http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/big-bang-big-bo...yptr=yahoo

I thought this was interesting. I just kind of grasped the Big Bang theory. Now, they have a Big Bounce theory. I'm glad they are still working this out. Apparently quantum mechanics saved the previous universe from going into nothingness. it collapsed and a new one was born. That is what I understand from the article. 

From the linked article which is a long read: "In a mathematical model testing their theory, Gielen and Turok found quantum mechanics allowed the universe to bounce from a contracting universe to an expanding one, rather than emanating from an infinite point of broken physics."

They are also working hard at CERN http://phys.org/news/2016-05-physicists-...-revs.html
They are finding a new particle or working toward discovering a new particle. They already found the Higgs Boson four years ago which was very highly anticipated. This new project to find a new particle that they theorize exists is the newest thing happening at CERN.

So, what do you think about that ??

The title is too open to jokes. I think I'll watch awhile.

(July 14, 2016 at 7:53 pm)Czechlervitz29 Wrote: http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/big-bang-big-bo...yptr=yahoo

I thought this was interesting. I just kind of grasped the Big Bang theory. Now, they have a Big Bounce theory. I'm glad they are still working this out. Apparently quantum mechanics saved the previous universe from going into nothingness. it collapsed and a new one was born. That is what I understand from the article. 

From the linked article which is a long read: "In a mathematical model testing their theory, Gielen and Turok found quantum mechanics allowed the universe to bounce from a contracting universe to an expanding one, rather than emanating from an infinite point of broken physics."

They are also working hard at CERN http://phys.org/news/2016-05-physicists-...-revs.html
They are finding a new particle or working toward discovering a new particle. They already found the Higgs Boson four years ago which was very highly anticipated. This new project to find a new particle that they theorize exists is the newest thing happening at CERN.

The universe is also going from a big bang or big bounce to a big rip. http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/big-rip-univers...ts-1508766

[url=http://www.ibtimes.co.uk/big-rip-universe-will-pull-itself-apart-22-billion-years-model-predicts-1508766][/url]

10 years from now, we're going to know more about it than we do now.


I called it right here. Remember that. You'll kudos me in 2026, it's ok. From your flying cars, of course.

The articles you have posted fall a bit in the common science journalism trap of taking one paper from the body of literature of many 100s and running with it, downplaying the context and speculative nature.

The consensus does not point towards big rip and I don't think there is a very compelling underlying physics model that would yield such a divergent expansion.

As to the big bounce, that stuff is really interesting, but Gielen and Turoks paper is not the last word nor provides decisive scientific evidence in favor (In a recent review of bouncing cosmologies, it is one of 150 or so references, and even there more or less a footnote, to give you some context) it may well be one of the more important references because they try to tackle a difficult theoretical problem, the complete quantum physics of the earliest stages of cosmic evolution - they have shown in a speculative simplified scenario that they can handle the quantum physics involved. This approach is still somewhat removed from a realistic picture and involves many unknowns concerning how this conformal model might arise from the physics we know. The "classical" inflation paradigm is still simpler and more well defined and explains the observations, but since it suffers from two conceptual problems (trans planckian effects and past singularities), the big bounce stuff might one day provide a fully developed alternative.

As to the 750 GeV diphoton resonance at the LHC, that would be epic, but the latest rumours dampen the hopes a bit. The ICHEP conference is approaching, and if there is a discovery in the 2016 data, we should be hearing some more concrete rumours. So far all we got was inofficial claims that the signal is not there any more.

Heh, heh, maybe a "big bounce" just looks like that to us when it's really a pair of universes diverging from a point.  It looks like a big bounce to us, but time runs backwards in the other one, so it's a universe expanding just like ours is.




Good luck trying to design some lab experiments to prove that CF . . .

I haven't read this article yet, sorry. But if this universe contracts and bounces back would the universe play out the exact same when bouncing back?

(July 15, 2016 at 6:46 am)RozKek Wrote: I haven't read this article yet, sorry. But if this universe contracts and bounces back would the universe play out the exact same when bouncing back?

The article is not about our universe recontracting but rather our big bang actually being the result of a previous contraction. I don't think it would necessarily play out exactly the same way as its past mirror version, but since we don't know where quantum randomness really comes from, I don't think there is any way to say for sure.

(July 15, 2016 at 7:07 am)Alex K Wrote:

(July 15, 2016 at 6:46 am)RozKek Wrote: I haven't read this article yet, sorry. But if this universe contracts and bounces back would the universe play out the exact same when bouncing back?

The article is not about our universe recontracting but rather our big bang actually being the result of a previous contraction. I don't think it would necessarily play out exactly the same way as its past mirror version, but since we don't know where quantum randomness really comes from, I don't think there is any way to say for sure.

So there must be non causality in order for it to not play out the same as its mirror past?