Scientists crushed as ‘Big Bang’ evidence evaporates on further analysis

  • Thread starter Thread starter Exiled_Child
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Time must have a beginning or else we have eternal continual creation of time by God which makes sequential events impossible as everything would be simultaneous, wouldn’t it?
Time is a human invention not a law of nature. It is just a subjective unit of measurement used to describe or quantify a change in x in relation to y based on our perception of that change from our relative position in the universe.
 
Time is a human invention not a law of nature. It is just a subjective unit of measurement used to describe or quantify a change in x in relation to y based on our perception of that change from our relative position in the universe.
I second this. Time makes us make sense of our reality, it isn’t clear if time has real existence outside of our minds.
 
Time is no more arbitrary than length or volume.
It is a phenomena that can be measured, and as much as we might wish, the boundaries that it lays out for us are for all practical purposes, arbitrary.
 
Time is no more arbitrary than length or volume. It is a phenomena that can be measured, and as much as we might wish, the boundaries that it lays out for us are for all practical purposes, arbitrary.
The difference is that there is no cosmic baseline to consistently measure time. Length and volume are the same no matter how a person views it or where they view it from. Time is not. One of the easiest examples of this is a time measurement of 1 year. That means ~365 days for us on Earth, but it means ~90,500 days if you’re standing on Pluto.
 
The difference is that there is no cosmic baseline to consistently measure time. Length and volume are the same no matter how a person views it or where they view it from. Time is not. One of the easiest examples of this is a time measurement of 1 year. That means ~365 days for us on Earth, but it means ~90,500 days if you’re standing on Pluto.
That is not the same as saying that time is a human invention.
 
*A new quantum equation suggests that the Universe has no beginning or end, and it could also account for dark matter and dark energy.
*
Some bleeding-edge theory here. Seems interesting!
phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html

(Phys.org) —The universe may have existed forever, according to a new model that applies quantum correction terms to complement Einstein’s theory of general relativity. The model may also account for dark matter and dark energy, resolving multiple problems at once.
The widely accepted age of the universe, as estimated by general relativity, is 13.8 billion years. In the beginning, everything in existence is thought to have occupied a single infinitely dense point, or singularity. Only after this point began to expand in a “Big Bang” did the universe officially begin.
Although the Big Bang singularity arises directly and unavoidably from the mathematics of general relativity, some scientists see it as problematic because the math can explain only what happened immediately after—not at or before—the singularity.
“The Big Bang singularity is the most serious problem of general relativity because the laws of physics appear to break down there,” Ahmed Farag Ali at Benha University and the Zewail City of Science and Technology, both in Egypt, told Phys.org.
Ali and coauthor Saurya Das at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada, have shown in a paper published in Physics Letters B that the Big Bang singularity can be resolved by their new model in which the universe has no beginning and no end.
The physicists emphasize that their quantum correction terms are not applied ad hoc in an attempt to specifically eliminate the Big Bang singularity. Their work is based on ideas by the theoretical physicist David Bohm, who is also known for his contributions to the philosophy of physics. Starting in the 1950s, Bohm explored replacing classical geodesics (the shortest path between two points on a curved surface) with quantum trajectories.
In their paper, Ali and Das applied these Bohmian trajectories to an equation developed in the 1950s by physicist Amal Kumar Raychaudhuri at Presidency University in Kolkata, India. Raychaudhuri was also Das’s teacher when he was an undergraduate student of that institution in the '90s.
Using the quantum-corrected Raychaudhuri equation, Ali and Das derived quantum-corrected Friedmann equations, which describe the expansion and evolution of universe (including the Big Bang) within the context of general relativity. Although it’s not a true theory of quantum gravity, the model does contain elements from both quantum theory and general relativity. Ali and Das also expect their results to hold even if and when a full theory of quantum gravity is formulated.
In addition to not predicting a Big Bang singularity, the new model does not predict a “big crunch” singularity, either. In general relativity, one possible fate of the universe is that it starts to shrink until it collapses in on itself in a big crunch and becomes an infinitely dense point once again.
Ali and Das explain in their paper that their model avoids singularities because of a keydifference between classical geodesics and Bohmian trajectories. Classical geodesics eventually cross each other, and the points at which they converge are singularities. In contrast, Bohmian trajectories never cross each other, so singularities do not appear in the equations.
In cosmological terms, the scientists explain that the quantum corrections can be thought of as a cosmological constant term (without the need for dark energy) and a radiation term. These terms keep the universe at a finite size, and therefore give it an infinite age. The terms also make predictions that agree closely with current observations of the cosmological constant and density of the universe.
In physical terms, the model describes the universe as being filled with a quantum fluid. The scientists propose that this fluid might be composed of gravitons—hypothetical massless particles that mediate the force of gravity. If they exist, gravitons are thought to play a key role in a theory of quantum gravity.
In a related paper, Das and another collaborator, Rajat Bhaduri of McMaster University, Canada, have lent further credence to this model. They show that gravitons can form a Bose-Einstein condensate (named after Einstein and another Indian physicist, Satyendranath Bose) at temperatures that were present in the universe at all epochs.
Motivated by the model’s potential to resolve the Big Bang singularity and account for dark matter and dark energy, the physicists plan to analyze their model more rigorously in the future. Their future work includes redoing their study while taking into account small inhomogeneous and anisotropic perturbations, but they do not expect small perturbations to significantly affect the results.
“It is satisfying to note that such straightforward corrections can potentially resolve so many issues at once,” Das said.
 
That is not the same as saying that time is a human invention.
It is the same. Time is measured in accordance with our perception from our position which makes it unique to us. Another example of this is our invention of timezones. If time were a natural law then it would be 11:27PM everywhere in the universe simultaneously.
 
It is the same. Time is measured in accordance with our perception from our position which makes it unique to us. Another example of this is our invention of timezones. If time were a natural law then it would be 11:27PM everywhere in the universe simultaneously.
And length is measured in units convenient to us as well.

The fact that we can measure time ought to tell us that time exists.
 
And length is measured in units convenient to us as well. The fact that we can measure time ought to tell us that time exists.
This is really just an “If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it…” discussion. The physical properties of what we use to define time don’t go away. Rocks will continue to erode, the Earth will continue to rotate on its axis, the planets will continue to revolve around the Sun, etc. but thats not what time is. Time is a human concept and without humans it doesn’t exist.
 
Too much information on the internet + journalistic sensationalism

Leave that question to physicists and follow reputable science journals which summarise the latest finding and make it understandable to the general public.
The article itself has a correction saying saying that this view is a “model” that doesn’t even reach the status of a hypothesis.

As for the Big Bang, it fits the facts as we know them for now (with some modifications since its first formulation).

Einstein and other cosmologists at the time believed in the “steady state” theory and Einstein had to throw a cosmological constant into his theory of General Relativity to make everything come right.

Someday the Big Bang may be disproved, we shouldn’t raise it to the level of an article of faith. In fact the Pope at the time (Pius XI?) took the Big Bang theory as proof that the universe started with God’s "Fiat lux’. Fr. Lemaitre’s response was basically, “Please don’t”.
 
This is really just an “If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it…” discussion. The physical properties of what we use to define time don’t go away. Rocks will continue to erode, the Earth will continue to rotate on its axis, the planets will continue to revolve around the Sun, etc. but thats not what time is. Time is a human concept and without humans it doesn’t exist.
Samuel Johnson kicks a stone, and refutes Berkeley thus.
 
And length is measured in units convenient to us as well.

The fact that we can measure time ought to tell us that time exists.
time
legnth
height
weight

etc.

aren’t really actual realities in the world. They are Human concepts that help make sense of the world around us. Now I’m not falling into a Kantian understanding of the world were everything is just what humans make it out to be. The table in front of me really exists as a table, but the 3 feet it spans isn’t really 3 feet. There is no property of feet in it’s being, rather this is just how we understand how wide it is.

Augustine explains it the best.

Time is a concept of our mind and can only exist because of our mind.

The past has no existence because it is no longer here
The present exists but time doesn’t exist in the present because there is no value of present. It is constantly coming in and out of existence.
the future has no existence because it doesn’t exist yet.

If only the present exists and it has no length or value, how can we say time exists?

By our minds.

The past exists in our memories
the future exists anticipation.

Why can I say 10 minutes ago I woke up? Because I have memory of waking up 10 minutes ago.

Why can I say in 3 minuets I will be getting ready for the day, that because I’m anticipating that in 3 minuets I will be getting ready.

Time has no real existence in the world, it only exists in our minds. At-least according to Augustine.
 
Yes. And how could the universe not have an end or beginning? (I am not a scientist, just speculating.) I do believe the universe had a beginning but then I believe in God…it is absolutely fascinating though - dark matter, black holes, parallel universes; 11 dimensions, strings, etc. Problem is you don’t know how much is useful fact, how much is fantasy (madness even). I don’t think the people who come up with this stuff even know for sure.
I think they claim the Universe was created Ex nihilo, where matter and space spewed like a fountain from nothing.
 
The difference is that there is no cosmic baseline to consistently measure time. Length and volume are the same no matter how a person views it or where they view it from. Time is not. One of the easiest examples of this is a time measurement of 1 year. That means ~365 days for us on Earth, but it means ~90,500 days if you’re standing on Pluto.
In the movie Interstellar, they said that one hour on a certain planet far away was the equivilent of 4 earth years -due to the bending of space-time. When they returned to the ship, their friend had aged to his senior years yet they were only gone a few hours.

…I do wonder if the bending of space time has the universe as a whole at different ages.
 
Watch “Thomas Dolby - She Blinded Me With Science” on YouTube
Thomas Dolby - She Blinded Me With Science: youtu.be/-FIMvSp01C8

…I just heard this song on Jack FM while viewing this thread…😃
 
This is really just an “If a tree falls in the forest and no one is around to hear it…” discussion. The physical properties of what we use to define time don’t go away. Rocks will continue to erode, the Earth will continue to rotate on its axis, the planets will continue to revolve around the Sun, etc. but thats not what time is. Time is a human concept and without humans it doesn’t exist.
This is nonsense.

Exactly HOW time is measured is a human construct. But the EXISTENCE of time is NOT dependent upon humans recognizing or measuring it.

Take for instance a moment of time (in any measurement unit you wish to use). Once that moment passes, can you enter into that moment in time again? Once I have thrown a baseball, can I go back in time and unthrow that baseball? Of course not. Because time has moved foward.

Humans, and all creation, are subject to time. Time affects everything, as not one part of creation can change time nor can it affect time, and yet time affects all of creation.
 
This is nonsense.

Exactly HOW time is measured is a human construct. But the EXISTENCE of time is NOT dependent upon humans recognizing or measuring it.

Take for instance a moment of time (in any measurement unit you wish to use). Once that moment passes, can you enter into that moment in time again? Once I have thrown a baseball, can I go back in time and unthrow that baseball? Of course not. Because time has moved foward.

Humans, and all creation, are subject to time. Time affects everything, as not one part of creation can change time nor can it affect time, and yet time affects all of creation.
With a 3 dimentional mind, its hard to comprehend 4 dimentional space. Or even 5 dimentional space. How do we know radiation cannot cross time?
 
What your saying is an interesting thought experiment but it doesn’t disprove that the universe can’t be enteral.
But what do intestines have to do with this topic? ‘Enteral’ = ‘intestinal’. I am guessing you meant ‘eternal’ - danged auto-correct. 😃
We exist at point who knows what, but just because we exist at a point doesn’t mean it can’t be eternal.
Actually, yes, it does mean exactly that unless you want to resort to claiming that God creates time on a continuing basis. We cannot have come from an infinitely long past any more than we can go to an infinitely distant future.
I know I exist, i know things exist before me and will exist after me, but we don’t know how long that goes on for.
Meh, but we can make estimates that are close enough for government work.
Divine revelation does say in the beginning, and it appears that there was a beginning to the universe. But reason alone can’t show that the cosmos is either finite or eternal.
Sure it can, and has. I am confused as to what you think your unwarranted asertions accomplish exactly.
From what I read about this statement is this. Correct me if I’m wrong it’s not super clear.

You are saying no-one holds that God is constantly for all time creating time and space?

Implying that God did at once and stepped back or is not actively holding up existence or actively creating time and space.

Many people including myself believe that God is for eternity and in a single moment creating the universe.
I believe God created the universe in a single moment. He may be creating other universes in other moments as well.
Let’s bring some theology into this.
Oh, yes, because adding theology to the discussion of science always clears everything up, doesn’t it?
Was there a point in time when the father begot the son? (I’m talking about the trinity)
IF yes, than the son is less than the father therefore not divine.
if no, than the son is entirely created by the father, meaning the son has no origin in time but only in the father.

Catholic dogma holds point 2
Yes, I believe that the Father is continually emanating the Son and Heaven (the Divine Presence of God, not Paradise in Hell)
God’s single act of creation is an act that is continually actualized for all eternity. We see it as a time because that is where, in a sense, God broke into our creation and our reality. But for God that is continually happening.
Now you move the goal posts. We are talking about OUR understanding of THIS universe, not God and all Creation in however many universes that might involve.
It is very plausible that God could have created an enteral universe.
Again, intestinal stuff, why? 😃
What does that do to in the beginning from Genesis I have no idea, but it’s not outside of the realm of possibility. Is it outside of the realm of faith, I honestly don’t know.
It is not outside the realm of possibility, agreed, but I do think it is outside the realm of plausibility since I have as yet not read of any serious assertions by any Catholic sources that God is continually crating the universe.
 
time
legnth
height
weight

etc.

aren’t really actual realities in the world. They are Human concepts that help make sense of the world around us. Now I’m not falling into a Kantian understanding of the world were everything is just what humans make it out to be. The table in front of me really exists as a table, but the 3 feet it spans isn’t really 3 feet. There is no property of feet in it’s being, rather this is just how we understand how wide it is.

Augustine explains it the best.

Time is a concept of our mind and can only exist because of our mind.

The past has no existence because it is no longer here
The present exists but time doesn’t exist in the present because there is no value of present. It is constantly coming in and out of existence.
the future has no existence because it doesn’t exist yet.

If only the present exists and it has no length or value, how can we say time exists?

By our minds.

The past exists in our memories
the future exists anticipation.

Why can I say 10 minutes ago I woke up? Because I have memory of waking up 10 minutes ago.

Why can I say in 3 minuets I will be getting ready for the day, that because I’m anticipating that in 3 minuets I will be getting ready.

Time has no real existence in the world, it only exists in our minds. At-least according to Augustine.
It would be a mistake to think that since time does not exist in the same way that a material thing exists, that it is therefore not real.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top