Yahoo Answers is shutting down on May 4th, 2021 (Eastern Time) and the Yahoo Answers website is now in read-only mode. There will be no changes to other Yahoo properties or services, or your Yahoo account. You can find more information about the Yahoo Answers shutdown and how to download your data on this help page.

If you say that the Big Bang theory says "something came from nothing"?

have you ever even seen the Equation representing the Big Bang? I ask this because I have never seen the equation posted on here before and I doubt anybody here has seen it either. I've posted it in a picture.

Anyways, I'm just curious as to which part of this equation says that "something came from 0"?

It doesn't, and there isn't a physicist alive that thinks something came from nothing.

Update:

@win

....no, the picture. last I recalled, I specifically said equation. besides "Big bang" is not what people in the scientific community call it, just idiots or when we are trying to it dumb. It is more properly called Cosmic Inflation.

Update 2:

@vmcm

Yes, I do realize that but it's a good thing that we have irrefutable evidence (the First Law of Thermodynamics, elaborated upon below) suggesting that Energy is eternal. Why is it irrefutable? because it would not be called a LAW if it were not. Laws only go to the most irrefutable of things. not even relativity or evolution are laws.

And since someone will undoubtedly asks the utterly stupid question of "how did matter/energy get created?" let me answer that: dE/dt = 0. This is the First Law of Thermodynamics and it says the change in Energy per change in time equals zero. This has also lab tested and shown to never be wrong, thus always true. Now, the consequence of this law is that if we perform Integration (from calculus) over any 2 intervals in time, the amount of energy will be a constant. It does not matter if we are integrating from 1 second ago to right now, from 2 years ago to yesterday, we could even integrate from 5 billion years ago to 100 Trill

Update 3:

100 Trillion years from now an the answer would still be the same. As it is, we are going to integrate from 0 seconds (0 seconds would be just before Cosmic Inflation occurred) to infinitely far in the future. Now, since we are referring to the universe, the constant mentioned earlier (we will call it "C") will be equal to however much energy exists inside of the universe, which can be calculated by knowing what the mass of the universe is. Lets call the mass of the universe "m_universe". Now, from Einstein we know that E=mc^2 (also tested in labs and proven to always be true...in fact, America tested this on Hiroshima...). So,

dE/dt = 0. -- Integrate from t=0 to t=infinity: E=C, where the constant C can be found from C= m_universe*c^2.

In case you're wondering how I know what happened before t=0 that can be explained by understanding the concept of the singularity. At a singularity, and in fact at every point inside an event horizon (this is the point at wh

Update 4:

event horizon (this is the point at which light can no longer escape gravity, or whatever force is creating the event horizon), time does not pass. What does this mean: this means that we know for a fact that before Cosmic Inflation 0 time passed. If you were outside of the singularity then 10 trillion years could have passed but whatever was inside the singularity would have experienced 0 time passing. Basically, this allows us to know that however much Energy exists in the universe also existed before Cosmic Inflation and thus: Energy was Never Created and has existed infinitely long. The above is in addition to the fact that creating Energy violates the First Law of Thermodynamics, which is impossible.

Update 5:

@nothing

A singularity is defined as dimensionless (it is not, but it's dimensions are so small that it might as well be), which technically means it is "nothing"despite having a mass equal to that of the universes.

Stephen was just trying to dumb it down.

Update 6:

@paulB

Alexander Friedmann came up with it in 1924. It is called the Friedmann–Lemaître–Walker equation if you want to google it. here's a wikipedia link: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FRW

Beware, scientific literature does not use the phrase "big bang", preferring to call it "inflation" and refer to the universe as having "inflated"

Update 7:

Let give all of you a lesson in Physics:

There is no such thing as a "singularity." That is, a "dimensionless point of infinite density", does not exist and this is a well known fact.

The problem is that Einstein's Field Equations, published in 1916, have never been truly complete and the Theory of General Relativity(GR), as it is currently written, is wrong and physicists, including Einstein, have known this ever since Karl Schwarzschild produced the solution for a black hole in 1916. This is why has been called the "Theory" of GR and not the LAW of GR for the past 98 years.

The reason you will never hear a Physicist say the Eq's are wrong though, is because the problem is not a mystery (in addition to the fact that being incomplete is inconsequential outside of a Schwarzschild Radius, which I will touch on below). They KNOW what the problem is and how to fix it. All they need to do is add Quantum Gravity to the equation (at which point it c

Update 8:

They KNOW what the problem is and how to fix it. All they need to do is add Quantum Gravity to the equation (at which point it can finally be called a Law) and, they, including Einstein, have been trying to come up with a theory of Quantum Gravity ever since. However, this has proven to be quite trifling.

Furthermore, the fact that GR is "wrong" is inconsequential outside of a Schwarzschild Radius. This is because the effect of quantum gravity is nearly zero outside of the Schwarzschild Radius. How can this be you may ask? Well, when we insert conditions into the Equations of GR and then measure the effect of these conditions in a lab, the measurement has been exactly the same as what is predicted by GR! However, this is a technological limitation because the scale on which our computers can measure these tests have limited accuracy and the current scale is not accurate to enough decimal places to detect the effects of Quantum Gravity. But we know that Quantum gravity is re

Update 9:

But we know that Quantum gravity is real and GR is "wrong" because of the fact that infinity is not a possible quantity.

But, assuming infinity when GR breaks down has produced extremely useful results, such as allowing us to accurately predict the state of the universe as far back as 10^-43 seconds after inflation. However, this is when GR stops working as it is currently formulated and thus to predict the state of the Universe any further back requires that GR be modified to include the effects of Quantum Gravity. and, if I recall correctly, there are even some things that happen after 10^-43 seconds that we need Quantum Gravity to determine.

Attachment image

14 Answers

Relevance
  • ?
    Lv 7
    8 years ago
    Favorite Answer

    The Big Bang Theory states that everything in our universe came from a singularity. Where that singularity came from is undefined.

    It is theists and creationists who misstate the Big Bang Theory, much as they misstate abiogenesis hypotheses and evolutionary theories.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    It is tempting to say that "the equation" is just a theory, but that would be incorrect as a theory is a hypothesis that has been tested.

    There could be an infinite number of possible equations for the big bang. The big bang was caused. Looking at an equation, which could be completely wrong, that couldn't be tested in a black hole, never mind the original singularity.

    Doesn't the notion of all the mass-energy of the Universe being in singularity describe a black hole?

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    Actually, I HAVE heard physicists say that the universe could have come from nothing.

    Stephen Hawking, among others

    "Because there is a law such as gravity, the universe can and will create itself from nothing"

    @Edit. Well said and thoroughly explained, but I will still dispute that something can and does arise from nothing, and I do not think this is only in reference to the singularity as infinitely small but with the mass of the universe. The word "nothing" is probably not exactly correct as it implies we have absolute knowledge of "nothing" when in fact there are indications of things such as dark matter/energy which we cannot detect precisely, and some of the problems with our understanding of gravity, for instance. The link I posted is actually to a book by ASU Professor Lawrence Kraus, who states "The latest physics research into the origins of the universe shows that, not only can our universe arise from nothing, but more generally, the laws of quantum mechanics and relativity imply that something will generally always arise from nothing." This would imply that the state of nothing is actually rather unstable, and specifically to 'nothing' and not some dumbed down colloquialism.

  • 8 years ago

    Your whole question is WRONG !

    The big bang theory DOES NOT state that something came from nothing.

    It also DOES NOT say that this was the beginning of the universe.

    This theory only describes an incredibly fast expansion, and nothing more.

    It wasn't even an explosion.

    Before this expansion began there was something there, but we will never know what this "something" was because it did not obey ANY of our laws of physics, these didn't even exist then.

    This expansion is still happening, it has never stopped, in fact it has accelerated and is always getting faster.

  • Anonymous
    8 years ago

    The Big Bang Theory doesn't "say" that and if you want an honest answer about that, you would be better off posting in the Physics section.

    Big Bang Theory posits the entire universe as it exists came from one single point - a singularity. It doesn't even posit how or why this occurred.

  • ?
    Lv 5
    8 years ago

    It seems like you care about physics, so a tip from me. Be cautious when using nothing in physics, like your last line. Something can come from nothing, but it is not the nothing that most religious people who are against science say. Nothing is unstable o.O

  • 8 years ago

    I think that you haven't researched this topic enough. To answer your question about something coming from nothing, I encourage you to research virtual particles.

    Also, there are physicists that believe something came from nothing. An example is Lawrence Krauss and for your benefit, I have linked one of his lectures.

    Good day.

  • mila
    Lv 6
    8 years ago

    Big bang started with a tiny speck of tightly packed (dense) mass - NOT nothing.

    The universe is teeming with microscopic life - packed in ice particles on comets. - also NOT nothing.

  • 8 years ago

    Physicists have simply re-defined "nothing" so their equations will work. However, in the real world, nothing is nothing.

  • 8 years ago

    You forget that to get "nothing", by definition, nothing is equal to an infinite amount of matter & anti-matter...That's what nothing is....As soon as the teeny tiny'st discrepancy happens...big bang.

Still have questions? Get your answers by asking now.