O.T. Hints of 'time before Big Bang'

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/7440217.stm

Discuss...

As a pretty common sort of bloke, it sounds "right" and feasible to me.

Galaxies split off to form others. Motorcycle clubs split to form
others. Why shouldn't a universe bubble split off to form another?

Through the alcoholic haze of a few vodka and oranges, I reckon they're
right and far out maaan...

<<Goes and looks for son's bubble machine to test theory...>>

Steve

 

Don't come Hawking that stuff round here

 

Sounds to me like a bunch of physics nuts are off with the fairies again.
What are they smoking this time ?.

 

Paging the Blane...

 

Did you know Hawking was Flemish?
Ah sorry, it was Bach who was a Phlegm.

--
Jeweller
R100RT
Formerly: James Captain, A10, C15, B25, Dnepr M16 solo,
R80/7, R100RT (green!)
www.davidhowardjeweller.co.uk

 

Why shouldn't they? Read Paul Davies's "The Goldilocks Enigma".

 

No no, actually this is not a particularly new theory
and for a while there, until I saw Rock Family Trees
on BBC FOUR last night in fact, I thought "The
Teardrop Explodes" was a particularly insightful and
well-thought-out allusion to precisely this theory.

I now, however, merely understand why it is that
Julian Cope is alleged to have spent 3 years or so
believing himself to have been an especially badly
designed new town project.

But yes, the theory goes that big bangs can happen
in localised areas - rather like, say, catastrophic
hydraulic failures happen in a localised area rather
than to all the fluid in the system when the air
bubble collapses and the temperature shoots sky
high.

As such there would be areas of spacetime which
have indeed been in a pretty steady state before
and after the conditions which led to our own little
area exhibiting signs of a big bang.

Like magma bubbling in a volcano, iron in a crucible,
water in a pan...it's all localised to some extent or
other.

I gather the reason it's been re-advanced is that
there's no observed evidence to back up the theory
which is roughly contemporary with string theories.

I may of course be entirely wrong.

G DAEB
COPYRIGHT (C) 2008 SIPSTON
--

 

...but that doesn't change the fact that what this
particular theory does, perhaps rather conveniently,
is obviate the need for any "Singularity Point" which
even the very best mathematical and physics minds
have so far been unable to model except for to a
few seconds after "The Big Bang".

Film-makers use cloud tanks regularly, but the
clouds themselves are dropped in from a pipette.

G DAEB
COPYRIGHT (C) 2008 SIPSTON

 

I've not read that, but...

What I have noticed is that many nutcases rail on about physics
theory in the blind belief that it is "truth" and then throw in things
which "disprove" it. Well, duh! It's _theory_ and in programming terms
is merely a placeholder until a better theory comes along. (I remember
having this sort of discussion with a very drunk someone at a Billy Mack
party once...).

For example, I'm not sure what adjustments to theories are being
made in the light of the discovery that neutrinos are not massless, but I
know that experimentalists are trying to verify that fact (and AFAIK
succeeding) so I hope that the theorists are trying to accommodate it. The
result may very well be like adding epicycles on to naive circular orbital
mechanics, but eventually someone will come up with an idea analogous to
elliptic orbits.

--
Ivan Reid, School of Engineering & Design, _____________ CMS Collaboration,
Brunel University. Ivan.Reid@[brunel.ac.uk|cern.ch] Room 40-1-B12, CERN
GSX600F, RG250WD "You Porsche. Me pass!" DoD #484 JKLO#003, 005
WP7# 3000 LC Unit #2368 (tinlc) UKMC#00009 BOTAFOT#16 UKRMMA#7 (Hon)
KotPT -- "for stupidity above and beyond the call of duty".

 

They've all become couch potatoes - they just sit in front of the TV all
day munching pringles and swilling stella

what do you expect ?

 

Popper, falsifiability, yadda, yadda etc.

 

Just reading a bit about the early days of particle research and it's
opened my eyes a bit. Tis utterly incredible how so much was discovered
using some real cheap and shite equipment and much of it at the end of
the Victorian era, too. It's fascinating how theories were fashioned and
discarded as something new was found that didn't fit. Previously, I'd
always just assumed that most of the work was done in the 20s and 30s
and buggerall before that, but I was wrong in that.

Just came across Fermi's marble table... all things in moderation.
--
Dave
GS850x2 XS650 SE6a

"It's a moron working with power tools.
How much more suspenseful can you get?"
- House

 

Well I hope you cleaned up after yourself.

 

Moderately.
--
Dave
GS850x2 XS650 SE6a

"It's a moron working with power tools.
How much more suspenseful can you get?"
- House