What existed before the big bang? Something must have!

[danot]

nothing is not nothing

 

empty space has energy, particles pairs called "virtual particles" are created and annihilate all the time, these are created by things called quantum fluctuations, which are variations in the energy of free space

 

and no, you can't see them, but the best theory to date that takes them into account makes predictions that agree with experiment to one part in a million million

 

so it's pretty good evidence for the existence of quantum fluctuations and virtual particles

 

this theory is quantum electrodynamics which allows you to calculate the interactions of light and electrons - everything that you can see can be calculated with this theory and some surprising predictions have been made that have proven correct

 

so a theory of the beginning of the universe could go like this

 

the seed of the big bang appeared from quantum fluctuations in the nothing that existed before the big bang happened

 

this seed was so violently unstable that it exploded creating the dimensions we exist in and the matter we are made from

 

this explosion is still continuing today as evidenced by the cosmic microwave background and the Hubble constant -(on average the further away a galaxy it the faster it is receding from us, the Hubble constant is a measure of this average)

 

the Hubble constant also supports the theory that the universe occupied a smaller volume the further back in time you look until eventually you get to the moment of the big bang

 

it's a theory

 

it may be complete rubbish

 

but the observational evidence to date supports it

 

if one day someone comes up with evidence that the universe was sneezed out of the nose of the great arkleseizure then the theory will be discarded and a new one will replace it such is the nature of theories

 

the question I have danot is what is your theory ?

As I have stated in my op, and since, I'm at a loss to what the nothingness is.. that's why I'm reluctant to accept the common theory.

[flamingjimmy]

As I have stated in my op, and since, I'm at a loss to what the nothingness is.. that's why I'm reluctant to accept the common theory.

 

Why presume that anything other than the universe exists at all though?

 

There's no reason to, so why presume that there was a before the big bang?

[pcspb1]

What about if 'We' don't exist at all, but 'I' do?

 

Maybe there is only me, and you are figments of my story, of the trip I'm on?

 

Or maybe there is only you, and I am a figment of your imagination...

 

Perhaps everything as either I or you do in life, everything we see, hear, touch, taste, & smell, doesn't exist in any physical medium, but in a virtual way, maybe 'We' are just energy, materialised by that energy into something that energy recognises...

 

The big bang never happened, our energy simply justifies it, as we are accustomed to believe through evolution that there is a beginning to everything, and that everything is finite.

 

I say it never happened, and I'm right, but, if I don't exist, and you do, maybe it did happen, and you are right.

 

If I get in my spaceboat, and travel faster than a billion times the speed of light, will I get to the edge of the universe in the equivalent of 20 billion earth years, bang into it, get off the boat - climb up the steps and walk through the door into an alternate reality where my existance to that point has been an entertainment show in a parallel universe? (a la Truman Show?)

 

or

 

when I bang into the very edge of the universe, will it spark a reaction, creating another big bang, which then expands into yet another universe....

 

The argument goes on...

 

There is no answer, because there is no logical question.

 

The O.P. suggests something must have, but that is just their perception, maybe something did, maybe it never did and never will.

 

I'm off now to get fitted into my new strait jacket - climb in the white van, and travel into no existance, couple of pencils up my nose, underpants on my head, and muttering 'Wubble' (old trick I learned in the Sudan...)

[danot]

Why presume that anything other than the universe exists at all though?

 

There's no reason to, so why presume that there was a before the big bang?

Because if there wasn't a "before", there wouldn't be anything that followed, No quantum fluctuations?, No big bang... Nothing!.. so why presume there would be?.

[skinz]

As I have stated in my op, and since, I'm at a loss to what the nothingness is.. that's why I'm reluctant to accept the common theory.

 

Maybe that's your problem? Your mental conditioning wont go beyond "nothing"?

 

Try "nothing" as something. As esme has suggested, "nothing is not nothing".

[Obelix]

Please to note it's called the Big Bang THEORY.

Theory, not fact.

 

Your original question is a good one, shows you have a curious mind.

 

Like the theory of gravity is only a theory not a fact?

 

Walk off a skyscraper and you will change your mind about something only being a "theory"

[danot]

What about if 'We' don't exist at all, but 'I' do?

 

Maybe there is only me, and you are figments of my story, of the trip I'm on?

 

Or maybe there is only you, and I am a figment of your imagination...

 

Perhaps everything as either I or you do in life, everything we see, hear, touch, taste, & smell, doesn't exist in any physical medium, but in a virtual way, maybe 'We' are just energy, materialised by that energy into something that energy recognises...

 

The big bang never happened, our energy simply justifies it, as we are accustomed to believe through evolution that there is a beginning to everything, and that everything is finite.

 

I say it never happened, and I'm right, but, if I don't exist, and you do, maybe it did happen, and you are right.

 

If I get in my spaceboat, and travel faster than a billion times the speed of light, will I get to the edge of the universe in the equivalent of 20 billion earth years, bang into it, get off the boat - climb up the steps and walk through the door into an alternate reality where my existance to that point has been an entertainment show in a parallel universe? (a la Truman Show?)

 

or

 

when I bang into the very edge of the universe, will it spark a reaction, creating another big bang, which then expands into yet another universe....

 

The argument goes on...

 

There is no answer, because there is no logical question.

 

The O.P. suggests something must have, but that is just their perception, maybe something did, maybe it never did and never will.

 

I'm off now to get fitted into my new strait jacket - climb in the white van, and travel into no existance, couple of pencils up my nose, underpants on my head, and muttering 'Wubble' (old trick I learned in the Sudan...)

Phew!. anyhow, you are right, it isn't a question that sits well within logic, but since we're discussing theoretical logic, can't we make an exception?

[danot]

Maybe that's your problem? Your mental conditioning wont go beyond "nothing"?

 

Try "nothing" as something. As esme has suggested, "nothing is not nothing".

That's what I've been saying. The nothingness has to be something, which means it must have had a functional purpose before the big bang created time and space

[skinz]

That's what I've been saying. The nothingness has to be something, which means it must have had a functional purpose before the big bang created time and space

 

 

In what sense?

[artisan]

That's what I've been saying. The nothingness has to be something, which means it must have had a functional purpose before the big bang created time and space

 

It is a concept, that if you will not accept can only lead to madness.

You are trying to imagine the unimaginable.

The Universe is expanding, but it is not expanding into a vacuum.

It is creating its own space as it moves, and expands.

We cannot say from nothing, as nothing does not exist

No human brain can understand it.

 

As I tryed to say last night (), perhaps in the Cyclotron experiments we find something close to the reality.