Since the latest research shows the Universe expanded from an infinitely small singularity to larger than the visible universe we can observe today in far less than a millisecond Everything was moving almost infinitely faster than the speed of light at the birth of the Universe, right?.
2006-08-15 17:54:40 · 7 answers · asked by afriendof CLIFFy D 2 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Physics
(uncertain about the millisecond part but...)
2006-08-18 06:40:26 · update #1
Most physicists will agree that there is a great deal of observable data that supports the "inflationary theory" of the Big Bang, but what you said in your question, "the latest research shows the Universe expanded from an infinitely small singularity to larger than the visible universe we can observe today in far less than a millisecond" is currently unverified.
Data only supports that the Universe within a very very tiny fractions of a second after the Big Bang went into an "Inflationary"mode where it expanded at an exponential rate. This expansion of space most certainly occurred at a rate faster than the speed of light, but how much faster, nobody really knows yet. It is also true that there are certain regions of the Universe today that are still expanding at a rate faster than the speed of light. (Here it is only space that is expanding, not "everything".)
2006-08-15 18:23:37 · answer #1 · answered by PhysicsDude 7 · 2⤊ 0⤋
The most logical explanation I have heard comes from one of the East Indian epics.
It says that Lord Brahma is in the period of sleep and when he began to exhale, the Universe was expanded out in his breath. Eons later, when Lord Brahma begins to inhale, the whole process shall reverse and breath (Our Universe) shall return to source.
How is this possible, consider if you will that when you look at our solar system, we have a sun (Nucleus), and we have planets revolving about it (Protons and Neutrons) and we have comets, (Free Electrons). This is basic atomic structure. Could this possibly mean that our universe could be the atomic makeup of minute particles in the breath of the great Lord Brahma.
Makes more sense than some of the other explanations I have heard.
Other writings in the Sanskrit language, predate creation of our Planet Earth, and there are words and expressions in Sanskrit that cannot be translated into the English language, as they do not exist for us. You might say they are beyond our realm of comprehension.
The Song of God, or the Bhagavad Gita was a book that Albert Einstein never stopped reading. He would finish it, and start over again and again and again. . . . . .
Learn to think outside the bun, you will find it sometimes makes more sense than what we have been force fed all our lives.
Darryl S.
2006-08-21 20:24:31 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋
Well expansion is an unfortunate term. The Universe didn't expand exactly like you would initially think. It is not like a balloon.
At the big bang, the Universe was everywhere at once. There is nothing outside the universe for the universe to expand into.
Thinking of an expanding Universe should really be more metaphorical than literal.
It is all very complicated to think about.
2006-08-21 08:52:45 · answer #3 · answered by Dallas M 2 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i do not realize your truth and singularity theory in any respect and far of the info you're sharing looks to go back from everywhere about no longer something consistent . It merely looks a jumble of you've heard yet yet to appreciate. Now that reported God vs large Bang. evaluate for once merely this. If there's a god and god desirous to create by technique of imploding or exploding something Say an atom or something even smaller, and reported god then created large Bang. is this a danger that both might want to be actual? The something from no longer something theory looks to more effective wholesome both god and large Bang except in that idea large Band might want to have had to go back from God somewhat than it merely being a fluke of nature. have you ever yet to absolutely understand nature yet. i have not nor have I yet to appreciate god or the best judgment of that existence. So the position does that convey us? Nowhere ok i'm executed
2016-11-25 20:20:17 · answer #4 · answered by mitra 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
No, nothing travelled faster than the speed of light.
2006-08-22 03:17:42 · answer #5 · answered by yofatcat1 6 · 0⤊ 0⤋
NO. It didnt happen that way for sure. That is an explantion given by mathematicians. No physcist will ever agree with that concept.
2006-08-15 18:07:49 · answer #6 · answered by Dr M 5 · 0⤊ 2⤋
beano is the way end the expansion
2006-08-22 12:05:37 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 0⤋