The beginning?

[cee-dee]

OK, so "They" say "everything" began with the Big Bang.

Fair enough, it was quite something and happened faster than the blink of an eye?

"They" also say nothing can travel faster than light?

If that's so, how can "They" view light which "began" shortly after the Big Bang?

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-19728375

We are "here", they're viewing light from a heck of a long way away, such light will have taken billions of years to get here even at approximately 186,000 miles per second.

So how did we get out "here", so far from that light when it was Starlight so long ago?

OK, were we able to get to the source of that light in an instant, we'd find it was probably no longer there but we are billions of miles from where that light was so how come the matter from which our Solar System was formed got sooooo far away from the Stars they're no "seeing"?

[abbots-wallop]

The laws of motion as you refer to them, are a part of Physics, so no mixing needed
They may be first encountered at gsce and A level in the form of sugat equations, and also parts of A level  pure and applied mathematics in more detail


I am not sure who ‘they’ are, but if I assume it’s either Physicists or Scientists in general then it sounds conspiratorial in nature, when I don’t think for a moment it is. There are some misconceptions about theory and ‘laws’ especially in popular media. Some of those have been tested and validated  over many years and as such it would seem foolish to reject them on some whim, because we may be missing a part of a bigger picture. If that was the general view, we would have progressed very little. Given what was known about chemistry and atomic structure, it seemed perfectly sensible to support the periodic table, even when there were gaps left for elements we had not yet discovered. I dont see that it matters much what they were called

The gravitational force exerted in relation to two bodies is inversely proportional to the distance between those two bodies, ref para 1) but that would not accelerate them in terms of moving apart as it has the wrong vector direction, unless they were subject to another force

I don’t see that it matters in itself what term is used to define that

As for precision, there is some which is unavoidable, in fact I would say essential, other caveats eg like needing an inertial frame of reference are usually left out at certain levels

If some see Scientists as just sitting there, whimsically thinking up some notion or other, I would say thats very much mistaken

[upthecreekyetagain]

The Universe as we know it is only part of The Greater Universe which has no beginning and no end and has existed for ever. "Our" Big Bang was just one of many over the eons of time (time and space which has also existed for ever).

What caused that bang was.... all the Black holes in our Universe eventually consumed each other until everything is in one enormous Black Hole. The immense pressure (gravity) and heat eventually creates "The Big Bang" and off we jolly well go (again).

Is that theory any more outlandish than everything being created from nothing?

A plausible theory but to my mind more difficult to visualise than the theory that at some point something came from nothing.

Your theory presumes that time is infinite in both directions, no beginning, no end.  I find it easier to imagine that at some point time must have started and that the end of time is a matter for conjecture.

With regards to the Higgs Bosun particle as I understand it this is the missing part of the theory regarding how particles gain mass.  The Pluto of quantum physics.

[Anonymous]

with regards to the black hole big bang, first of all you need massive super giant collapsed stars to form a black hole when that star dies, i can see the reason behind the second third and umpteenth times the big bang may have occured, but not the very first one, as just where did the matter to produce the stars come from in the first instance to produce the black holes. that's for just the black hole big bang. but then the question remains just where did the matter come from to start our big bang?

[cee-dee]

Does it "matter" Pete? :^O

We're told the Universe is 13½ billion years old (give or take the odd billion) so if we're talking about the Universe as we know it, where the matter came from for the original, original, original..........et al...... Big Bang shouldn't really concern us?

The age of the Greater Universe may be infinite for all we know or have any chance of discovering?

Like I've hypothesised, "our" Universe may be only a "small" corner of the Greater Universe, a "place" where Big Bangs come and go every now and again?

For all we know...... the cause of the movement of our Universe "speeding up" may well be that it's all heading "out" towards a series of gigantic Black holes which will eventually consume "our" Universe before, one day........ causing another Big Bang or series of them.

We just don't know and owing to the vast distances involved, are we ever likely to find out before some catastrophic event (Like a super-massive Coronal Mass Ejection from our own Star?) destroys us and all life on this Planet?

[cee-dee]

Just read this:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20528137

Has no-one thought that the "tiny Galaxy" is tiny because the Black Hole has already swallowed what was "the rest of it"?

[cee-dee]

Well, I've just spent ages re-reading this thread and I still can't fathom or remember if it's totally complete?

[mitzigirl_123]

If you watch "Stargazing Live" tonight on BBC1 at 9:00pm they might be able to fill in the gaps as they are covering this very subject!

[mitzigirl_123]

p.s. Here's their website and they are asking for viewers to pose questions?

Go for it!

http://www.bbc.co.uk/programmes/b019h4g8

[cee-dee]

I just can't abide Brian Cox somehow so didn't watch it.

[cee-dee]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20968199

I have to ask, do we really need to know why (or if) the Universe is "speeding up"?

[upthecreekyetagain]

Very rarely are the benefits of knowledge of the unknown known before the unknown becomes known 🙂

[cee-dee]

A lot of knowns which were previously unknowns are largely unknown by the unknowing?

[upthecreekyetagain]

So we can summarise by saying, the knowing rarely see the benefits of knowledge of the unknown before the unknown becomes known whilst the unknowing don't see the benefits of knowledge of the unknown even when the unknown becomes known because the unknowing don't know that the unknown has become known.

[cee-dee]

Those who think they know something do not yet know as they ought to know.

[cee-dee]

Here's an interesting bit of astronomical info:-

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/science-environment-20981994

That Galaxy is approximately 212 million light years away? That's a very, very long way indeed.

Light will travel 5,865,696,000,000 miles in a year (= one light year) so 212 million times that is a truly great distance?

The thing is, a lot of these astronomical "researchers" are really just having fun indulging their interests as the expense of someone else aren't they?

It's all very interesting looking in to the depths of the Universe but what's the point? It takes us ages to get as far as the Moon never mind anywhere in inter-stellar space?

The money spent on non-productive star-gazing would surely be better spent on attempting to find a better (and survivable) propulsion system coupled with a more practical spacecraft. That is, if we really need to venture in to Space at all?

Andromeda will eventually collide with the Milky Way so peering at some Galactic collision that happened over 200 million years ago isn't going to help or change matters is it?

[cee-dee]

On the subject of Space travel, the Voyager 1 probe was launched over 35 years ago and is "only" about 11,500 million miles away after all this time.

The Earth travels round the Sun faster than that craft is travelling.

We've got a long way to go before we can get anywhere in Space?

[bankhaunter]

It's all very interesting looking in to the depths of the Universe but what's the point?

Someone could have said that to Galileo.

[cee-dee]

They probably did but who financed Galileo? What was the reason for so doing? It wasn't for the advancement of mankind was it?

[Anonymous]

without research, we are nothing. without looking we would be lost. without asking why, we would still be swinging from branch to branch in the trees.

[cee-dee]

Pete, working out how to do things at the very limit of our capability is one thing, trying to do things beyond our capability is a waste of time.