Before The'big Bang' Reverse Universe?

[EDDIE51]

Interesting item from 'Universe Today'
http://www.universetoday.com/116835/what-came-before-the-big-bang/
It postulates that before the 'Big Bang' there was an identical but 'reversed' Universe. What do others make of this?

[Old_Geezer]

I don't believe this suggestion is new. Since our knowledge of physics breaks down at the small pop, there is a lot of different conjecture as to whether there was a before. If there was it was a different universe, a different load of time.

I'll go browse your link now.

[jim360]

For the foreseeable future, at least, the most interesting things that emerge from asking the question "What came before the Big Bang?" is a lengthy discussion about what "before" even means. Since time, as we understand it, is held to begin with the Big Bang, the question may not even make any sense -- although even nonsensical questions are worth asking, if doing so gives you an opportunity to learn why you shouldn't have asked it. In this case the point is that time is not necessarily infinite, in either direction, and nor does it have to be linear. Or even "universal"; although the differences are virtually non-existent, you and I measure time in different ways. Indeed, your head and your toes don't even experience time in the same way (https://www.newscientist.com/article/dn19494-standing-on-a-stepladder-makes-you-age-faster/ ). All of which makes "before" a woolly notion anyway, before going to the extreme conditions of the Universe at the time of the Big Bang.

My best guess is that the question of what came "before" the Big Bang is likely to remain unanswered. Hopefully people won't be discouraged from trying, for sure. The problem is that the Big Bang is, presumably, something we can't replicate in a lab and something that we can't really probe "beyond". On the "other side" of it, if there is one, there wouldn't even be a guarantee that the same laws of physics as in our Universe would hold (although, presumably, they would be at least fairly similar).

Perhaps, with the recent direct detection of gravitational waves, it won't be long before their detection is also confirmed in the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation (reported a couple of years ago, but since retracted, so we're still waiting for it). That, I think, would help to push the threshold of times we can observe from 380,000 years or so after the Big Bang to maybe a few seconds, or even fractions of a second. The closer we can get to observing the Big Bang itself, the better chance we would have of understanding its nature, and in turn what, if anything, came "before" it.

Until then, the best we can do is speculate. It's pretty fun, though, and the speculation can help to drive a greater appreciation of what we *do* know.

[Peter Pedant]

nice answer jim

I thought the whole thing about the big bang was that it was so bangy at the singularity point that you couldnt conclude diddly squat about what preceded that moment ?

[malagabob]

Is it possible that before the "Big Bang" that there was an identical universe to what we have now, that collapsed in on itself
It's known that our universe is still expanding and not slowing but speeding up.
But what if the Big Bang was not a one off event but a continuing series of big bangs over trillions of years, creating new universes . Infinity?

[atalanta]

What came before the big bang was the Big Crunch. The theory goes like this : the universe is eternal. It starts (again, of course) it expands, stops expanding and starts shrinking. It all comes together in the big crunch, then the big bang happens again.
And Again. And Again. And Again.

[jim360]

I believe it would be correct to say that the Big Crunch (and cyclic Universe) is "just a model". I'm not aware, at least, of any practical way to distinguish a Universe that had another universe preceding it from a Universe that did not, or at least from a Universe that "began" such a cycle.

The main thing is to ensure that the question is framed properly, which itself is incredibly difficult but totally worth the effort.

[naomi24]

Jim, //The main thing is to ensure that the question is framed properly, which itself is incredibly difficult but totally worth the effort.//

I think it commendable that the question is asked at all - however it's framed.

[jim360]

Yes, sure. As I was saying earlier asking the "wrong" question can help you learn what the "right" (or, at least, "more" right) ones are.

[naomi24]

Jim, I'd hate to think that anyone here might be deterred from asking a question for fear of it being considered wrong - in any sense.

[ToraToraTora]

How blasphemous everyone knows that Allah started the universe!

[jim360]

Fair enough Naomi, so would I.

[wildwood]

However it happened or whatever started it. There must have been something before so where did that come from? Even for the religious folks, the Allah/god thing had to have a beginning.

I can not comprehend truly 'forever' in time.

[atalanta]

I must say that the expressions "forever", "eternal", " without beginning and without ending" give me the creeps somewhat, too.