Krimel, Marsha, DMB --
Apparently you folks get your science education from Wikipedia.
Following is part of an article by William C. Mitchell which was published
in Physics Essays, Volume 10, Number 2, June 1997. It's a non-technical
summary of the problems cosmologists face when theorizing the Big Bang as
the primary, uncaused 'singular' event. I think you might find the entire
essay enlightening.
"The oldest and perhaps best known problem of Big Bang Theory is that of the
singularity. At the first instant of the Big Bang universe, in which its
density and temperature were infinitely high, is what is known to
mathematicians as a singularity. That situation is considered to be a
breakdown of theory. That is, it cannot be assumed that the laws of physics
as we know them can apply to that event, thus presenting serious questions
about it. In addition, the postulated creation of the entire mass and
energy of the universe out of nothing in the first instant of time, seems to
represent an extreme violation of the law of conservation of mass/energy.
"According to prevailing theory, before that instant, space and time did not
exist. Although to some, who confuse their religious ideas with science,
this is seen as a reasonable interpretation of their religious beliefs, to
others the beginning of space and time might represent a significant
problem.
"If there were a Big Bang, it would seem that events during the first
instant of time would involve the instantaneous acceleration of the enormous
number of particles (the entire mass) of the universe to relativistic
velocity; and some variations of Big Bang Theory postulate velocities well
above the speed of light. Because the acceleration of even a minute
particle to the speed of light requires an infinite amount of energy, the
Big Bang might have required on the order of an infinity times and infinity
of ergs; not to mention the additional energy that would be required to
overcome the gravitational attraction of the entire mass of the universe.
"It has been suggested that this singularity problem can be solved by
postulating a universe of zero net energy; a universe wherein the positive
kinetic energy, the potential energy, and the Einsteinian equivalent energy
of the mass of the universe is equal and opposite to the negative energy of
gravity. Somehow, if the universe is to collapse in the future as some
believe, all the energy that was expended in the birth and expansion of the
Big Bang universe was only borrowed; someday to be paid back. However, that
doesn't provide an adequate explanation for the source of the energy
requirement described above.
"It should be noted that this zero net energy explanation couldn't
reasonably be postulated for other than a recollapsing universe. However,
as will be discussed further on, observational evidence has all but ruled
out the possibility of the collapsing Big Bang universe case, thus adding to
the incredibility of zero net energy; and certainly it would seem that the
positive energy of the potential, kinetic and the enormous mass equivalent
energy of the of the universe must be far greater than the negative energy
of its gravity. For any Big Bang universe case the postulated zero net
energy idea appears to be unrealistic.
"Inflation theory ...has claimed to solve the singularity problem (and other
Big Bang problems as well) but it requires an enormous quantum theory vacuum
fluctuation and, according to some, an enormous cosmic repulsive force to
provide for a Big Bang. These are purely speculative ideas that have no
known means of experimental verification."
--The Big Bang Theory Under Fire,
http://www.spaceandmotion.com/cosmology/
Enjoy,
Ham
Moq_Discuss mailing list
Listinfo, Unsubscribing etc.
http://lists.moqtalk.org/listinfo.cgi/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org
Archives:
http://lists.moqtalk.org/pipermail/moq_discuss-moqtalk.org/
http://moq.org.uk/pipermail/moq_discuss_archive/
