This question is a bit ambiguous. You could either be asking about what caused the universe to start OR you could be asking about the events at the start.
All of the current theories about the universe have a Big Bang in them. We know that the universe is expanding and has done so for about 13.7 billion years. We generally understand how this expansion has resulted in the production of chemical elements and the large scale structure of the universe. This large scale structure is fairly well understood after about a millisecond after the expansion started. There are still questions about the specific mature of dark matter and dark energy as well as how the earliest galaxies condensed. Also, all of the current theories have some period of inflation to explain the flatness and boundary issues.
As to how the whole thing got off the ground, there is a lot of speculation but not much hard evidence. General relativity would say that there simply is no 'before the Big Bang' because time itself started at that point. As strange as that sounds, it is a direct consequence of applying the equations to the universe as a whole.
The difficulty with General relativity is that it doesn't allow for the known quantum nature of subatomic particles. Unfortunately, we do not have any good theories that merge relativity and quantum mechanics. One attempt is 'quantum loop gravity'. This theory, when applied to the universe as a whole, predicts that there was an earlier universe that collapsed to form our current one. The singularity of general relativity is smeared out dues to quantum effects and it does make sense to talk about time before the Big Bang. In spite of this, quantum loop gravity is not the only quantum gravity theory and others agree with general relativity about time before the Big Bang.
Other theories such as string theory or brane theory put our universe inside of a 'multi-verse' consisting of many separate universes. Collisions between branes produce the instabilities that lead to a Big Bang. Unfortunately, none of these theories have any experimental support, even when not applied to the start of the universe.
2007-06-20 01:42:48
·
answer #1
·
answered by mathematician 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The Universe started Before we started.
Which best scientific theories are the best. As far as Creation of the Universe a few of the scientific theories are considered pseudoscience because we cannot disprove them or prove them.
Cosmic radiation is one of the proof that is claimed to prove the Big Bang Theory . However that only indicated the temperature pressure that exist in space due to the heat energy released by Galaxies.It does not explain heat gained by galaxies or the expension of Galaxies.
String theory would be the Best theory However there are too many cobb webs in it.
In Reality we really dont have a Physics theory which has been scientically proven exactly.
Its a lot easier to accept the Biblical account of of Creation without proof of scientific elaboration.
2007-06-20 09:54:31
·
answer #2
·
answered by goring 6
·
0⤊
0⤋
There is currently only a single credible theory - the Big Bang.
This is largely based on General Relativity and solutions to the Field Equations, supported by observational evidence. It can project back to a few moments after the Big Bang but has some gaps.
The fist is an explanation of the very early universe - for this a unified field theory is required (string/membrane are but one -probably the most researched yet least promising). Observational support for these theories is tricky.
The second is an explanation of the period of cosmic inflation.
2007-06-20 08:40:12
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
What do you mean exactly? For how it began there are two main theories, the first one based on evidence and in my opinion the better one is that everything began as leptons (photons and particles like them) in a very small space (smaller than an atom, if not 0 in all three dimensions) at the centre of the universe, which exploded (still exploding as the universe becomes larger) which through the collision of high energy photons led to matter creation (protons, neutrons, electrons etc) which eventually led to us by nuclear fusion in stars and then evolution from simple molecules. The other theory is that a divine entity did it all, held by major religions such as christianity.
2007-06-20 08:34:27
·
answer #4
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋
The universe could have started in two different ways.
First: A primordial egg,maybe marble size,sitting somewhere.exploded.
It contained all the matter and mass in the universe and as it expanded,it coalesced into the universe we see to-day.
Second:A finite potential,before time zero produced a single space-time pulse of minimum size and duration,about 10 to the minus 95 second after zero.
The pulse repeated,increasing it's mass,and expanding at an accelerated rate,for one thirty-billionths of a second.
It is now expanding at the speed of light,a sphere of about 2 cm in diameter.
There was no matter,no electro-magnetism,no gravity,no heat nor strong or weak forces but it contained all the ingredients to evolve into the universe we see and experience to-day.
The first one is very unlikely,the second is plausible
2007-06-20 09:06:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by Billy Butthead 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
There are no "best" theories; there is one theory that has been backed up by research for nearly 80 years, and then beliefs that have no true scientific basis (i.e., not backed up by research that is accepted in the geological scientific world.)
What is that one theory - Big Bang
"
2007-06-20 08:54:14
·
answer #6
·
answered by Kris 5
·
0⤊
0⤋
Any comprehensive answer is going to involve some difficult concepts, not easy to explain!
I'll just make the point that *either* you have to accept there was a first thing (whatever that is), in which case it cannot have a cause (since if it had a cause, there would be something else before it), *or* you have to accept that there was no first thing, in which case you have to accept an infinite past, with no beginning, *or* you have to accept that our everyday understanding of time is wrong.....
.
2007-06-20 08:33:06
·
answer #7
·
answered by tsr21 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
theory, you need theory or the fact. i don't have theory.
2007-06-20 08:53:27
·
answer #8
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
0⤋
statistically speaking, god snaps his fingers, followed by big bang
2007-06-20 08:29:16
·
answer #9
·
answered by taco_man_747 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
???????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????
Big Bang, String and Membrane Theories, in a dead heat. All three evolving with observations, measurements and hypothetical mathematics.
2007-06-20 08:32:06
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
2⤊
0⤋