... speed-read.)
And I also wonder how much the science of it all has changed since 1984.

One thing I didn't like was the positive insertion of Buddhism, and the discounting of gods. I like some of Buddhism, but these inclusions in a text arguing about scientific theory is out of place, in my opinion, because it displaces any strength of argument by suggesting a religious bias, making it hard to read without being suspicious of that.

I was interested to read the coverage of the different periods and the surrounding issues, and then the theories surrounding Big Bang, and I would like to give it a better reading, but as I say, the religious angle makes me wary of it's credibility. I feel the same way when an atheist includes his atheism in a science paper.

I've rambled, but to me, if you're going to write a thesis about science myths, then you stick to talking about the wrong science and leave the rest out of it. I learned this lesson the hard way when I used to be religious.

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

11 Sep 2014, 11:03 am

Humanaut wrote:

The Universe is by definition everything that exists, so there cannot be other universes, but there could of course be other "bubbles," perhaps on a string.

Other universes are theoretically possible. The nature of the notion seems impossible because of the box our head lives in. In a similar way, a thousand years ago man lived in a box where gravity was universal, and if you mentioned zero gravity you would have received the same response, that it cannot exist.

Humanaut
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 17 Jul 2014
Age: 53
Gender: Male
Posts: 4,390
Location: Norway

11 Sep 2014, 11:04 am

Alfven is not making any religious arguments. Quite the contrary. He just sums up the historical development of cosmology, in which religion has been, and still is, a not insignificant ingredient.

Narrator
Veteran
Veteran

Joined: 26 Jul 2014
Age: 67
Gender: Male
Posts: 1,060
Location: Melbourne, Australia

11 Sep 2014, 11:34 am

Humanaut wrote:

Alfven is not making any religious arguments. Quite the contrary. He just sums up the historical development of cosmology, in which religion has been, and still is, a not insignificant ingredient.

It's 2.30am here. Maybe I'm reading it wrong. I'll have another read tomorrow.
Cheers

Page 3 of 4 [ 64 posts ] Go to page Previous 1, 2, 3, 4 Next

Jump to:

Time frozen before Big Bang Post Reply New Topic

Time frozen before Big Bang