Ok, so before the big bang, there was no matter right? (if if there was where did it come from??) so if there was no matter, and no energy( and if there was...where did it come from??) so what exactly exploded? Gases?! where did they come from?? you get the idea....energy can't be created or destroyed right? but energy had to come from somewhere, so where?
and i've heard something about a 'singularity' if that theory is true..how did the singularity form? please, no angry bashing on evolutionists or creationists, i just want a straight answer. thanks!
2007-11-05
11:14:29
·
11 answers
·
asked by
slvr
2
in
Science & Mathematics
➔ Astronomy & Space
right, "dense swirling mass" isn't any "mass" matter?? so again.....where did the matter come from?
2007-11-05
11:34:00 ·
update #1
right, "dense swirling mass" isn't any "mass" matter?? so again.....where did the matter come from? if there was indeed matter BEFORE the big bang, how did it get there??
or is it that "matter" always was....
2007-11-05
11:35:54 ·
update #2
not much of an answer amansci....we're working on it? if you don't know, why bother answering?
2007-11-05
11:56:04 ·
update #3
If we really knew this stuff, we could give you a straight answer. Since time as we know it began with the "big bang", trying to speculate on what happened before that is more in the realm of metaphysics than physics. A singularity has to do with the mathematics of describing the "stuff" that went boom, which is a huge chunk of mass in infintesimal volume. What set it off may never be proven, again you can't access time before time.
2007-11-05 11:57:49
·
answer #1
·
answered by cattbarf 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
"Ok, so before the big bang, there was no matter right?"
Wrong. There probably wasn't even "time", so the phrase "before" makes little to no sense. As for the matter part, no, there was probably no matter as we know it. But that doesn't mean there was nothing. It only means we don't know what was there.
Which answers your next question:
"if if there was where did it come from?"
We don't know. Which is a perfectly fine answer that can be worked on, while the alternative that religions suggest "goddidit" can neither be worked on nor does it have to be correct. It's just an avoidance of the hard question where things really came from.
"so if there was no matter, and no energy"
Repeating a falsehood does not make it right, so we'll skip that.
"so what exactly exploded?"
Nothing exploded but space-time expanded. So that one is wrong, again.
"Gases?"
Nope. Guess again. No points.
"you get the idea....energy can't be created or destroyed right?"
No. That one is plain false, once more. We have not seen an example in which energy would be created or destroyed. That does not mean it can't be under circumstances which we have not seen, yet. Which is, among other things, why physicists do experiments relating to energy conservation all the time. They just don't talk much about them and therefor the occasional science trolls rarely knows about them.
"but energy had to come from somewhere, so where?"
That is exactly the question thousands of physicist are working on right now. You are obviously not one of them.
"and i've heard something about a 'singularity' if that theory is true..how did the singularity form?"
Well, that is another question we are working on. Not that there necessarily had to be a singularity. Not many physicists believe that there was one. It's mostly the science trolls who are throwing that word around.
You don't want any bashing? So what is your own tirade other than that? You come here, you throw words around that you don't even understand and you ask questions that either make no sense or that have a very simple answer: "You need to learn and work on them if you want answers!"
I don't need to bash you, my friend. You are doing that to yourself quite well.
2007-11-05 11:46:30
·
answer #2
·
answered by Anonymous
·
1⤊
0⤋
The big bang was not named because of an explosion, the name was coined by Fred Hoyle, a scientist who had his own theory of the universe, it was called, "The Steady State Universe." Hoyle conceded that his theory was wrong, when the Hubble telescope provided proof that all the galaxies were moving away from each other. Science concluded that at some distant time all of the galaxies must have fanned out from one point. They tracked the galaxies back to 10-43 second, here they were stopped in their tracks, all the laws of physics broke down here. There was no matter, no gravity, just energy that was concentrated in a point with no radius, it was the singularity. You want to know where this point came from? No scientist will give you an answer to this question. I offer you a possibility. Einstein gave a formula, E=MC2, the only part of this formula that existed in the pin point was the E, for energy, we now know that energy and matter are two forms of the same thing. Matter has mass, energy does not. Could you describe energy as a form of nothing? If potential energy existed in a vacuum, the vacuum that existed before the appearance of that pin point must have been the mother of all vacuums, perhaps some unknown force caused the potential energy of this huge vacuum to concentrate into a pin point. But, what do I know? I am not a scientist.
2007-11-05 11:55:32
·
answer #3
·
answered by johnandeileen2000 7
·
0⤊
0⤋
The theory on singularity alludes to the total mass of the Universe was concentrated into a volume no bigger than the size of a Grenade. However ,there is no mention how the subtance of space which permeates the whole volume containment of the Universe was also a singularity.
If mass was concentrated into a singularity than what was the substance of space concentrated to what size volume. Did the singularity of space substance explode just like a grenade.?And what kind of interacion did the singularity containing the total mass of the Univere experience relative to the singularity of the space structure.. And which singularity exploded first or did they both explode at the same time? There appears to be a singularity competion in th Big Bang theory. Mass cannot just hang in space without a means of support.
Or perhaps the Creation of the Universe as outlined by the Big Bang theory ,did not take place at all .But more likely Creation was more of an external event rather than an internal one from a tiny insignificant volume expanding with no particular known mechanism.
I am not to keen to believe without proof that the Big Bang theory of the Creation of the Universe took place from the center of a non existing space structure volume,as an internal event.
Whenever a construction is taking place material have to be Brought to the construction site. So construction can only take place if the material is brought in from an external source to the cite in question.
Therefore; it is more likely that the Creation of the Universe did not take place internally as a Big Bang theory alluded, But as a wirlpool type of effect which can only be produced as an external phenomenon.
As a strainght answer=The Big Bang theory of Creation is just a theory with non explainable definitions and nothing more. The Singularity theory was based on General relativity theory of Einstein's Field Equation, which yielded the whole 2 x10^53 kilogram mass of the Unioverse to be concentrated into a volume the size of a Golf Ball.
Whereas simple calculation indicates that the whole mass of the Universe cannot be concentrated smaller than two meter cube.This result appears more realistic than the Singularity calculation based on Relativity Theory Field Equation.
2007-11-05 11:59:43
·
answer #4
·
answered by goring 6
·
0⤊
1⤋
Those who are saying what was going on before the big bang may be referring to a cyclical Universe, but that just dodges the question of how did it all begin.
First of all, we are talking about the whole Universe. It stands to reason that it would be unfathomable to its extents, spacially or temporally. As amans said, it isn't valid to even talk about "before." There was no before. There is no end or center or outside. This does not fit our mindset of everything being contained by something else. A Universe would not be.
So we go with the Big Bang, knowing it leaves the untimate question unanswered. And we see that it is the only theory that is consistent with the evidence.
Now, as for God, there is no evidence for the existence of such a being. No, the bible isn't evidence. It's a collection of myths, superstitions, folklore, and dogma. It is canonized, authorized, written, edited by, and imposed on others by humans alone. However difficult it may be trying to describe how the Universe began, it requires a lot less special pleading and magic than the beginning of God. What you could say for one, you could simply assert for the other. The only difference is that the scientific explanation is not based on myth and folklore and religious dogma. It is a natural event, and those who disagree with this premise should present evidence to support their views.
2007-11-05 12:10:44
·
answer #5
·
answered by Brant 7
·
1⤊
0⤋
There was nothing before time zero.
This nothing had to contain a potential and the potential had to be finite.
The finiteness of the potential produced a single,quantum space-time pulse of minimum size and duration.
The pulse continued cubing the product with each pulse.
The entity expanded at an accelerating rate for one-thirty billionths of a second,the radial expansion reached the speed of light,the acceleration stopped and the radial expansion continued at "C".
At this point there was a 2 cm in diameter entity with all the ingredients needed to evolve into the universe we see and experience today.
2007-11-05 11:53:38
·
answer #6
·
answered by Billy Butthead 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
when i watched the science channel it said that at first there was only one single atom then somethin went wrong and created the big bang and i think what they said that it was like after 6 min. or something half of the universe was formed...
but it was just a theory and i don't think anybody could really prove what really happened and how it all started
2007-11-05 12:46:33
·
answer #7
·
answered by d. b 2
·
0⤊
0⤋
Thats proof that something sumpreme must have started it all. God.
the story goes
Before the big bang was a dense swirling mass... when it exploded then was when matter came about etcetc
2007-11-05 11:25:39
·
answer #8
·
answered by ... 3
·
0⤊
4⤋
There was matter before the big bang.
It collapsed into a black hole, and then started expanding.
Supposedly the Universe we know is a giant black hole, and keeps absorbing more matter and space, and keeps expanding.
In quantum physics, energy is constantly being created and destroyed.
2007-11-05 11:28:42
·
answer #9
·
answered by Darth Vader 6
·
0⤊
4⤋
the matter came from a black hole, witch sucked in another universe and banged into our space, it's starting to happen behind our milky-way
2007-11-05 12:29:46
·
answer #10
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋