No Evidence of Time before Big Bang

[Ichingcarpenter]

Latest research deflates the idea that the Universe cycles for eternity.
| December 10, 2010 | 30



By Edwin Cartlidge

Our view of the early Universe may be full of mysterious circles -- and even triangles -- but that doesn't mean we're seeing evidence of events that took place before the Big Bang. So says a trio of papers taking aim at a recent claim that concentric rings of uniform temperature within the cosmic microwave background--the radiation left over from the Big Bang--might, in fact, be the signatures of black holes colliding in a previous cosmic 'aeon' that existed before our Universe.


SNIP.......




Cosmic cycle




Now Gurzadyan and Penrose's idea is being challenged by three independent studies, all posted on the arXiv server within the past few days, by Ingunn Wehus and Hans Kristian Eriksen of the University of Oslo; Adam Moss, Douglas Scott and James Zibin of the University of British Columbia in Vancouver, Canada; and Amir Hajian of the Canadian Institute for Theoretical Astrophysics in Toronto, Ontario.

SINP






Circles of significance

To gauge this significance, Gurzadyan compared the observed circles with a simulation of the cosmic microwave background in which temperature fluctuations were completely scale invariant, meaning that their abundance was independent of their size. In doing so, he found that there ought not to be any patterns. But the groups who are critical of his work say that this is not what the cosmic microwave background is like......


SNIP

You can read the rest of the article here but I'm out of time.

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=no-evidence-of-time-before-big

[qb]

1. Assuming the Big Bang theory is valid, how could one expect to see the other side of a singularity?

:shrug:

[KansDem]

2. Time is defined as motion and change...

Without motion and change, there can be no time.

[WheelWalker]

7. I've always thought of time

as the perceived succession of events. Without an observer, is there time?

[KansDem]

9. I don't know...

Our definitions are rather similar: "motion," "change," and "succession of events."

Without an observer, is there time? -- I'm inclined to say "yes," since I'm certain the universe, and its "time," will still be here after I'm gone...

[FiveGoodMen]

10. Was there time during the first, say, five billion years of this universe's existence?

Who was watching?

[pinto]

3. Kick

:kick:

[glinda]

4. Thanks for the link. Bookmarking.

[pleah]

5. K&R

[unblock]

6. i don't see how research could provide any evidence one way or another.

if there was a "big crunch" before the "big bang", well, it would have destroyed all evidence of it. so there's no way to detect it, which is exactly the same as if there was absolutely nothing before the big bang. there's no conceivable experiment or evidence that could distinguish between the two hypotheses (or any other hypothesis as to what came before the big bang).

[laconicsax]

8. Penrose's model, as I understand it, has identifiable remnants.

It's hard to tell if he's more interested in proving his hypothesis or disproving inflation.

[RagAss]

11. There's no evidence of Time....period !

[FiveGoodMen]

12. So none of us will age and die!

:bounce:

[RagAss]

13. Age is Decay.