Re: [asa] big bang question ... and the start of matter...

> George, in lay terms, is the following true:
>
> -- what was "before" the big bang appears at present to be a true
> singularity ("before" not really being an appropriate term because
> space-time does not exist before the big bang). Science at present cannot
> explain what was "before" the big bang and it appears that science may
> never
> be able to do so within the bounds of known principles of physics. Common
> scientific explanations presently involve ideas such as string theory,
> bouncing universes, colliding branes, and/or multiverses, none of which
> are
> properly scientific theories because they are not really testable.

One exception... the extradimensionality required by string theory may be
inferred if proton collision experiments at the LHC result in a minute
energy loss. Especially if the particle analysis reveals decay products of
the Kaluza-Klein partner of the graviton.

RC

> -- in theological / apologetic terms, the singularity "before" the big
> bang
> seems consistent with the notion in classical Christian theology that the
> universe had a "beginning" caused by an unmoved mover God. Though this
> is
> a god of the gaps argument, it is a more sturdy argument than irreducible
> complexity in biology, because pre-big bang singularity appears to be a
> real
> black box. However, it is not impossible that this black box also could
> be
> opened, so the question of creation's exact "beginning" and the strength
> of
> unmoved mover / Kalam arguments must be held with some degree of
> tentativeness.
>
> On Tue, May 6, 2008 at 11:08 AM, George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com> wrote:
>
>> I should probably clarify what I said below. In the simple model I
>> described, in which 2 particles pop into existence in a state of zero
>> energy, the speeds of the particles will decrease as their separation
>> increases until they come to a stop & then fall back together. (There
>> can
>> be no orbital angular momentum if the particles are spinless.) This can
>> be
>> seen by solving the special relativity equation of motion with Newtonian
>> gravity. In this sense the model corresponds to the closed universes of
>> general relativity.
>>
>> But in relativistic cosmology things are different. The Friedman
>> equation
>> for the scale factor of a uniform model universe has the mathematical
>> form
>> of the Newtonian - i.e., *non*relativistic - equation of motion of a
>> particle. (This resuult seems surprising but there's a reason for it.
>> In a
>> uniform universe the scale factor of any small part is the same as that
>> of
>> an arbitrarily large part. & for a sufficiently small region containing
>> a
>> very small amount of matter, the equations of Einstein's theory approach
>> those of Newton's.) What corresponds to the Newtonian energy is
>> -kc^2/2
>> where k is the curvature which is +1 , -1 or 0. So zero "energy"
>> corresponds to *flat* space, the borderline between spaces which will
>> expand forever and those which will eventually collapse. k = 0 is like
>> the
>> case of a rocket sent away from the earth at exactly escape velocity -
>> it
>> would in the limit creep out to infinity at a speed approaching zero but
>> would never fall back.
>>
>> Both inflationary cosmology and present observations indicates that our
>> universe is, on the average, spatially flat. But it's possible that
>> it's a
>> closed (spherical) space with an extremely large radius of curvature.
>>
>> Shalom
>> George
>> http://web.raex.com/~gmurphy/
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> *From:* George Murphy <gmurphy@raex.com>
>> *To:* Dehler, Bernie <bernie.dehler@intel.com> ; asa@calvin.edu
>> *Sent:* Monday, May 05, 2008 6:04 PM
>> *Subject:* Re: [asa] big bang question ... and the start of matter...
>>
>> Bernie -
>>
>> Briefly, matter could come into existence from a state of zero energy if
>> its mc^2 energy plus any kinetic energy were exactly cancelled by its
>> negative gravitational potential energy. In the simplest case of 2
>> particles of mass m at a distance r, 2mc^2 - Gm^2/r = 0. In a more
>> general
>> case of a homogeneous distribution of matter, this corresponds to the
>> spatially closed universes of Einstein's theory. The transition from a
>> state of no particles to one of 2 (or of N) particles would be
>> discontinuous
>> but quantum theory allows such "jumps." Thus you need a correct quantum
>> theory of gravitation to make this work rigorously & whether we have
>> that or
>> not is a matter of debate.
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> David W. Opderbeck
> Associate Professor of Law
> Seton Hall University Law School
> Gibbons Institute of Law, Science & Technology
>

To unsubscribe, send a message to majordomo@calvin.edu with
"unsubscribe asa" (no quotes) as the body of the message.
Received on Tue May 6 12:33:41 2008