Go Back   Physics Help Forum > Physics Forums > Philosophy of Physics

Philosophy of Physics Philosophy of Physics Forum - Philosophical questions about our universe

Like Tree2Likes
Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Nov 8th 2016, 12:50 AM   #11
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: New Zealand
Posts: 534
Originally Posted by drawnout View Post
I am aware that this is very dated thread, but to say hello I thought I would add my two cents to this discussion.

My understanding on the big bang as a theory is that space expanded, and that means that matter itself was also expanding, as matter is simply space being occupied by localized energy.
Are you referring to the energy of the quantum fluctuations of the vacuum?
I am also not entirely sure what "occupied" means.

Originally Posted by drawnout View Post
I don't think anyone should be taking what is a relatively accurate theory on the geometry of space and presuming it describes the creation of the universe. I don't think anything would ever be that simple.
I don't think it is either. Just way too much "curve fitting" to experimental data for my liking. No one has ever seen inflation happen. Its only surmised to explain the CMBR (afaik).

I don't really get why an inflating universe filled with a homogeneous hydrogen gas should produce so much empty space or solar systems where every planet lies in a disk in a way that resembles our solar system. Even at that level its hard to conceive of a simulation, driven primarily by gravity, that would produce that. For me the inverse square law and conservation of momentum and angular momentum requirements don't seem to add up.
kiwiheretic is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 28th 2016, 01:13 PM   #12
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 10
I have made some conclusions after thinking deeply about the singularity.

At the state where/when big bang had not yet happened and everything was in the singularity form, time and space didn't have a meaning, so in principle you aren't allowed to consider that specific state to exist "in the past". Because what we call "time" was born after that state (and after is a word I have to use, while it isn't really like that. Because there wasn't a time "then").

The same logic applies to space as well. So from a philosophical point of view, Whatever that state "was/is/will be", you can't consider it to be in the past of the universe. But in fact, if singularity exists, then such a state is a timeless-spaceless reality based on which the after-big-bang-universe is formed (or better to say the universe we are used to is somehow a manifestation of it).

Based on the reasoning I mentioned, you can't consider the past, today, and future to be in a line "after" singularity. In fact, whatever singularity is in its nature, is something beyond the usual universe we are used to and underlies anything limited to space-time.

Of course I don't mean the "singular reality" is something supernatural or unphysical. But whatever it is, it "underlies" the space-time universe in a timeless spaceless manner (if it exists).

I don't know how to translate what I mentioned in physics language. But I hope to read your opinions on my thoughts.

Thanks
Koohyar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29th 2016, 04:48 AM   #13
Senior Member
 
Woody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: England
Posts: 491
Mind Bending...

Stephen Hawking touched on this in "A Brief History Of Time",
He used the analogy of the 2 dimensional surface of the world in 3D space.
Here, if you consider yourself travelling North, then the North Pole becomes a singularity, you can't go further north (without leaving the 2D world).

OK so we now consider the 4D curved spacetime, in what way is is it curved?
I suppose it must be curved in some other 5th dimension,
now perhaps we can begin to consider "before" the big-bang, in this 5th dimension...
Koohyar likes this.
Woody is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29th 2016, 02:20 PM   #14
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 10
now perhaps we can begin to consider "before" the big-bang, in this 5th dimension...
Does that fifth dimension somehow underlie the other four dimensions?

I mean, everywhere you look (through space and time) that 5th dimension should be present in a timeless-spaceless manner. Is my understanding of the subject accurate?
Koohyar is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Dec 29th 2016, 04:19 PM   #15
Senior Member
 
Woody's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2016
Location: England
Posts: 491
I have to admit that I was expressing my own (rather vague) thoughts in the previous post.
Perhaps someone else out there would like to critique them?
Koohyar likes this.
Woody is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

  Physics Help Forum > Physics Forums > Philosophy of Physics

Tags
bang, big, problems



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Physics Forum Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The big bang or the big fizz? kiwiheretic Philosophy of Physics 32 Aug 28th 2017 03:03 PM
Can someone explain a bit about The Big Bang? Anonymous General Physics 7 Mar 25th 2014 11:23 AM
How did The Big Bang create the first elements? Anonymous General Physics 0 Mar 21st 2014 08:51 AM
My own take on Big Bang/Big Bounce idea, looking for criticism etc... anti me Special and General Relativity 1 Jul 26th 2009 08:05 PM
Problems.. the whizz Kinematics and Dynamics 0 Dec 17th 2008 03:31 PM


Facebook Twitter Google+ RSS Feed