We Can Learn What Was Before The Big Bang??!!

[rhinefire]

I listened to Michio KaKu this morning on Fox and he said using the Hadron Collider we can go back before the Big Bang. I was not aware this was possible. So answer this question would this not give us the final answer? Or is it only how it happened, not what made it happen? I am lost here.

 

[Fisher]

I listened to Michio KaKu this morning on Fox and he said using the Hadron Collider we can go back before the Big Bang. I was not aware this was possible. So answer this question would this not give us the final answer? Or is it only how it happened, not what made it happen? I am lost here.

In science every "answer" results in more questions. For instance, while a lot of armchair people have declared the "God" particle the answer to many questions, those in the fields immediately started asking, "Well what makes up that particle and where did those come from?"

 

[TheNextEra]

In science every "answer" results in more questions. For instance, while a lot of armchair people have declared the "God" particle the answer to many questions, those in the fields immediately started asking, "Well what makes up that particle and where did those come from?"

Yes, because science keeps asking those questions where religion just accepts it as "God made it" and moves on. This is why I think religion is so detrimental to society and stunts it's own growth because evidence might prove that religion wrong. Hence why there aren't too many Greek God followers out there and why if life or evidence of life is found elsewhere in the universe that will send Christians, Muslims, and any other stunted religion into a tizzy fit that they aren't the center of the Universe.

The Roman Catholic Church is a good example of stunted growth. I mean, how dare a heretic say the Earth is round instead of flat.

 

[RGacky3]

The Roman Catholic Church is a good example of stunted growth. I mean, how dare a heretic say the Earth is round instead of flat.

WHere did the anceint catholic church believe that the earth was flat? Where did they ever call it a herasy to claim it was round?

 

[MaggieD]

WHere did the anceint catholic church believe that the earth was flat? Where did they ever call it a herasy to claim it was round?

The Galileo Controversy | Catholic Answers

 

[TheNextEra]

WHere did the anceint catholic church believe that the earth was flat? Where did they ever call it a herasy to claim it was round?

Sorry, my bad, it was his idea that the planets revolved around the Sun that caught the ire of the Roman Catholic Church. Here you go....

Galileo was found "vehemently suspect of heresy", namely of having held the opinions that the Sun lies motionless at the centre of the universe, that the Earth is not at its centre and moves, and that one may hold and defend an opinion as probable after it has been declared contrary to Holy Scripture.

Galileo Galilei - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Either way, it is an example of how stunted religion can really be.

 

[Rainman05]

I listened to Michio KaKu this morning on Fox and he said using the Hadron Collider we can go back before the Big Bang. I was not aware this was possible. So answer this question would this not give us the final answer? Or is it only how it happened, not what made it happen? I am lost here.

Well... all we know is that the "big bang" was a state in which the universe was very contracted. The "bang" wasn't an explosion, it was an expansion of the universe from that contracted state into what we see now.

There is a theory that the universe is both expanding and contracting in cycles... so probably, what was before the "big bang" was the universe being expanded... stopped expanded and started contracting... got contracted to a critical level and then started expanding again. Basically.

That would be in line with the first law of themodynamics, the conservation of energy.

 

[Aunt Spiker]

I listened to Michio KaKu this morning on Fox and he said using the Hadron Collider we can go back before the Big Bang. I was not aware this was possible. So answer this question would this not give us the final answer? Or is it only how it happened, not what made it happen? I am lost here.

I'm wanting to hear a new theory that doesn't involve the concept of "a single source for all things." So debating it, how it happened, etc, is entirely 'scientific' in my view.

(Now, how religion came up so quickly in this thread - that is a mystery)

 

[ChuckBerry]

Sorry, my bad, it was his idea that the planets revolved around the Sun that caught the ire of the Roman Catholic Church. Here you go....



Galileo Galilei - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Either way, it is an example of how stunted religion can really be.

The idea that the earth was not the center of the universe was a new and radical one for everyone at that time, not just the church.

If the church still believed in an earth centered universe today, I would say the church was scientifically stunted.

 

[TheNextEra]

The idea that the earth was not the center of the universe was a new and radical one for everyone at that time, not just the church.

If the church still believed in an earth centered universe today, I would say the church was scientifically stunted.

Yes, but the Church was the one to invoke "heresy" charges. Again, religion just stunts growth.

 

[TiredOfLife]

Yes, but the Church was the one to invoke "heresy" charges. Again, religion just stunts growth.

Religion tries to be the light so it avoids actual light whenever possible.

 

[ChuckBerry]

Yes, but the Church was the one to invoke "heresy" charges. Again, religion just stunts growth.

You're moving the goalposts. First you said religion itself was stunted, I argued against that, now you say religion stunts growth (presumably of other things). Those are separate things.

Any institution composed of human being will make mistakes. The church is not immune to this and has in fact apologized for many of its transgressions in the past. Pope John Paul II officially apologized for Galileo's heresy charges. From the link: (in) 1741...Benedict XIV bid the Holy Office grant an imprimatur to the first edition of the Complete Works of Galileo, imprimatur meaning that the book is free of defect and doctrinally sound, and thus having no contradiction with Catholic dogma.

If you have a problem with the church stunting growth, you have to have a problem with the whole human race stunting growth. We all resist new ideas.

 

[Fisher]

Yes, because science keeps asking those questions where religion just accepts it as "God made it" and moves on. This is why I think religion is so detrimental to society and stunts it's own growth because evidence might prove that religion wrong. Hence why there aren't too many Greek God followers out there and why if life or evidence of life is found elsewhere in the universe that will send Christians, Muslims, and any other stunted religion into a tizzy fit that they aren't the center of the Universe.

The Roman Catholic Church is a good example of stunted growth. I mean, how dare a heretic say the Earth is round instead of flat.

Religious folks don't ask how so much as they ask why, and science is pretty poor at answering the why questions.

 

[rhinefire]

According to Mr. Kaku the universe was symmetrical before the bang and now it is a mess of junk of all sizes and properties and the relationship in my mind is illogical. Fire, ice, explosions, implosions, quasars, black holes, bugs, dinosaurs. Whoever made this mess is stupid and I want an apology!!.

 

[BmanMcfly]

Yes, because science keeps asking those questions where religion just accepts it as "God made it" and moves on. This is why I think religion is so detrimental to society and stunts it's own growth because evidence might prove that religion wrong. Hence why there aren't too many Greek God followers out there and why if life or evidence of life is found elsewhere in the universe that will send Christians, Muslims, and any other stunted religion into a tizzy fit that they aren't the center of the Universe.

The Roman Catholic Church is a good example of stunted growth. I mean, how dare a heretic say the Earth is round instead of flat.

Yes, religion tends to stunt science, an for hundreds of years religion and science have been antagonistic to each other.

However, religion (when it's not misused) can promote a better society by applying the good tenets of the faith... That said, the good in religion is small compared to the bad that has come from religions.

The best point would be to see what religions alien cultures ascribe to; an I would wager that if they are an enlightened species that the science and religion would find themselves as balance points between all aspects of society.

Let's not forget that science can become (although less often) entrenched in dogma that takes a new generation to bring about the new paradigm.

To the op; yes, science could be used to extrapolate the pre-big bang conditions, but we must accept that it's mostly unknown.

 

[the_recruit]

Unlikely, IMO. We don't even know how to properly phrase the question.

 

[douglas]

Although it's known that there was no "time" at the exact moment of the big bang, I've always taken that with a grain of salt; that could be used to infinitely freeze the timeline in philosophical debates, saying that "now" is impossible if there is any such time where a "then" was impossible, taking a chain of impossible "now's" and "then's", starting from any particular point where either is impossible. If it could be argued that time didn't exist at the big bang, then could it not be argued that there was no "now" at that point to be the next "now"'s "then", which would make every other point in time impossible. But, apparently that is self-evidently not the case, since we're here right now.

I've always understood the "timeless" moment of the big bang to be in relation to the lack of matter; if there was no matter for time to act on, then time has no effect and is essentially meaningless; "now" and "then" can't be measured as changes in entropy, so they don't exist. But, that means that you could go before the big bang if it was only an instantaneous moment of no-matter, and if there was a physical cause (in a pseudo-previous universe with matter) that caused the big bang. You could extend the timeline of this universe into the one that caused it.

 

[sookster]

If science continues to ask questions, and refuses to accept that something was created from nothing, it will always ponder to eternity. Believing in a creator, albeit it doesn't have to be a God from popular religions, gives a logical conclusion. That something came from nothing. If there is some sort of realm before the big bang, what created that? Is there something beyond that?

This is my point. This is evidence that we cannot fully comprehend reality itself for we are finite creatures. It falls in line I think with Aristotle's metaphysics, but I could be wrong. The reasoning is that the universe consists of many infinite elements which is evidence that it is infinite. We are finite beings. Therefore, we cannot fully gather the reality in front of us.

But, it isn't to say that learning about it wouldn't be beneficial. We could learn various ways to re-transfer and command energy (in my opinion the flow of the universe) until the entire universe cools.

 

[Fenton]

Yes, because science keeps asking those
questions where religion just accepts it as "God made it" and moves on. This is why I think religion is so detrimental to society and stunts it's own growth because evidence might prove that religion wrong. Hence why there aren't too many Greek God followers out there and why if life or evidence of life is found elsewhere in the universe that will send Christians, Muslims, and any other stunted religion into a tizzy fit that they aren't the center of the Universe.

The Roman Catholic Church is a good example of stunted growth. I mean, how dare a heretic say the Earth is round instead of flat.

FFS, can you comment on the science of pre-big bang existence or on the Hadron Colloder or is that beyond your capabillities ?

 

[rhinefire]

Problem: If we can go back to before the big bang are we not going to nothingness? How can it be a point if we profess nothingness is something? What is behind the green door, anything?

 

[TheNextEra]

FFS, can you comment on the science of pre-big bang existence or on the Hadron Colloder or is that beyond your capabillities ?

FFS don't like my comments, either ignore them or go pound sand.

 

[Fenton]

Let's discuss what they're currently accomplishing at the Hadron Collider and how that could lead to a better understanding of our Universe both pre and post big bang.

Some clown sidetracked a scientific discussion and I think its important to keep the SCIENCE part of the forum focused on SCIENCE.

They've recently detected a Particle that behaves like the Higgs Bosun should, giving some credence to the existence of the Higgs field.

The theoretical field that gives all particles their mass. The Higgs Bosun is the intrinsic particle in the Higgs field that acts on all other particles.( with the exception of photons ).

Without the Higgs field transmitting mass to particles our Universe would just be a mix of particles zipping around at light speed with no mechanisms to act on other particles.

That is called the Higgs Effect.

Now the only compelling aargument scientist have made prior big bang is that our entire Universe existed in the form of a singularity...A point with infinite gravitaional pull and zero mass.

There was no time space continuum, no speck floating in a void, there was simply NOTHING but for a singularity.

Now those who discount God cannot account for WHY or who in that pre-big bang existence.

 

[Fenton]

FFS don't like my comments, either ignore them or go pound sand.

AGAIN, care to speak on the topic of particle physics or is that beyond your capabillities ?

What ? Your Public education not paying off now ?

Go poison some other thread with your non-sense.

The Scientific part of the Forum should be restricted to Scientific discussion.

Quit de-railing potentially interesting threads with your twisted ideological view points.

 

[TheNextEra]

AGAIN, care to speak on the topic of particle physics or is that beyond your capabillities ?

What ? Your Public education not paying off now ?

Go poison some other thread with your non-sense.

The Scientific part of the Forum should be restricted to Scientific discussion.

Quit de-railing potentially interesting threads with your twisted ideological view points.

Again, you don't own these forums and if you don't like what I say, go pound sand! I will comment on the religious aspects of how religion impedes science and growth. Don't like it, TOUGH ****.

Just because one cannot account for EVERYTHING, doesn't mean the Christian god is the reason.

 

[Fenton]

Again, you don't own these forums and if
you don't like what I say, go pound sand! I will comment on the religious aspects of how religion impedes science and growth. Don't like it, TOUGH ****.

Just because one cannot account for EVERYTHING, doesn't mean the Christian god is the reason.

It's funny.

You're so willing to discount God, or the existence of a Creator, which you base on " Science".

But you're scientifically ignorant. Lol !!

How embarassing.

Cmon, I challenge you to a discussion on particle physics and the Hadron Collider.

What's wrong ? Did you go Google it earlier and realize it's beyond your comprehension ?

Because thats not my fault.

I guess you're a liberal for a reason.