Giant Mystery Blob Discovered near Dawn of Time

[thrombomodulin]

There is a common misconception about the big bang theory running through all the posts above. The misconceptions are dealt with in a book "Starlight and Time" by R. Humphreys.

According to Humphery's, astronomers understand the big bang to be an event that is (1) unbounded (2) without a center (3) and homogenous. The bang involves space expanding, with matter "on a large scale" *always* being evenly distributed. Thus, as space expanded, the density (kg/m^3) decreased in every place concurrently. It is incorrect to think of empty space, filled with a small "egg" of dense matter. It is correct to think of all space being filled with matter, and the expansion of space making all regions less dense at the same rate. Most of this matter is beyond the distance within which observation is possible, as eventually due to the expansion of space objects far apart are moving away from each other beyond the speed of light. (The universe being unbounded or bounded is a different question as to whether it is finite or infinite)

Thus, there is not any "point" at which the big bang happened, as it had supposedly happened everywhere at once. Thus, pointing the telescope in any direction to observe the BB is consistent with the theory - one just has too look far enough to get the necessary amount back in time. The object pointed to is roughly spherical and has a boundary - it is not the universe forming via BB theory.

Humphery's does not accept the BB theory, but he does accept the theories of relatively. Humphery's is of the view that the earth young (few thousand years), and proposes a different solution to Einstein's equations using a "white hole" cosmology to make it work out. In a nut shell, the proposition is that the age of the universe measured by clocks in different positions would yield different ages - one measured on earth could be running slow, and thus reveal a young age, while one running on the edge of the universe would run fast yielding an old age. The question the becomes, which clock is referenced in Genesis 1? answer: the one on earth - which runs slowly. There has been considerable debate been him and Hugh Ross who correctly discerned Humphery's theory to be a threat to his ministry.

Pete

[TK]

Pete- I need to understand what you are saying a little better.

The typical conception people have of the BB is that at some point all the matter in the universe was "condensed" to a point without dimensions (i.e, a singularity) and that this matter "exploded" throwing matter outward from this point, i.e the "expanding" universe.

Are you (Humphreys) saying that it wasn't just matter that was "condensed" but also that the "space" was condensed as well? and that as the matter "exploded" the "space" exploded with it?

The reason I have a hard time grapsing this is the obvious question: "If both matter and space were condensed to a singularity, then what was outside of this "compaction" of matter and space?" Well, God was, at a minimum.

TK

[thrombomodulin]

TK,

As I understand it - BB does not teach all matter or space was condensed to a point at all.

For the case of an infinite universe, it would be correct to say that space always was and always is infinite in extent - thus there isn't anything outside of it.

I'll make a one-dimensional analogy: Astronomers could for example observe that there is one galaxy every N kilometers apart. Some time in the past, it was the case that there were galaxies were spaced less than N kilometers apart, and in the future they will be more than N kilometers apart. The matter in space remains the same size, but the space itself expands such that the objects therein contained become further apart than they were.

Suppose your an observer from one particular galaxy one this line. Lets name them by number - There are galaxies [-Inf,.,-N,..-3,-2,-1,0,+1,+2,..,+N,...+Inf] all evenly spaced on this line. If your living in galaxy 0, then you would be able to see the nearest galaxy (-1 and +1) on either side moving away from you with a certain velocity. If you were able to see through that one to the next (-2 and +2), these would be moving away from you also - but at twice the velocity. And if you could see three galaxies away (+3 and -3) you would see those moving away from you at a speed three times faster than the first, and so on.

At any time, you could always look farther and farther*, until eventually you reach the case where galaxy N is moving away from you at more than the speed of light. In this case, light from galaxy N can never reach galaxy 0. Galaxies this far away, and further, are matter beyond the visible universe - nothing can be observed. However, suppose someone else was observing from a different galaxy. The idea is that this observer sees the exact same effects described above as yourself, but his visible universe would consist of a different set of galaxies than yours. It is important to realize that no point or galaxy along the line is particularly unique. An observer anywhere see the same basic effects. The big bang happens everywhere, and the universe continues onward in each direction forever.

Now the case of a finite universe. The idea is similar, but instead of imagining a line, think of what was a line as a circle. The diameter of the circle increases over time, and the basic effect is the same - excepting that if you travel in one direction far enough, you end up back where you came from.

In either case, there is no boundary - There is no edge, where galaxies stop and something could be thought of as "outside".

Peter

*Of course, looking further away is tantamount to seeing light that was transmitted a longer time ago since light takes time to travel - thus somewhat analogous to looking back in time.

[TK]

Pete-

you lost me when you said: "BB does not teach all matter or space was condensed to a point at all."

I pulled this off of "How Stuff Works" (which I realize is not a scientific treatise but it uses language I can grasp-- link to article is here: http://science.howstuffworks.com/big-bang-theory1.htm):

Today, when we look at the night sky, we see galaxies separated by what appears to be huge expanses of empty space. At the earliest moments of the big bang, all of the matter, energy and space we could observe was compressed to an area of zero volume and infinite density. Cosmologists call this a singularity.

What was the universe like at the beginning of the big bang? According to the theory, it was extremely dense and extremely hot. There was so much energy in the universe during those first few moments that matter as we know it couldn't form. But the universe expanded rapidly, which means it became less dense and cooled down. As it expanded, matter began to form and radiation began to lose energy. In only a few seconds, the universe formed out of a singularity that stretched across space.

One result of the big bang was the formation of the four basic forces in the universe. These forces are:

Electromagnetism
Strong nuclear force
Weak nuclear force
Gravity

At the beginning of the big bang, these forces were all part of a unified force. It was only shortly after the big bang began that the forces separated into what they are today. How these forces were once part of a unified whole is a mystery to scientists. Many physicists and cosmologists are still working on forming the Grand Unified Theory, which would explain how the four forces were once united and how they relate to one another.

We'll take a look at where the big bang theory came from in the next section.

This explanation states that at one point all matter, energy and space was compressed to an area of zero volume and infinite density (singularity), but you stated that BB theory does not actually state this. Can you elucidate a little?

Thx,

TK

[thrombomodulin]

The key to reconciling the difference is the statement "all ...that we could [presently] observe". The BB teaches all presently visible matter was indeed reduced to a zero volume, yet there is also an infinite amount of matter which is beyond this that is no longer (or never was) visible from our location in the universe. In my example above it would be all the matter beyond "N". The BB theory teaches that at the beginning, when things were infinitely more dense than now, that the volume of the region of infinitely dense material was itself infinite! But, of course, BB teaches that our entire visible universe would only have been a tiny speck (ultimately a single point) inside this unending and unbounded volume.

Since the BB teaches an infinite density at the beginning, it would also be correct to say that they teach that all matter within the distance 2*N would also be have reduced to zero volume. It is also true in fact for any finite distance from here (3*N, 4*N, etc,...). The idea is that the extent of the universe goes on forever and ever, so no matter how much reduction in size occurs (looking back in time), the universe still remains infinitely vast in height, width and depth.

Peter

[TK]

Thanks, Pete. Now my brain hurts.

TK

[Paidion]

It all sounds like a fairy tale to my simple mind.

[TK]

I really am looking forward to the Lord explaining this all to me some day. I hope He is willing to do so. I'll have a few gazillion years to listen.

TK

[Paidion]

Maybe when you're in HIS presence, you'll be so overwhelmed, that you'll no longer care! You'll just want to worship Him forever!

[TK]

so true, Padion. thanks for slapping me back into reality.

TK