The Best Bang Since The Big One: Possible Revisions To Cosmology

Republibot 4.0
Republibot 4.0's picture

We all are aware of the "Big Bang Theory" that states that everything in the universe, at one time in the distant past, came from an infinitesimally small and dense point called a singularity.  It's science's version of religion's "let there be light" scenario for the creation of the universe.


Only, it might be wrong.


Now, theories are "theories" because they can't be proven, although they make sense--otherwise they'd be called "laws."  So the Big Bang Theory is, and has been, our best bet for how the universe came into being without involving deities.


And it was fine enough, except that on the quantum level, things didn't exactly fit together in a way that made sense.


So now these two scientists, Ahmed Farag Ali of Benha University and the Zewail City of Science and Technology in Egypt, together with Saurya Das at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada, have postulated that the universe never had a "beginning" at all, it just has always been.  They have presented their research in a paper called "Cosmology from quantum potential" published in Physics Letters B. The new model makes quantum corrections to a previously known equation which used a theory of quantum trajectory originally proposed by the legendary physicist David Bohm. Using the corrected equation to fit Einstein's theory of general relativity, the researchers came up with a model that implies that the Big Bang singularity never happened.


Personally, I couldn't care less how the universe came to be, or how it's going to end, because it doesn't directly have a bearing on my life as such, and the time frames we're considering are so mindbogglingly huge that I just can't get worked up about it.  But lots of people do get worked up about such things, and expend untold hours of brainpower trying to think these things out so that they sort of make sense...then they go and revise their models to accommodate new data, theories, or Mountain Dew-induced visions they had after staring too long at their computer monitors.  For what it's worth, I'm happy thinking that the universe was spewed out the back end of a black hole.  Sort of like a "Continuous Quiff Theory." I never could get along with the Big Bang Theory.  I mean, that was fine enough to account for what we could see with our primitive land-based telescopes, but ever since Hubble and its kin have been showing us pictures of a universe filled with galaxies--galaxies--that look like plankton floating in a dark sea, I can't accept the thought that all of that matter was once condensed into a space the size of the head of a pin.


But I'm not a theoretical physicist, and I never liked Mountain Dew, so what do I know?


http://www.msn.com/en-us/news/technology/everything-we-know-about-the-big-bang-could-be-wrong/ar-AA9es2p?ocid=mailsignout


 

Tags: