Size of singularity

How are you doing gentlemen!You have no chance to survive make your time.

This is just wrong. Science doesn't say the big bang was created out of nothing, it doesn't say it created itself, it doesn't say there was nothing before it. It says, with some certainty, we don't know - these questions are ones to which we have no answer - we don't even really know that it became a singularity (both string theory and QLG would disagree). What we do know is that there was a big bang, and that it tracks back to a size of 10^-23m - we know this because observations of the CBM prove it, not because some scientist says so.

E=MC2 Why not? Please define substance. Energy simply exist, I do not know if "caused" is applicable. Energy is the currency of the Cosmos. IMO.

---

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

Thread moved here from the Short Subjects forum.This topic should not have been started in the "Short Subjects" forum. Essentially, pretty much any topic that is going to have any discussion is not "Short Subject" material.My creation of the "Short Subjects" was for little announcements etc. of short term value, that could be deleted after that short term.If anyone wants to discuss the function of the "Short Subjects" forum, please start a "Suggestions and Questions" topic on the matter.AdminnemooseusThis message has been edited by Adminnemooseus, 06-09-2004 02:20 PM

quote:

---

Pretend you have a rewind-time machine. Go to an arbitrary point in the universe. Rewind time far enough and you'll discover you're at the location of the big bang.

---

what if you can rewind time but your position still remains fixed ???You would see the universe recede to it's singular point somewhere but no where near where you are ???This message has been edited by RingoKid, 06-09-2004 07:39 PM

When you look out, you see everything expanding away from you.Suppose you were somewhere else looking at the Universe. What would you see?

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

you can only see what's in the light, the rest just looks dark even if it has substance...But if what you mean is viewed from a point outside the universe i believe you would see a bubble just like the ones you blow uing soap liquid except it would be filled with something you wouldn't recognize as familiar that's if you could see it at all kinda like blowing bubbles with cigarette smoke but never having seen smoke beforedifference being this bubble would have a "skin" 13.5 billion light years thick instead of the few microns of normal bubbles and it would appear to be constantly inflatingnow peeps are probably gonna say prove it !!!...but that's the beauty of belief I don't need to prove it, just have faith that what I believe is true and it will be if only to mecos it's all about ME...My Evolution

That is sort of the point. If you go back in time, but stay still in space, you will see that everything else in the universe is getting closer and closer to you.This would happen regardless of where in the universe you are. Even if you moved to Andromeda, you'd see the same effect as if you stayed in our solar system.So no matter where in the universe you are, you'll end up at the exact point of the singularity if you go back in time far enough.

No, not outside the Universe because that really has no meaning. But rather from any point within the Universe.By the way, if you click on the small red reply image at the bottom of each post it ties responses together.

---

Aslan is not a Tame Lion

Ha-ha-ha.This message has been edited by Lam, 06-09-2004 10:35 PM

---

The Laminator

​

I get what you mean about the universe getting smaller around you as you and your position in space would get smaller in relation to the speed at which the time machine is rewinding so without moving you would become as one with the initial singularity......but if your postion were fixed (maybe in another dimension) and time and distance kept rewinding, spacetime would recede a round you and you would see it disappear into the distance like a bubble reducing in size to a point no longer visible and not anywhere near youif that were true and I believe it is then that initial point is fixed somewhere in another medium/dimension and is the point at which the universe expands uniformly aroundIf not then I don't get how the universe can supposedly still be infinitely expanding unto infinity without a leading edge at which spacetime along with matter is still being created and adding to the mass of the universeI really would appreciate trying to be set on the straight and narrow about this as i would hate to go thru life believing a self deluding lie of my own fabrication...thanx

somebody set up us the bomb... This message has been edited by RingoKid, 06-09-2004 10:50 PM

I know analogies for the universe are a dime a dozen, and being that they are analogies, they are not completely accurate descriptions, but here goes. Think of the universe as a rubber band being stretched. The rubber band itself is not getting any bigger, the mass is the same, but the atoms are being pulled farther apart, the same is true of the universe. Its not really that the Universe is expanding INTO anything, space itself is being stretched so the distance from point A to point B seems to be larger than it was before.Similarly, being fixed "outside" the Universe is at the very least grammatically impossible.. the universe is defined as everything, and so to be outside of it would refute that definition. As for physically, there may very well be higher dimensions, but these dimensions would also be part of the universe, and so being fixed to a spot in a higher dimension would still keep you within the universe, and so everything would seem to be rushing toward you as time ran backward. The opposite is what we see right now, (everything rushing away from us) which is how we find the Hubble Constant.

---

"Of course...we all create god in our own image" - Willard Decker, Star Trek: The Motion Picturehttp://perditionsgate.bravepages.com

see that's the thing...I don't consider the universe the sum total of everything that exists just that which exists within our perception of reality as defined by us and vibrating at a rate which keeps us locked in this universethe multiverse would then be any number of universes vibrating at different rates but even then not possibly the sum total of everything that could possibly existas i still believe in a supreme creator that exists outside all our frames of reference

But that is the definition of the word, if that's not what you mean, then use "multiverse" as you did below that line. Now the question is, if you can somehow fix yourself in one multiverse, how would you be able to percieve the other seeing as how we can't see any others right now?