Why is there something rather then nothing
Posted on: May 10, 2009 - 4:39am
Offline
Why is there something rather then nothing
When I was reading a article about the "Big Bang" , I started to think about matter and anti-matter,and why didn't the big bang annihilate all of the matter ? Can some of you science minded bloggers help me to understand this conundrum. 
Signature ? How ?
- Login to post comments
YouTube - The Dawn of Creation: The First 2 Billion Years (mirrored)
EDIT: Or, actually, it might be in this one. Both good videos; at least one of them mentions assymetry and a possible reason why there's more matter than antimatter:
YouTube - The Coming Revolutions in Fundamental Physics (mirrored)
Wonderist on Facebook — Support the idea of wonderism by 'liking' the Wonderism page — or join the open Wonderism group to take part in the discussion!
Gnu Atheism Facebook group — All gnu-friendly RRS members welcome (including Luminon!) — Try something gnu!
It's been theorized relatively recently that there may have been multiple big bangs, not just one, as has been theorized for many decades.
A recent broadcst of Nova on PBS widely publicized a vareity of reasons for this new theory. (Information about it could be googled, as most everything else.)
I only mention it as the theory of a single big bang is in question, so to would be any assumptions based on a single big bang be in question.
At this point, we don't know what happened when just speaking of a big bang.
CERN is supposed to enlighten us as to what happened, "very soon" after the explosion. However, CERN is still under construction, and no one can know for certain, what information it may yield.
There are three basic types of 'multiple Big Bangs'.
One, the Oscillating Universe, which has been around since Einstein suggested it in 1930, has tended to fall out of favour since the 1960's.
Evidence that the expansion has actually been increasing further seem to go against the idea of a slow-down followed by a Big Crunch, although there is enough uncertainty that it is still actively considered.
More recently, as the evidence mounted that the expansion is accelerating under the influence of Dark Energy and/or Dark Matter, there has been speculation that as the Universe progressively separates into ever smaller fragments, some of those fragments may actually spawn new Big Bang events.
The implications of these two ideas mainly apply to the long term fate of a Big Bang originated Universe, rather than to the early states of the Universe and the emergence and interactions of matter particles of various kinds.
The third idea on multiple Big Bangs is a parallel version, where within a Multiverse, Big Bangs are triggered repeatedly and independently, perhaps by collision of M-Branes.
Multiple Universes, whether from cyclic, sequential, or parallel Big Bangs do allow for one answer to any fine-tuning argument, since each Big Bang could well have different combinations of those properties, meaning that if such processes occurred repeatedly, the assumed low probability of hitting a combination which allowed some form of intelligent life to emerge becomes less of an ultimate problem.
Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality
"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris
The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me
From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology
=
On a serious note, go with what Bob said. There are a few ideas kicking around that provide multiple universes. The one that is most likely to be relevant to your question has some currency in the literature as the “Cosmic Landscape”.
Basically (your brain will hurt if you try to take this too literally), if you take the idea of our universe and work with the idea that it is contained on some unimaginably larger stage, then you can have many sibling big bangs also occurring on that stage.
Now the thing is that the other universes may not be required to have the exact same constants as the one which we are in. So in that larger context, each of what we call constants could be variables, with the specific “position” in that larger staging being what controls the values that any particular universe ends up with.
Don't even try to imagine such a “place” in common sense terms. The current ideas seem to suggest that it may have 11 dimensions (or 22 dimensions but let's not split hairs, just say that you can't ever understand it in non-mathematical terms).
As Bob said, it may just be that we happen to be in a lucky place in that larger context such that the universe looks like it does. There may even be other universes where we could not live but other minds may have evolved to ask the hard questions about the universe that they have.
So one possible answer to your question might be that we happen to live in a setting where anitmatter is allowed but hardly any came into existence at the very beginning. Perhaps the minds in other universes have plenty of anitmatter but they have a huge conundrum over some of the properties of their universe such that we would not even know how to phrase the questions.
However, Ken, may I propose a could of other ponderables about our universe?
First, Why is the “fine structure constant” equal to 1/137.0356? Really, this is one that nobody knows the answer to. Many of the other constants can be resolved to a whole number or a simple ratio in some mathematical base. Not this one though.
Second, why does the “cosmological constant” appear to equal 10^-120? Most of our theoretical work points to it being equal to 0.0. However, that does not appear to be the case. In fact, it appears to be damn close but not quite what it ought to be. Hell, I am feeling generous, so I will type it out:
Λ=0.0000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000000001
Both of those constants being what they are is considered to hint at the idea that there are deeper layers to physics which we have yet to uncover. When we peel back those layers, perhaps we will know the answers to some of these questions. But will knowing those bring us yet more subtle questions that beg for answers?
=
Ahhh... come'on McAlpine Wallace... beating dead horses is fun, sometimes!
“A meritocratic society is one in which inequalities of wealth and social position solely reflect the unequal distribution of merit or skills amongst human beings, or are based upon factors beyond human control, for example luck or chance. Such a society is socially just because individuals are judged not by their gender, the colour of their skin or their religion, but according to their talents and willingness to work, or on what Martin Luther King called 'the content of their character'. By extension, social equality is unjust because it treats unequal individuals equally.” "Political Ideologies" by Andrew Heywood (2003)
I thought the theory was that the big bang caused everything to fly out at light speed and it all gained matter as it travelled, eventually slowing it all down, and along with some other circumstances we have what we see today. Different combinations of elements, gravity, that sort of thing.
Faith is the word but next to that snugged up closely "lie's" the want.
"By simple common sense I don't believe in god, in none."-Charlie Chaplin
No that is not what it says.
The whole of what was to become our universe was extremely small, and it suddenly started to expand, more like a balloon inflating, than an explosion. In fact there seems to be good evidence for an early period of "theorized exponential expansion of the universe at the end of the grand unification epoch, 10−36 seconds after the Big Bang, driven by a negative-pressure vacuum energy density." which is specifically referred to as the 'cosmic inflation', or just 'inflation' (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inflation_(cosmology)).
As it expanded, its extreme energy density dropped, which effectively reduced the temperature, and after the inflationary period, the energy 'condensed out' into particles of matter, and it entered a new phase where it gradually started to take on the mix of matter and radiation we are more familiar with.
After the initial inflation, it continued to expand exponentially. Initially it was thought the rate of expansion was steady or slowing, but more recent observations seem to to show it progressively speeding up, under the influence of 'dark energy'.
Favorite oxymorons: Gospel Truth, Rational Supernaturalist, Business Ethics, Christian Morality
"Theology is now little more than a branch of human ignorance. Indeed, it is ignorance with wings." - Sam Harris
The path to Truth lies via careful study of reality, not the dreams of our fallible minds - me
From the sublime to the ridiculous: Science -> Philosophy -> Theology