If the big bang theory is correct, then where did all of that matter and energy come from in the first place?

Answer 1

Thats called the Zero-point. No one knows, except God. And if you believe that he is the only one that knows then that means he did it. If you do not believe in God than you now have to figure out how something (everything) was created out of nothing, which is alot harder to believe in than a higher power. Isn't it?

Answer 2

My conclusion is that there was no big bang. Physically cant happen. Some mathematicians try to explain their mathematical model and introduced this big bang. This is analogous to ETHER. Like ether the big bang will vanish with time.

But still the question of the existance of the matter and at what form has to be answered. For instance sun uses hydrogen and it looks most of the stars are consuming hydrogen and spits out helium. If this is the case was only hydrogen present. ? Or was there any other process that was making hydrogen from atoms. If so why hydrogen. These can be answered by physicist and chemist not mathematicians. Also this astronomy seems to have lots of hot air no substances. Theories that doesn't fit anything.

This doesnt answer the question but there is no answer yet.

Answer 3

Scientists can watch the Universe expand using a camera and play back the film with a projector. Naturally it occured to some that if you played the film backwards the Universe would shrink. What is the limit for the Universe if it were to shrink back to the beginning of time? Perhaps it would form a giant star. But no, when stars reach certain proportions they are known to collapse into singularities (black holes) where light can not escape and density of matter is infinite. It follows (roughly) that the Universe should shrink into a giant black hole or singularity where an almost infinite amount of matter would have infinite density. It might be no larger than the period ending this sentence(.) Of course all know laws of physics break down in a singularity and it is impossible to state what the initial conditions were. Scientists are still trying to determine whether the amount of mass in the Univers (visible and dark matter) have enough gravitational attraction to arrest the current expansion and to reach a steady state or in fact reverse the expansion and contract (similar to reversing the film!). It is fair (IMHO) to speculate that if the Universe contracted into a singularity it might rebound into a new expansion cycle (perhaps as a pendulum constantly cycles back and forth) or break out in an opposite direction perhaps where all matter and energy will be negative (as in anti matter?). This is a great area for science fiction to take over but based on the amount of time required will likely not affect the real erstate markets very much, right?

Answer 4

you've a uncomplicated false impression about the large bang theory. you've gotten the version of it that's spread with the help of those who've in no way genuinely studied it. the large bang theory quite shows that there replaced into no remember in the starting up, none in any respect. there replaced into in common words means. remember condensed out of means (remembe e=mc^2?) because the universe superior and cooled. the large bang theory also would not say a element about a singularity. some people assume that there replaced into one previous to the Planck epoch, that's the position the theory starts. the theory does not go each of the faster to the starting up of the particular "vast bang". yet it is purely an assumption we do not genuinely know that and regardless it isn't addressed in the large bang theory. So the real question is because all of us know that there replaced into no remember in any respect, the position did each of the means come from. because the universe on the on the spot ought to were extremely small it ought to not have taken a lot means. A quantum vacuum fluctuation perchance. Or like M theory per chance 2 universes colliding. Or because we now know we've darkish means per chance there's a continuing source of means coming in from outdoors the universe. From the multiverse perchance.

Answer 5

Not that it's a satisfying answer, but the most current version of the theory on how the creation of the Universe happened posits that two other Universes made out of elemental particles which could interact and which both existed in the same dimensional space time to do so, collided, causing the explosion of the Big Bang and the creation of this Universe.

The theory is known as Membrane Theory.

So, if you like, you can imagine the creepy "B" movie organ music playing in the background as a mad scientist intones "It came from another Universe!"

In this case, it came from two of them.

Now the question becomes, where did THOSE Universes come from?

P.S.-- Now that I've seen some of the other answers on this question, I'm also starting to get really sick of "cut and paste" answers by people trying to appear smarter than they are. If you're just going to plagiarize someone else's work, then just post the link to it. It's a lot more efficient, and 100% more honest. (End rant.)

Answer 6

Oh, great, an easy question. Okay, here's one theory. There existed a false vaccum, where at some given locale there was a potential of energy not quite zero. Some one-in-a-gazillion quantum flux occurred, where things got a bit imbalanced. You can see the effects of electormagnetic imbalance by watching lighting bolts. Anyway, this imbalance really took offf, and space started unfurling out, up, and horizontally (in 3-D) and time and "space" were born. Sting theory has it that there were 7 other dimensions that curled up to sub-sub-atomic size, and those dimensions determined the properties of the stuff that was expanding in 3 dimensions. That stuff, referred to as leptons, were one-dimensional strings (don't ask) wrapping around 2, 3, and 4 (time) dimensions. Leptons are things like quarks, electrons, photons and neutrinos. Those things come in many flavors, like up quark, down quark, strange quark, charmed quark, and I forget the rest. There are electron neutrinos, tau neutrinos, etc., Anyway, two up quarks and one down quark are stuck together by "gluons" (no kidding) to make a proton, a positively charged subatomic particle, a baryon. A positively charged proton could eventually capture a negatively charged electron, and we have an atom of hydrogen. When the universe was 10 to the minus 35 seconds old (the "Planck time"), its mass density was collosal, millions of tons per square inch, ridiculous density and temperature, and the universe was the size of a pinhead. All the stuff that makes up the universe was squeezed into an area that small. It expanded and cooled, and slight density fluctuations in the primordial plasma caused some areas to clump. We can see evidence of that by measuring the cosmic background radiation ("CMB"), the trace of light that was released by the Big Bang, now much red-shifted and cooled to a few degrees above absolute zero (Kelvin). Anyway, those density clumps eventually formed galaxies (top down theory) or stars (bottom up theory). After this 4 dimensional spacetime expanded for about 14.5 billison years, voila, here you are, asking this question.

Answer 7

Nowhere. All that we see is really nothing. An illusion. We think the universe is something but our minds have just created it so we can "think" we exist. Like something to reflect back at us in a mirror.

We don't exist. None of this does. It is all a dream. Only thoughts appear to exist. There is no separation between what we do at night in a dream and what we do during the day. Is there any way to prove you exist? If you are not the mind, not the body, what are you?

The universe/existence is an example of dualism. But what is behind that? What is behind yin + yang, right + wrong, black + white? Nothing from which it all arises! A space of non-dualism, non-separation. Which makes what is happening—including the "idea" that we even exist all one thing. Nothing.

Answer 8

"Anamaka" above is essentially correct. The U. is made up of opposite terms, which sum to zero, which means it amounts to Nothingness. It is the ultimate free lunch.

However, most physicists answer the question differently. They believe that there were equal amounts of matter and anti-matter created at the Big Bang, and that most of the matter and all the anti-matter was annihilated in a mutual destruction, leaving a tiny bit of matter. Which is what we see around us now, supposedly. (Their hypothesis is weak, to say the least.)

Answer 9

It's always the great mystery how to get something for nothing. Like cold fusion or the replicator on Star Trek. However, I'd rather think there is a rational explanation for the origin of the universe other than some mystical magical deity that snapped his fingers and there it was. I mean come on... hope for a believable explanation or make up something magical and fairy taleish. I'll take my chances with the explanation.

Answer 10

We can take energy in the form of light and turn it into anti-matter. if you've ever read Angels and Demons, you might know more about it, but anti-matter cannot come into contact with any of our matter or there is a "cancellation" and an explosion of light energy occurs. This is ture, Google it. We (humans) are making it, but we cannot make a large amount.

Answer 11

2 parallel universes collided, and the energy released was the big bang. energy was then turned into matter. so in the begining there was only pure energy