We all know it happened. We all know something about it.

One thing i have always wondered about it is:

Was the vacuum of space there before it? .............i.e............ did it happen in the vacuum of space, or did it actually create the vacuum of space and everything else?

Paul,

Hard as it is to imaging, but space itself is a property of the universe, therefore it didn't exist for the universe to expand into. Neither did time. That's why any question that begins with 'Before the big bang' is irrelevent, since time didn't exist before the universe.

So what did the universe exand into? Nothing not even space. Tricky one to get yer head around eh?

but space itself is a property of the universe, therefore it didn't exist for the universe to expand into.

So you are saying that indeed the big bang created space. As best we know.

You could seriously go ga-ga pondering such things. Its all just too much for our tiny minds to understand or even begin to comprehend.

Thanks Dave. I've always wondered.

So before there was ANYTHING.....................there was NOTHING............not even the vacuum of space.

That will give me many sleepless nights thinking about it.

So if NOTHING existed before the bang.....not even space.........what the hell was there to make it happen?. Something cant happen out of NOTHING.

When you think about it, it's easier to believe in a God who created everything. No questions asked......................it is what it is............and that's that.

So if NOTHING existed before the bang.....not even space.........what the hell was there to make it happen?. Something cant happen out of NOTHING.

Well we don't know but there are several theories.

One is that the "universe" oscillates. So the big ban was somehow created by a big crunch from the last one.

Another is to do with string theory which has to do with our universes brane merging with another brane which caused a release of energy that triggered the big bang. I guess that means that string theory takes the big ban as an event in our regular 4 dimensional space but that the other dimensions already existed? Try as I might I've never been able to figure out much of string theory.

If you want to give your brain some exercise pick up a copy of the Elegant Universe by Brian Greene. That the best book I've seen on string theory. Also made into a short series of documentaries, the first is at tinyurl.com/3d3w2e

Paul,

Hard as it is to imaging, but space itself is a property of the universe, therefore it didn't exist for the universe to expand into. Neither did time. That's why any question that begins with 'Before the big bang' is irrelevent, since time didn't exist before the universe.

So what did the universe exand into? Nothing not even space. Tricky one to get yer head around eh?

Drat... and I'd just settled on a title for my doctoral thesis: "The Universe, and Everything Outside it."

I guess my PhD's going to have to wait a little longer... mutter, mutter, mutter...

Paul,

Hard as it is to imaging, but space itself is a property of the universe, therefore it didn't exist for the universe to expand into. Neither did time. That's why any question that begins with 'Before the big bang' is irrelevent, since time didn't exist before the universe.

So what did the universe exand into? Nothing not even space. Tricky one to get yer head around eh?

Drat... and I'd just settled on a title for my doctoral thesis: "The Universe, and Everything Outside it."

I guess my PhD's going to have to wait a little longer... mutter, mutter, mutter...

Just make another dimension for your ideas. That seems all the rage :wink:

Well we don't know but there are several theories.

One is that the "universe" oscillates. So the big ban was somehow created by a big crunch from the last one.

From the last WHAT?

You cant make something out of nothing.

I know of the theory that the universe will expand (as it is doing) and one day may come to a point where it implodes on itself and start the whole process over.

*least i THINK thats what i read*.

It will expand for so long and then start to come together once again until it reaches a point where it is all but one and another big bang will happen once again

I'm getting dizzy thinking about it.

Drat... and I'd just settled on a title for my doctoral thesis: "The Universe, and Everything Outside it."

I guess my PhD's going to have to wait a little longer... mutter, mutter, mutter...

Phil, you're a man before your time, you're talent is wasted at our current level of technology, just give it a few more hundred years and you could be another Albert Einstein. :wink:

Hey PJ, the Big Bang theory for me is one of those things that science can't explain and (some) religions endorse! You know, the whole "was it always there?" argument, and so on. After a while, my brain hurt, so I have given up since!

If you want to give your brain some exercise pick up a copy of the Elegant Universe by Brian Greene. That the best book I've seen on string theory. Also made into a short series of documentaries, the first is at tinyurl.com/3d3w2e

I've just finished his follow up The Fabric of the Cosmos which is equally brilliant and gives you plenty to think about.

It gets worse.

Exactly 50 year's ago Hugh Everett proposed the "Many Worlds" interpretation of Quantum Mechanics.

At every quantum moment in time the universe splits. Then the new universe also splits etc. etc. forever.
See:

plato.stanford.edu/entries/qm-manyworlds/

This theory is now being revisited as the best interpretation of quantum mechanics.

Peter.

P.S.

The great Biologist and science populariser J.B.S. Haldane once said:

"The Universe is not just queerer than we imagine, it is queerer than we can imagine."

Peter.

"The Universe is not just queerer than we imagine, it is queerer than we can imagine."

That would explain the theory some people have that the universe is bent.

Sorry i couldnt resist.

I just knew that was coming. I must be psychic.

The great German mathematician Georg Cantor proved that tthere must be more numbers in the set of Rational Numbers than in the set of Real Numbers.

The trouble is both sets are "infinite". (You can always "keep counting".).

Cantor proved that there are two different "Infinities".

Figure that one out!

Link:
www-groups.dcs.st-and.ac.uk/~history/Biographies/Cantor.html

Peter.

The great German mathematician Georg Cantor proved that tthere must be more numbers in the set of Rational Numbers than in the set of Real Numbers

Are you sure about this? Rational and irrational numbers are subsets of real numbers :? . He found that there there were more real numbers than natural (counting) numbers even though there are an infinite number of each. In fact he found that there are an "infinity of infinities" :shock: .

A right brainy bastid our Georg :wink: .

Cantor called them "transfinite numbers".

See:

www.geocities.com/Athens/Parthenon/3761/cantor_set_theory.htm

Strange stuff.

Peter.

P.S.

You are right Declan.

I meant to write "more REALS".

Me dumbo.

Peter.