New ''theory'' about the Big Bang being a ''change of phase''

Hey

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Thanks for stopping in...I'm a little taken aback right now, because I visited a site, that highlighted Guth's work, earlier today. How ironic.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Thx for posting that link.

aw, so you looked into grant money, then?

Would you mind answering some questions relating to this, brucep?

My questions are:

1) Can String Theory make any valid predictions with respect to pre-Big Bang? (I don't fully grasp String Theory) :/
2) Why do you feel the Big Bang Theory will never be replaced?
3) So the ''inflationary universe theory'' is the popularly accepted theory for pre-Big Bang? (I ask because I've read that inflation theory hasn't been confirmed.)
4) Doesn't the inflation theory violate Einstein's equation? I was reading something to this effect, and if so...why would this be accepted then? (There are some who don't believe the inflation theory largely because it 'violates' Einstein's theory)

I'm a bit confused, but I'm hopeful you can help me better understand. (TIA)

Well, science knows a wee bit more than that.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

But, science is always pushing the envelope, so we shall see what the future has in store.


For anyone interested, here's a session with Alan Guth...he is very interesting.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rfeJhzPq3jQ

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Can I have a shot at answering them? [from a layman's point of view]

[1] String theory can I'm sure make predictions pre 10-45 seconds after the event [which current models and GR do not] whether it can before the the actual BB event I'm not sure....The problems with string theory and its derivitives, is that we do not as yet have the technology/tools to observe before 10-45 seconds after the BB event as yet.

[2]I would imagine he means that any future QGT or TOE will encompass the BB/Inflationary theory while extending the parameters of what it is capable of describing.
The BB/Inflationary model appears too well supported by observational evidence to be totally wrong.

[3]Inflation goes hand in hand with the BB and has come to be known as the BB/Inflationary model of Universal evolution. It does not go back any further then the BB originally did...It just describes more accurately what took place at just after 10-45 seconds after the event

NB: The 10-45 seconds after the BB may well be wrong...I am going from memory. It could be 10-43 seconds not too sure now and too bloody lazy to google and check.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Oh, anyone can answer.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Of course!

I added a question #4, too...sorry.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

It's the first I have heard of it violating any current model or GR......I was of the opmion it was fairly well accepted.
And of course if it did violate GR, then it would not really be accepted.

 

first, thank you for your answers above, i will respond in more depth tomorrow to them...
but, as to #4...inflation theory has become widely accepted, yes--but there is a lot of literature out there that states it violates Einstein's equation. Isn't that odd?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

We also have a lot of alternative theories out there, that claim current cosmology is also wrong...Some even claim Einstein is/was wrong.

I'll let the big boys work it out...

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Everything is speculation to you but not for me and folks who study science. Your assertions are not facts regardless whether you put fact in capital letters or not.

 

This is a good source: What is the Inflation Theory?

It's worth mentioning that it has been speculated in the mainstream that inflation may have happened BEFORE the 'big bang'. This would fit with my own mind-model of a bubble or void inflating before spinning energy erupts from the outside to within and then implodes. P.S. This mind-model also models Dark Energy, which is simply helical spinning gravitons which have traveled around a 4D hypersphere to re-emerge as forces of repulsion, yet completely unchanged except for their apparent direction of motion. (That takes thinking about)

Q & A: Did Inflation Happen Before the Big Bang?

This next part is dependent on the theory of gravity being correct, which I'm sure it isn't:

Even the observation that red-shifted light from distant galaxies means that the universe is expanding is also a speculation imv. Dark Energy could be acting on the photons which causes the helical particles to expand in length.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Alphanumeric said string theory recovers inflation in it's classical domain of applicability. That's good for string theory and eternal inflation.
The Classical Big Bang Theory won't be replaced because it's a work in progress. All we learn about the evolution of the universe becomes part of the BBT.
Inflation Theory isn't a 'popular' theory. It's a scientific theory about how our universe came into being. It's made predictions that have been measured and confirmed by the WMAP experiment. It's the first cosmological theory to make testable predictions. It brought cosmology into the realm of testable science.
No it doesn't violate relativity theory. The 'metering stick' we use for cosmological purposes is GR. Without GR the cosmology wouldn't make any sense. Without GR inflation couldn't be described. There's lots of bullshit out there. Surprisingly very few know much about this. The best way to learn about what's known about the evolution of our universe is to read it from the horses mouth. IE the scientific literature. It's freely available. You don't have to learn much math to learn about cosmology. You have to learn some math to understand GR.

 

This may all be true but the current BB/Inflation theory is woefully poor in modeling or predicting Dark Energy, which is estimated to make up around 70% of the known universe. It doesn't even mention Dark Energy. Any theory which states that it's how the universe was created, but misses out 70% of it, isn't much of a theory at all, is it?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

TAKE A LOOK AT THIS! Fat gravity particle gives clues to dark energy

 

What observational evidence do you have to support any alternative claim better then the current model?

It's really easy to sit back, and criticise current models, [every man and his dog that wants to be remembered has had a go] the hard bit is to come up with something to replace it.

As brucep has just posted, there is a heap of garbage on the net that tries to pass itself off as legitimate science, when in actual fact, they are about on the same level terms as the crazy conspiracy pushers with regards to the Moon landings and 9/11.

 

I have come up with a legitimate mechanism for the gravity force, namely, a spinning Archimedes screw. This also can explain Dark Energy by a wraparound universe. I've submitted these ideas to the FQXi physics competition which questions the fundamentals of physics. My essay was well received.

I've recently predicted that the forthcoming Juno flyby on 9th Oct 2013 will experience a large positive acceleration with a unique signature lateral deviation to the left. This is due to the hypothesized left-hand spinning gravitons from fluid exotic matter (neutron matter) around the inner most core of the Earth.

Just 4 weeks to see if there's another substance to my claims.

 

Good for you!!!
Now if you're really fair dinkum , you'll get it peer reviewed through the proper channels. Afterall this is just a forum and I don't know who you are .

 

Thanks...I've put this prediction 'out there' in a number of forums and sites where it will get noticed if correct. The implications for the airline industry are tremendous to say the least. I'm hoping John Goglia who writes for Forbes, a former lead NTSB investigator, will take the matter further. A mystery lateral deviation as well as sudden acceleration toward the surface of the Earth was recorded by the flight data recorders in the Asiana Airways 777 crash at San Francisco Airport just a few months ago. Most airliner incidents could be attributed to this mystery 'geo-force' which only affects fluids. It's going to be BIG news.

 

I think the reason for this is because no one definitively knows what dark energy is, and it's hard to detect, etc...

 

But you have to agree that a theory of the beginning of everything needs to incorporate it at some point, right? Same thing goes for 'dark matter' which has been shown to be more likely a Modification Of Newtonian Dynamics (MOND)

MOND predicts dwarf galaxy feature prior to observations - Also indicates gravity fields vary where dark matter presumes uniformity

 

Considering that dark energy is thought to dominate the universe, I can only say that two of the problems with it is that no one knows what it is, exactly. And it’s hard to ‘detect.’ I'm just guessing. Question >> How does Einstein's cosmological constant come into play here?

 

Deja vu?

Good luck with your project, Sense!

The multi-verse idea (I call this "MV") which is that many universes were "born" at the Bang. This would create the impression for me that beyond our universe is an eternity of "seed" singularities throbbing away until they too burst into life. This approach to the BB allows cosmologists to "flow" around that first, unknown sequence.

In the meantime, I think the studies of "Dark Flow" seem promising. This is the possibility that 2500 galaxies move in the same direction. One excited professional thought it might be the influence of another universe upon ours. I thought it might mean ours might start to "spiral" back into itself like water in a sink...

The MV theory seems to put the ultimate cause problem into an eternal void which then makes me wonder about how that "became". This just seems the kind of "problem transference" to which cosmology is prone...

 

Wikipedia states:

But take a look at this new research Fat gravity particle gives clues to dark energy - Force-carrying ‘gravitons’ with mass could help to explain Universe's accelerating expansion. (10 Sep 2013)

Experiments that bounce laser beams off the Moon — similar to this one at NASA's Goddard Space Flight Center in Greenbelt, Maryland — might detect anomalies in the lunar orbit that would help to explain the nature of dark energy.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

As I inferred before, I'm reasonably sure posting an hypothesis on a number of science forums, isn't really accepted peer review.
And until it is peer reviewed in the accepted manner, [and accepted] it remains an hypothesis.
I have no qualifications to acclaim your hypothesis or invalidate it, but I do know that to overturn a theory as well supported as the BB/Inflationary model, you must have extraordinary evidence that highlights its predicitve ability better then the current models.

At a guess, I would imagine there are many would be Einsteins out there, with suggestions, ideas and hypothesis that each is sure is the "real thing"....99% of these all are shown to be false.

As I have said earlier, I believe that any future new model, will almost certainly encompass the BB model due to the overwhelming evidence that exists that presently supports it....