So I DID want to start trying to reach science academies to find out where I can hit the whole scientific community with a question, but I work 63 hours a week, 28 days in a row, so I dont have lots of time to do this stuff, so i am just going to ask this question here, now, and let someone else handle it. Here is the question I have to ask, which if the scientific community cannot answer it will turn the science world on its head. Maybe there is an obvious answer, I dont know, but from what i know the question seems very valid. If it is believed that the the big bang evolved from no time or space, by matter expanding from infinitely dense , infinitely small matter, and if this is determined with classical physics, such as using the law of inertia to determine that space is expanding, and D=V/T, etc, and if the laws of nature become quantum physics at the atomic and subatomic level, would this not mean that the laws of nature at the quantum level would predate classical physics? That is, if the universe was once infinitely small, then at some point would the universe have not been at the subatomic level, such that all laws of the universe were once governed by quantum physics? So then how can you use classical physics to determine that the big bang evolved from no time and space? Because if quantum laws predate classical laws, then that would mean quantum entanglement would also be possible at the start of the big bang when the universe was at the subatomic level. As far as my understanding of the scientific worlds understanding of quantum entanglement, it is described as “strange phenomena” but not fully understood, aside from speculative theory. But given the properties of quantum entanglement as we DO understand it, do these properties alone not cause us to rethink the big bang, when you consider that evolving from no time and space is no longer valid when we consider that the universe could have instantly arrived from another location? If we consider one particle existing in two places at once, or a particle disappearing and reappearing somewhere else, which is commonplace at the quantum level, then how can we accurately say the universe evolved from no time or space? Perhaps there WAS no time or space at the finite starting time and location of THIS universe, but if this starting point is infinitely small, thus reaches the realm of quantum laws, then whos to say that the universe did not previously disappear in another location and reappear to where the big bang was formed here, or possibly as string theory suggests, that there are multiple universes? If two particles can exist in one place, and if velocity, distance, and time is used to determine the starting point of the big bang, then has this not been done with classical physics? That is was the big bang not derived with V= D/T.......but if one particle can exist in two places at once, as in quantum law, then V=D/0 which would be undefined. So if quantum law predates classical law, how can you use V=D/T to determine the start of the universe? But no matter how you look at it, does this paragraph I just wrote not mean we need to rethink the big bang? To answer this, i suppose we need to know whether quantum law is determined by size or elemental properties. Is it quantum law because it is small, or is it quantum law, because it is made of fewer elements. If quantum law is determined by size, and the universe was once infinitely small, then we SURELY need to rethink the big bang. But if quantum law is determined by elemental properties, was the universe not once fewer elements, which would have evolved into more elements, and surpassed the subatomic level to classical law? Are electrons and quarks not a fixed size? So if the universe evolved from infinitely small, then at some point would the universe have not had to consist of one electron, or quark....or regardless, of which particles existed, SURELY if the universe expabnded from infinitely small, then surely it must have been small enough to contain few enough particles to be governed by quatum law, wouldnt it have? Is this question answered? If yes, do we still not need to rethink the big bang? To summarize. The current universe evolved from infinitely small infinitely dense matter, and this statement is derived by using classical physics such as the law of inertia and V=D/T, etc...But would this mean that at such point that the universe was so small that it was at the subatomic level, that quantum law predates classical law. Then do the laws we use to determine that the universe appeared from no time and space no longer apply, since at the start of the big bang D= V/0 ? I wanted to bring this to the scientific world myself, as if they cant answer it, and I mean with SCIENCE, not words, then the big bang will need to be completely rethought. However, I have a lot of dishes to wash, and pretty much no time, so I figured it would be easier to just post this, and let someone else bring it to the scientific community.
Posted on: Fri, 08 Aug 2014 05:48:52 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015