{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by TheMalevolence:
1/25/2016 12:03:12 PM
6
[quote]The Universe was nothing, and then the big bang happened.[/quote]
Uh..yeah..no.
From my understanding: You cannot create or destroy matter. Therefore, all matter has always existed in some form. (This also means that the Universe is finite, as for the universe to be infinite, you'd always have to have new matter, as infinity is..infinite. And stuff.)
Because the Universe has always existed, however, it's time would be infinite- from "negative infinity" (past) to "infinity" (future). This means that an unfathomable- and yes, Infinite- amount of things has happened and will happen.
Now, we also have this thing called Gravity. Gravity affects all things, however with increased distance comes less power.
So, we a finite universe (with matter that has always existed) that has always existed and will always exist. Given these quite literally unfathomable amounts of time, I think it is a logical jump to say that, Due to the gravitational forces that are slowly exerted over these immense amounts of time, all matter will eventually be pulled together. And, of course, as more matter comes together, the stronger the gravitational force becomes, compacting the matter until eventually it cannot sustain itself, and a "Big Bang" happens again. Cue expansion of the universe, and the start of the process of it slowly coming together again.
Admittedly, there are a few things out of my understanding. Black holes, how they interact with this and the happenings if two were to collide. Space itself and what it is. Etc. Frankly, these things are above my pay grade.
[spoiler]Which is 0, btw.[/spoiler]
English
-
Check out the ekpyrotic universe theory.. Gravity isn't pulling the universe back together. Picture a slinky being pulled at both ends: it stretches thinner and thinner until it's released, and then it snaps back on itself. This is what's happening to our universe. All the matter in the universe has been spiraling out from the center and will keep expanding until all matter is stretched out to the limit, and then at the end of the universe, it'll all snap back. The amount of energy given off at the end is what made the big bang, meaning the universe is like a Phoenix, constantly going through cycles of destruction and rebirth
-
Edited by bip: 1/25/2016 7:58:13 PMActually, the explanation I was using explained that there was an equal amount of matter and antimatter, but because they are polar opposites, they canceled eachother out. There was still matter and antimatter, but technically there was nothing. The reason why I listed this is because while it's a very intelligent and creative way of explaining the Big Bang (The matter and antimatter were the ones that set it off), as well as a reason I list below, but the problem is that the current amount of matter we've seen vastly out scales the amount of antimatter. There are dozens of theories and hypothesis as to why, from the antimatter amounts before the Big Bang actually being lower to us just not looking in the right place, but that's what they are; theories and hypothesis. I mainly chose that theory of the Big Bang to combat (fake) Lincoln's post about it, but really, the Big Bang Theory is really just that; a theory. There's a reason why scientific theories, however solid they may be, can never be considered scientific laws, because we just don't know enough about the universe to know for sure.
-
Space isn't matter though, there could be infinite space, with a finite amount of matter in it
-
Alright. I haven't really had the chance to study more of...space itself, so I was unsure of its properties.
-
I agree with most of that, except the assumption that the universe is finite in size. Your stated reason is it would require "new matter" to be infinite, which is actually not a requirement if it has always been infinitely large. It is difficult for us to imagine, but that does not mean it is false. My suspicion (unprovable) is that the true universe is both infinitely large and infinitely old, with our perceived universe being like an atom in the ocean and our Big Bang being a local event without uniqueness or inherent importance.
-
[quote]I agree with most of that, except the assumption that the universe is finite in size. Your stated reason is it would require "new matter" to be infinite, which is actually not a requirement if it has always been infinitely large. It is difficult for us to imagine, but that does not mean it is false. My suspicion (unprovable) is that the true universe is both infinitely large and infinitely old, with our perceived universe being like an atom in the ocean and our Big Bang being a local event without uniqueness or inherent importance.[/quote] I guess. If the universe is infinite, however, that means that the idea of a cycle of big bang/ expansion and compression is less plausible. Also that we have no current reasons to assume its Infiniteness(or finiteness, I suppose.) I decline to comment on that second part. [spoiler]It's above my non-existent pay grade.[/spoiler]
