milky way,mars,galaxy
2007-10-16 08:14:28
·
answer #1
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
This time question is kinda along the same lines as the "Where is the centre of the *surface* of the earth?" question. The answer is that the word "centre" does not apply to a shape without edges, the same kind of reasoning applies to time before the universe.
We are beings in 4D spacetime that are travelling through time in a direction, the direction of time's arrow - that which entropy (randomness) increases.
Imagine instead that you are a 3D being and the earth is your universe, space for such a being is a slice of the earth, while time goes forwards in the direction of the south pole. For you, the beginning of time would be the north pole, and the end of time would be the south pole.
In this case, it would not be fair to call the north pole the "beginning of the universe", because the earth simply exists - it having a "beginning" or "end" depends in your direction of travel (through time). Time itself would be "a slice of the earth", so there would be no "time" "before" the north pole - the idea of "before" would be a useless concept once you reach the singularity of the north pole - there are no more slices of the earth, so space and time no longer exist!
The point is, "time" is a property of the inside of the universe - it cannot exist outside of the universe, so there can be no "before" the universe. If time is depth, the concept of "depth" doesn't exist outside the shape you're talking about - asking what came before is as useless as asking where the centre of the skin of a balloon is, how deep an infinitely flat shape is, or how many corners a circle has.
So does this mean that nothing can exist beyond the north pole? Of course not! It just means that if you lived as a being in a slice of the earth, all your ideas of what is possible (everything else you've learned about living in a slice of the earth) can say nothing about what is "outside" your universe. We don't even know what direction "outside" is!
So maybe there was a beginning of *time* all those billions of years ago, but the beginning of the universe depends on what the universe actually is and how many dimensions there are - this is something that is still up for debate!
2007-10-16 14:59:04
·
answer #2
·
answered by Mantrid 5
·
1⤊
0⤋
yes and no.
Apparently, based on what we understand about the way time "flows", there was a start about 13.7 billion years ago. We have an idea of what happens AFTER the start (e.g., Big Bang theory) but not at exactly the start and certainly not BEFORE (if that word can be used in that context).
Recent solutions to certain cases of the theory of Relativity seem to indicate that time results from the existence of mass (and/or energy). This suggest that in an empty universe (if such a thing can exist), there is no time flow. No 'before', no 'after', no 'during'.
For us, being living in a (3+1)-dimension world -- three spatial dimensions plus a unidirectional time flow, this would be the equivalent of an empty set.
In maths, the empty set does strange things that are not expected in "normal" sets. An empty set is really empty. It does not even contain the number 0 (because, then, it would not be empty, it would contain a number). An empty set can be described with an upper bound lower than the lower bound (impossible in any other set) which would indicate that the empty set is NOT well-ordered -- in fact it is not ordered at all (a strange thing indeed in math).
The empty universe seems to behave the same 'way' (in theory): 'before' may come after 'after' without creating any paradox.
So, it is difficult to even understand if the question makes sense in the context of time flow being conditioned by the presence of matter (and/or energy).
2007-10-16 13:48:35
·
answer #3
·
answered by Raymond 7
·
3⤊
0⤋
well, that depends...
if you want your conventional big bang theory type universe, then no, there was nothing, then there was the universe, something like 13billion years ago, i think.
other theories have an eternal system of big bangs and big crunches, where there has always been a universe (though not this universe, with these laws, but A universe at least).
And others have multiple universes being born all the time, and so again, there would have always have been a universe, even if not this particular one.
So basically ,we don't know, but THIS universe, with these physical laws etc. has not always existed, and may not always exist....but really we don't know.
2007-10-17 12:27:16
·
answer #4
·
answered by Kit Fang 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
Well, if you go by the widely accepted scientific theory, it hasn't. It's possible that a lot of universes were created by the Big Bang and they are now expanding from that point at the speed of light. In about twenty billion years, the universe will collapse in the opposite of the Big Bang.
Before the universe, there was nothing. No empty space, nothing. There wasn't even time. Imagine your asleep. You can't, can you? That's what it was like before then.
2007-10-16 14:07:47
·
answer #5
·
answered by AJ 3
·
1⤊
0⤋
Ive always wondered about this too.
By the distance between galaxies, and the speed at which they're all moving away from each other, it's estimated that the universe expanded from a single clump or whatever, about 12 billion earth years ago. But ive aways wanted to know what was before that, as well as what's outside the universe and whatever it is, what it is that separates it from what's inside the universe. I doubt we'll ever know though.
2007-10-16 13:45:16
·
answer #6
·
answered by Nightwing 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
It is estimated to be around 14 billion years, and this is a recent estimate. I think we need more time on this to get a better estimate.
Some years ago we tried to guess the earths age and managed to get it embarrassingly wrong, only recently have we managed to get close to it. So what chance do we have with the universe. I think the universe or space has always been there, but can anyone prove it. No, they just have theory's on it, so you can guess what you like on these matters
2007-10-16 17:59:08
·
answer #7
·
answered by 00000 3
·
0⤊
0⤋
Kirkliston is the centre of the Universe
2007-10-17 04:49:28
·
answer #8
·
answered by roger69 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
As the famed astronomer Carl Sagan put it elegantly by saying, "The universe is all there is, ever was, or ever will be." By saying "here" you approach a profound misconception. We are still trying to answer this question. It is a deep question.
2007-10-16 13:49:40
·
answer #9
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
The universe contracts & expands like a rubber band, therefore once the universe was tiny & then expanded again,,,
I can imagine i'm asleep!
The universe is an immortal heartbeat in slow motion!
2007-10-16 13:53:25
·
answer #10
·
answered by ♥ARKONi™♥ 2
·
1⤊
1⤋
yes. it has always been here. just as a small part of the outer universe or other dimension. just like eventually we will become stardust again like we were before. my point everything has always been here in one form or another.
2007-10-16 15:18:47
·
answer #11
·
answered by the only booboobear 4
·
1⤊
0⤋