Scientists see what came before Big Bang

[CptStern]

TLDR: scientists see what came before Big Bang: infinite universes before the big bang and infinite universes after this universe collapses

In general, asking what happened before the Big Bang is not really considered a science question. According to Big Bang theory, time did not even exist before this point roughly 13.7 billion years ago. But now, Oxford University physicist Roger Penrose and Vahe Gurzadyan from the Yerevan Physics Institute in Armenia have found an effect in the cosmic microwave background (CMB) that allows them to "see through" the Big Bang into what came before.

http://www.physorg.com/news/2010-11-scientists-glimpse-universe-big.html

 

[Rizzo]

Sick.

 

[Uriel]

Amazing

 

[No Limit]

Doesn't that throw a huge wrench in to the theory of the big bang if this is infact due to black holes before the time we believe the big bang to have happened? I know the article says it doesn't but that doesn't make sense to me. If universes existed before the big bang they were still compressed in to a single point. If everything is compressed in to a single point how can anything be reconstructed to the state it was before when that single point explodes?

On edit:

If this implies that the big bang isn't random, but instead always the same, that's some really crazy shit. That means that once the big crunch happens and then we have another big bang everything will end up the same (atleast as far as galaxy/solar system/planet formations, hell maybe even evolution go).

 

[flamingdts]

I'm confused as ****.

The idea of traveling in one direction in space and never reaching a stop is mind blowing.

Still pretty sick though, I wonder how all this works.

 

[No Limit]

I read through all the comments just because stuff like this blows my mind. The original paper can be found here, most of it might as well be in chinese for me:

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1011/1011.3706.pdf

But it does seem to say that in no way is what they are seeing an error with the instruments since they used two independent methods to verify this. So these circles (if they are actually circles) do exist in the cosmic microwave background radiation. Meaning the big bang wasn't totally random.

 

[Tyguy]

This is exciting but I'm prepared to be let down when the paper is put under a microscope.

Also: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/dark-energy-cosmological-constant-101124.html

This is huge.

 

[Avoidist]

http://arxiv.org/ftp/arxiv/papers/1011/1011.3706.pdf

I never thought I would see the day when that website would be posted on a video game forum. Worlds just collided and as a result my brain has spiraled out of control.

 

[VirusType2]

I'll have to wait until they put this on a BBC program. They have a way of using various objects and lines in the sand to expertly explain anything.

 

[Dodo]

This is exciting but I'm prepared to be let down when the paper is put under a microscope.

Also: http://www.space.com/scienceastronomy/dark-energy-cosmological-constant-101124.html

This is huge.

Ah thank you for posting that link
I have always kind of envisioned the universe working like that, and have been trying to explain it to my friends for ages, but now it's written properly by people who actually kind of think they now what they're talking about.
Awesome..

Basically the X, Y and Z axis's in the universe connect on either end of the axis. They for have a length and are infinite at the same time (they loop). Making the question or thought "what is behind the border of the universe" irrelevant.

 

[Krynn72]

The finding comes from a measurement of the universe's geometry that suggests our universe is flat, rather than spherical or curved.

Flat universe

The geometry of space-time can distort structures within it. The researchers studied observations of pairs of distant galaxies orbiting each other for evidence of this distortion, and used the magnitude of the distortion as a way to trace the shape of space-time.

To discover how much the galaxy pairs' shapes were being distorted, the researchers measured how much each galaxy's light was red-shifted — that is, budged toward the red end of the visual spectrum by a process called the Doppler shift, which affects moving light or sound waves.

The redshift measurements offered a way to plot the orientation and position of the orbiting pairs of galaxies. The result of these calculations pointed toward a flat universe.

*head explode*

 

[Warped]

Mind is blown. also multi universes makes more sense now

 

[Shift]

What I want to know is, if the universe is said to be constantly expanding since the Big Bang, but if its infinite, then where the hell is it expanding too?

 

[ríomhaire]

What I want to know is, if the universe is said to be constantly expanding since the Big Bang, but if its infinite, then where the hell is it expanding too?

You're using two different definitions of the universe. Basically the amount of space that matter/energy occupies is expanding. Whether or not you could the realm outside of what contains stuff to be the universe is subjective.

 

[Stigmata]

"I swear to god if they say 'more big bangs' I'm going to -" *click* "- oh hey, that's actually pretty cool."

 

[StarBob]

I've heard about the theory behind cyclic big bangs. Big Bang followed by the Big Crunch... but I thought everyone decided the universe was increasingly expanding due to Dark Energy or something and was going to end with the 'Big Chill.' Meaning basically the universe runs out of energy and particles are too far apart to interact with one another.

I've pretty much given up on throwing my hand in to the realm of universal beginnings and what not. It's overly complex and theoretical and I just can't keep up with it ... I figure there are plenty of domestic mysteries to think about. We're still discovering things under our feet right now. Not to mention things just in our solar system.

I mean it's cool to try and understand where everything we're made of really did come from, but it's just so far beyond even the wildest levels of existentialism that it hurts my brain.

 

[bbson john]

When we think our universe is big. We have just discovered that we are a small part of a larger universe.

 

[AKIRA]

But there had to be a point in which the cycle started. Everything has a starting point. What caused the FIRST big bang that triggered the infinite cycle?

 

[VirusType2]

From the lobby (where the thread title is truncated), I constantly think this thread has to do with Goatse. Just me?

 

[Bad^Hat]

But there had to be a point in which the cycle started. Everything has a starting point. What caused the FIRST big bang that triggered the infinite cycle?

Your mum.

Naw but seriously, why does the universe have to be limited to our comprehension of it? Not to wax philosophical (well okay maybe a bit), but the idea that something must have a single, defined point of origin is kind of human in nature. The inability to visualise infinity doesn't make it impossible.

 

[RidleyRockets]

Your mum.

Naw but seriously, why does the universe have to be limited to our comprehension of it? Not to wax philosophical (well okay maybe a bit), but the idea that something must have a single, defined point of origin is kind of human in nature. The inability to visualise infinity doesn't make it impossible.

The universe having an origin and finite age is just where the evidence happens to be pointing, as soon as there is any decent evidence to suggest otherwise the old theory will be dropped.

An infinite universe of that has existed for infinity has some very strange properties. For example every possible situation will have already occurred an infinite amount of times, i will have typed this message out an infinite amount of times on an infinite earths.

 

[AKIRA]

An infinite universe of that has existed for infinity has some very strange properties. For example every possible situation will have already occurred an infinite amount of times, i will have typed this message out an infinite amount of times on an infinite earths.

So the SAME universe would come in and out of existence, or would each new cycle create a new universe?

 

[RidleyRockets]

So the SAME universe would come in and out of existence, or would each new cycle create a new universe?

I have no idea since this is entirely hypothetical, i was just trying to illustrate how strange infinity is. The point was that if the universe is infinite in age or infinitely cyclical then not only has every possible thing that can happen already happened but it has already happened an infinite amount of times.

 

[Mogi67]

Your mum.

Naw but seriously, why does the universe have to be limited to our comprehension of it? Not to wax philosophical (well okay maybe a bit), but the idea that something must have a single, defined point of origin is kind of human in nature. The inability to visualise infinity doesn't make it impossible.

I agree. Why does there have to be a finite beginning? What if it just... is?

 

[ian1]

I have no idea since this is entirely hypothetical, i was just trying to illustrate how strange infinity is. The point was that if the universe is infinite in age or infinitely cyclical then not only has every possible thing that can happen already happened but it has already happened an infinite amount of times.

That is not necessarily true. The only thing that is required with infinity is at least one possible event repeating an infinite ammount of times. That probably isn't the case, but its the only requirement.

Of course, it could be that the amount of possible variations is also infinite, in which case the universe could perhaps never occur the same way twice.

 

[Raziaar]

I have no idea since this is entirely hypothetical, i was just trying to illustrate how strange infinity is. The point was that if the universe is infinite in age or infinitely cyclical then not only has every possible thing that can happen already happened but it has already happened an infinite amount of times.

Just don't forget that each successive iteration is 5 feet lower.