So what did exist before the Big Bang? This question would normally belong in the realms of deep philosophical thinking; the laws of physics have no right to probe beyond the Big Bang barrier. There can be no understanding of what was there before. We have no experience, no observational capability and no way of [...]

More...

Steady State.

Please see the following Links of threads a)Started as "Big Bang" By Pranab on Bad Astronomy and Universe Today Forum
Big Bang

Other links B) Thread "what is beyond the boundary of Visible Universe" by Pranab inthe Extreme astronomy.com
http://www.extremeastronomy.com/foru...-universe.html
C)In the Astronomyforumdaily.com thread" Do our universe has a boundary?" by Pranab
http://forums.astronomydaily.com/vie...ghlight=pranab
D)In the Astronomy daily.com forum Thread" Big Bang" by Pranab
http://forums.astronomydaily.com/vie...ghlight=pranab
Professor Pranab Kumar Bhattacharya
www.unipathos.com
please also see the " Our Universe Started in A big Bang Gospel or Just Be"
http://www.unipathos.com/main/compon...per/Itemid,28/

Hmmmm....

So if the pre-universe was identical 27.4 billion years ago, what caused the 'Big Crunch'? And where did that universe come from?

So now I'm left wondering if this LQG isn't just the Oscillating theory with go-faster-stripes and a fresh paint job!

__________________
I don't believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein

Biologically speaking, if something bites you it's more likely to be female. Desmond Morris.

Quantum analysis is scientific dithering

Professor Frink: My observations n'hey, n'hey, show the universe could be a torus Weh, uh, or toriod it may like the typewriters and bananas and the monkeys with big teeth the biting the screaming Mm-hai!

Homer: mmmmm... doughnuts!

I think I saw that Star Trek epsiode. Spock had a beard.

__________________
"If this were play'd upon a stage now, I could condemn it as an improbable fiction."
Shakespeare, Twelfth Night
Illuminati's Razor-The most complicatedly evil answer is usually the most correct answer. - Fazor
"Every book is a children's book if the kid can read." - Mitch Hedberg
"Distance doesn’t matter much in space, where if you just start a thing off with the right kind of shove, sooner or later it will get where you want it to go." -Frederik Pohl, Mining the Oort

He never did...? O lawks!

Pranab...

Don't get me started on boundaries!
I hate the idea of an enclosed system that only occupies itself, but I also hate the idea of a multi-verse with an infinite number of universes... universi perhaps? (there shouldn't even be a plural for universe). Dagnammit!
It is easy enough to conceive one occupies a system that loops in on itself and prevents you from reaching the boundary, but that doesn't mean a boundary doesn't exist.
What's beyond the boundary is another thing entirely though. A one-dimensional plane perhaps, or even a no-dimensional plane? Or space with no time - or time with no space?
All answers could be conceived as possible including your dark energy one.
Unfortunately, I feel we are and always will be just the tadpoles in the pond and will never know.

__________________
I don't believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein

Biologically speaking, if something bites you it's more likely to be female. Desmond Morris.

Quantum analysis is scientific dithering

Professor Frink: My observations n'hey, n'hey, show the universe could be a torus Weh, uh, or toriod it may like the typewriters and bananas and the monkeys with big teeth the biting the screaming Mm-hai!

Homer: mmmmm... doughnuts!

The matter of which the universe is made of is 4% to 23% is CDM matter as per Big Bang Theory and 73% is in energy form which we do belive. The universe is Flat. The density of matter & energy plays important role in spce. If the density of matter & space is less then the Critical density the univers is then open. If the density is greater then the critical density the universe is then closed. The Big Bang theory says that universe is flat. If the density of universe is less then the critical density and is proportional to square of Hubble constant the universe will Expand for ever. If the density of universe is greater then the critical density the gravity will pull the universe in another singularity. The universe will then collapse in a Big Crunch. The qiestion stands before us what role plays by the dark energies. According to us the universe will expands for some time then it will collapse a little and will further expand
professor. Pranab Kr Bhattacharya
MR Rupak Bhattacharya
Mr Ritwik Bhattacharya
Mr.Abhisek Chakraborty
www.unipathos.com

see the Thread Discussions On "fate of The Universe" in the astronomydaily.com
http://forums.astronomydaily.com/vie...ghlight=pranab
http://forums.astronomydaily.com/vie...ranab&start=15
See the Thread7Discussion- The Other Views 'The End of the Universe' By 'Resident of The Earth"
The End of the Universe

and
the E. book' our universe started in a big bang Gospel or Just Be!"
http://www.unipathos.com/main/compon...per/Itemid,28/

I was always under the impression that it was gainsayed that the universe would expand forever, and that one of the amazing things about the expansion is that the density is just a bit less than the critical density to avoid a Big Crunch - the door is ajar!
Now that the universe is known to be accelerating in its expansion and taken as flat, this must be the final nail in the coffin for the Big Crunch.

The acceleration must in itself deny the BC as the gravitational pull of contraction is constantly getting less and less. As in, if it was going to a BC, it would be doing it now.

Relating back to the OP, if the pre-universe was identical and obeyed the same laws as ours, I fail to see how it could be contracting.
The place of dark energy is the mystery ingredient it seems... but even though we have not defined it per sa, the observations of its interaction (taking that the acceleration is caused by dark energy) with the universe seems to logically point only in one direction - expansion.

__________________
I don't believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein

Biologically speaking, if something bites you it's more likely to be female. Desmond Morris.

Quantum analysis is scientific dithering

Professor Frink: My observations n'hey, n'hey, show the universe could be a torus Weh, uh, or toriod it may like the typewriters and bananas and the monkeys with big teeth the biting the screaming Mm-hai!

Homer: mmmmm... doughnuts!

The fact is that our universe is fairly homogenious & isotropic at larger scale larger than 150 h*-1MPC where 1MP~ 3x10*24 Cm and h~0.7
The fact is also that our universe is expanding. The Mean distance between galaxies is 1MPC and our visible universe is about 300h*-1MPC
Our universe has a critical energy density and that critical energy density have different components ( Like baryons density, Dark Matter density, Radiation density). Cosmic microwave Back ground Radiation Study(CMBR) also prove that that we live in a universe with Critical density
Total ammount of Baryons in the universe produced in the Big Bang nuecleosynthesis OmegaB=(0.024+-0.0012)h*-2 where h=0.72+-0.7 and all baryons exist in the universe today irrespective of whether they are luminious or not. But most of the universe is Non baryonic
universe is populated by non luminiuos component of Dark matter made of WIMP and this component is OmegaDM~=0.15-0.3
so there must be one or more components to the energy density of universe contributing aBout 70% of critical density and this component is unclustered and has negetive pressure and this component omegaDE~=o.7-0.85
The universe has also radiation contributing to OmegaRh*2=2.56x10*5 to day which are mostly photon in CMBR and these photons are at red shift larger than Zeq~- OmegaDM/OmegaR~-4x10*4DMh*2
and So our universe must has omegaDE~-0.7,~-0.26 beyond the CMBR ie observable universe
The dark energy with suffieciently negetive pressure( can be treated as fluid with stress tensors) will accereate the expansion of universe once it can dominate the matter
If Dark energy is taken as cosmological constant Omegatot=1 and when omegam=1 with no dark energy, universe is then Decelerating at all epoch aND When Omega m=0 and Omega DE=1 then universe is accelrating at all epoch. And in between this lies that universe is were decelerating in the past and to accelrating when dark energy is dominating as above shown

See the Following Links on Thread by Pranab" What is beyond the Boundaries of Our Visible Universe"
http://www.extremeastronomy.com/foru...-universe.html
See thread"Big Bang" By Pranab
Big Bang

Mr. Rupak Bhattacharya
Mr. Ritwik Bhattacharya
prof. Pranab Kr Bhattacharya
www.unipathos.com

Commentary added by Tony B. in highlighted text in double "" quotation marks:



April 14th, 2008

What was Before the Big Bang? An Identical, Reversed Universe


Written by Ian O'Neill




So what did exist before the Big Bang? This question would normally belong in the realms of deep philosophical thinking; the laws of physics have no right to probe beyond the Big Bang barrier. There can be no understanding of what was there before. We have no experience, no observational capability and no way of travelling back through it (we can't even calculate it), so how can physicists even begin to think they can answer this question? Well, a new study of Loop Quantum Gravity (LQG) is challenging this view, perhaps there is a way of looking into the pre-Big Bang "universe". And the conclusion? The Big Bang was more of a "Big Bounce", and the pre-bounce universe had the same physics as our universe… just backwards… Confused? I am…

Tony B.: ""It is actually a little simpler than that! This idea of a 'bouncing universe' hits the bullseye or 'occuli tauri' of the hitherto best approximating unification cosmology.
The trick is however, that it wasn't a 'big bounce' but a 'little bounce' at the so called Planck scale. So we don't have large spacetime universes colliding, but discover the pre-Big Bang parameters leading to the observed and measured universe of today.""

LQG is a tough theory to put into words, but it basically addresses the problems associated with the incompatibilities behind quantum theory and general relativity, two crucial theories that characterize our universe. If these two theories are not compatible with each other, the search for the "Theory Of Everything" will be hindered, disallowing gravity to merge with the "Grand Unified Theory" (a.k.a. the electronuclear force). LQG quantizes gravity, thereby providing a possible explanation for gravity and a possible key to unlocking the Theory Of Everything. However, from the outset, LQG has many critics as there is little direct or indirect evidence backing up the theory.

See the previous Universe Today article on Loop Quantum Gravity»
Regardless, much work is being done into this area of research. The primary consequence to come from LQG is that it predicts that the Big Bang which occurred 13.7 billion years ago was actually a "Big Bounce"; our universe is therefore the product of a contracting universe before the Big Bang. The previous universe (or our universe "twin") contracted to a single point (which could be interpreted as a "Big Crunch") and then rebounded in a Big Bounce to produce the Big Bang as we've learned to accept as the birth of the universe as we know it. But until now, although the pre-bounce universe has been predicted, its characteristics could not be known. No information about the pre-bounce universe could be observed in today's universe, the Big Bounce causes a "cosmic amnesia", destroying all information of the previous universe.

Tony B.:""No information is destroyed, as the pre-bounce universe created the Big Bang simultaneously with its after-bounce. This is the underpinning dynamics for the 'inflation standard cosmologies' and is adequately described in the dualities of standard string physics.

Look at it in this simple way, not requiring complicated mathematics.

1) Define a mathematical singularity, say the 0th dimension as a pointspace, with associated abstract boundary conditions (infinities, division by zero etc.).

2) Now map this singularity on some minimum condition, which can so bypass the abstractions and form a physical initial and boundary condition.

3) Define this minimum condition as the Planck-Scale, say the Planck-Length (LP); the Planck-Mass (MP) and the Planck-Charge (QP).

4) Pre-bounce the Planck-Length in defining this as a CONTRACTION in a factor called SSU for 'super-symmetric unification'.

5) After-bounce the Planck-Length in defining this as an EXPANSION in the same factor SSU.

6) This double-bounce so defines the duality as inverse proportionality between pre- and after.""

Now, physicists Alejandro Corichi from Universidad Nacional Autónoma de México and Parampreet Singh from the Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Ontario are working on a simplified Loop Quantum Gravity (sLQG) theory where they approximate the value of the "quantum constraint", a key equation in the LQG theory. What happens next is a little surprising. From their calculations, it would appear that a universe, identical to our own, with identical mechanics, existed before the Big Bounce.

"…the twin universe will have the same laws of physics and, in particular, the same notion of time as in ours. The laws of physics will not change because the evolution is always unitary, which is the nicest way a quantum system can evolve. In our analogy, it will look identical to its twin when seen from afar; one could not distinguish them." - Parampreet Singh

We are not talking about an alternate dimension; we are talking about an identical universe with the same space-time and quantum characteristics as our own. If we look at our universe now (13.7 billion years post-bounce), it would be identical to the universe 13.7 billion years before the Big Bounce. The only difference being the direction of time would be opposite; the pre-bounce universe would be reversed.

Tony B.:""The twin universe is NOT a universe 'before time', BUT IS the same universe in MODULAR DUALITY. It can be described either as contracting in the pre-bounce or as expanding in the after-bounce. So of course, both twin universes must have the same underpinning physical laws. The 'reversed' universe is INVERSED under dualities.""

"In the universe before the bounce, all the general features will be the same. It will follow the same dynamical equations, the Einstein's equations when the universe is large. Our model predicts that this happens when the universe becomes of the order 100 times larger than the Planck size. Further, the matter content will be the same, and it will have the same evolution. Since the pre-bounce universe is contracting, it will look as if we were looking at ours backward in time." - Parampreet Singh
Analysing what happened before the Big Bang is only part of the story. By making this approximation of a key LQG equation, Singh and Corichi are working on models where galaxies and other physical structures leave an imprint in the pre-bounce universe to influence the post-bounce universe. Would these structures be distributed in similar ways? Will the structures in one universe be similar or identical to structures in the other universe? There may also be an opportunity to look into the future of this universe and predict whether the conditions are right for another Big Bounce (once can imagine repeated bounces, producing a cycle of universes).
For now, this research is highly theoretical and any observational evidence will remain sparse for the time being. Although this is the case, it does begin to probe the big question and may push physics a bit closer toward describing what existed before the Big Bang…
Source: Physorg.com


Tony B.:""Parampreet Singh has hit the 'occuli tauri' again, but in a rather simpler way, than envisaged by him and Alejandro Corichi and many others.
The references below describe the Planck-Charge (from say wikipedia) and also a pertinent Feynman quote regarding the finestructure constant alpha.""

It has been a mystery ever since it was discovered more than fifty years ago, and all good theoretical physicists put this number up on their wall and worry about it. Immediately you would like to know where this number for a coupling comes from: is it related to π or perhaps to the base of natural logarithms? Nobody knows. It's one of the greatest damn mysteries of physics: a magic number that comes to us with no understanding by man. You might say the "hand of God" wrote that number, and "we don't know how He pushed his pencil." We know what kind of a dance to do experimentally to measure this number very accurately, but we don't know what kind of dance to do on the computer to make this number come out, without putting it in secretly! — Richard P. Feynman, QED: The Strange Theory of Light and Matter, Princeton University Press 1985, p. 129.
The mystery about is actually a double mystery. The first mystery -- the origin of its numerical value ~ 1/137 -- has been recognized and discussed for decades. The second mystery -- the range of its domain --is generally unrecognized. -- Malcolm H. Mac Gregor, The Power of Singapore: World Scientific Publishing Company, 2007, p. 69, ISBN 9789812569615.



Planck charge
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search
In physics, the Planck charge, denoted by qP, is a quantity of electric charge defined in terms of fundamental constants. It is the unit of charge in the system of natural units known as Planck units. The Planck charge is defined as


where :

is the speed of light in the vacuum,
is Planck's constant,
is the reduced Planck's constant or Dirac's constant,
is the permittivity of free space
is the elementary charge
= (137.03599911)−1 is the fine structure constant.
Some systems of units (such as Gaussian cgs units) are defined so that 4πε0 = 1, giving qP the simple form:


Its value as expressed in SI units is

= 1.8755459 × 10 −18 C.
The Planck charge is approximately 11.706 times greater than the elementary or electron charge.

TonyB.:""Now the grand simplification is this.


Our SSU from above is Squareroot(Alpha) and for over fifty years known by physicist to be perhaps the most important number in theoretical and experimental physics.
So our pre-bounce reduces the Planck-Length by a factor of 11.7 and the after-bounce increases the Planck-Length in the same factor. As mass and displacement are inversely proportional to each other in the characteristic quantum physics of the appropriate de Broglie/Compton wave mechanics; this factor of 11.7 becomes universal in mensuration (metric) physical analysis.


Proof.:

a) Let Planck-Length=Compton-Radius in: LP=Sqrt(Gh/2pi.c^3)=h/2pi.MP.c or MP=h/2pi.LP.c=Sqrt(hc/2pi.G)

b) Derive the de Broglie characteristic wavematter mass which is the Planck-mass in a)

c) Call this the monopole string unification mass MM=h/2pi.LM.c=MP(LP/LM) for LMMM=LPMP.

d) As SSU=Sqrt(Alpha)=e/QP=Sqrt(2pi.ke^2/hc)=e/Sqrt(hc/2pi.k); QP=Sqrt(hc/2pi.k)=LP.c^2 in the case of kG=1

e) LP.SSU=e.LP/QP=e/c^2 as the pre-bounce contraction for a Planck-Mass increase to MP/SSU and

f) LP/SSU=QP.LP/e=LP^2.c^2 as the after-bounce expansion for a Planck-Mass decrease to MP.SSU

g) MM=30[ec] as say 30 monopolic string masses [ec] and is uniquely defined in the modular duality of kG=1 and the unification of electromagnetic and gravitational finestructures wrt nucleonic or quark elementaries (fermion definitions from bosonic supersymmetry in primordial neutron decay to establish quark-lepton hierarchies etc and via GM^2=ke^2).

Numerically then, the laboriously obtained result of Singh and Corichi using LQG-theory crystallises immediately in g).

In the universe before the bounce, all the general features will be the same. It will follow the same dynamical equations, the Einstein's equations when the universe is large. Our model predicts that this happens when the universe becomes of the order 100 times larger than the Planck size. Further, the matter content will be the same, and it will have the same evolution. Since the pre-bounce universe is contracting, it will look as if we were looking at ours backward in time." - Parampreet Singh"


30 monopolic string masses reduce the Planck-Mass MP in the factor 11.7=1/SSU and increase the Planck-Length as Compton-Radius by the same amount. This energy then represents the so called grand unified string scale at precisely MP.SSU=81x10^16 GeV or so 1.45x10^-9 kg.

The overall 'bounce' of Singh and Corichi so spans the deviation of the Planck-Length in a Planck-Length-Oscillation (PLO) and a factor of SSU^2=Alpha~1/137. This represents a simple application of modular duality to the Planck-Radius as a physical boundary - and initial condition, which becomes manifested from its abstract mathematical singularity precursor and progenitor.

A later cosmogenesis can now be constructed in the defining parameters for the manifesto of inertia from the supersymmetry embodied in the PLO and a resultant de Broglian universe described in wave matter.

The interaction probabilities of four fundamental interactions become defined in alpha in say:

Cuberoot(Alpha):Alpha:Cuberoot(Omega):Omega and where Cuberoot(Omega)=Alpha^6 to revisit the 'squared alpha eigenstate' of the PLO.

Then 1 in 5 gluons will statistically interact strongly via inertia; 1 in 137 photons will interact electromagnetically; so 1 in 7 trillion antineutrinos will interact weakly and so 1 in 3x10^38 gravitons will interact gravitationally - all in a common gauge Higgsian template of the supersymmetry given in the PLO of the twinned and monopolically selfdual universe.""

Tony B.



www.tonyb.freeyellow.com

this is my first post!!

B4 the "Big Bang" there was/is energy,a parallel universe!This is also in the Yoga Sutras (Patanjali),dreams give insight into these subtle worlds.

Thanks for the posts. Have read them through and going to read up on it a bit more.

__________________
I don't believe in mathematics. Albert Einstein

Biologically speaking, if something bites you it's more likely to be female. Desmond Morris.

Quantum analysis is scientific dithering

Professor Frink: My observations n'hey, n'hey, show the universe could be a torus Weh, uh, or toriod it may like the typewriters and bananas and the monkeys with big teeth the biting the screaming Mm-hai!

Homer: mmmmm... doughnuts!