May 10, 2006
The universe may be infinitely old and infinitely large
James Randerson in The Guardian:
The universe is at least 986 billion years older than physicists thought and is probably much older still, according to a radical new theory.
The revolutionary study suggests that time did not begin with the big bang 14 billion years ago. This mammoth explosion which created all the matter we see around us, was just the most recent of many.
The standard big bang theory says the universe began with a massive explosion, but the new theory suggests it is a cyclic event that consists of repeating big bangs.
"People have inferred that time began then, but there really wasn't any reason for that inference," said Neil Turok, a theoretical physicist at the University of Cambridge, "What we are proposing is very radical. It's saying there was time before the big bang."
Under his theory, published today in the journal Science with Paul Steinhardt at Princeton University in New Jersey, the universe must be at least a trillion years old with many big bangs happening before our own. With each bang, the theory predicts that matter keeps on expanding and dissipating into infinite space before another horrendous blast of radiation and matter replenishes it. "I think it is much more likely to be far older than a trillion years though," said Prof Turok. "There doesn't have to be a beginning of time. According to our theory, the universe may be infinitely old and infinitely large."
More here.
Posted by Abbas Raza at 11:15 PM | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c562c53ef00d8345c7d8269e2
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The universe may be infinitely old and infinitely large:
» Universe May Be Much Older and and Larger from Sam Harrelson
The Science Channel is rebroadcasting the entire Cosmos series by Carl Sagan. Cosmos originally aired in 1980 yet is still amazing in its relevance. As a kid growing up in a static Nile like world dictated by annual floods, droughts and rel... [Read More]
Tracked on May 14, 2006 8:43:07 PM










Comments
This particular story was criticized as being an example of bad science journalism by Mark Trodden of cosmicvariance in this post. A better article on this theory can be found here--basically it's a variant on the older "cyclic universe" theory in which neighboring branes in higher-dimensional space repeatedly collide and create new big bangs, but the new twist is that the value of the cosmological constant decays over time, which could explain why it's so much smaller than what physicists would expect if the cosmological constant was caused by vacuum energy.
Posted by: Jesse M. | May 11, 2006 12:42:44 AM
How the hell did we ever come to be here? Think about it. And without the "god hypothesis."
Posted by: Jorge | May 19, 2006 12:00:43 AM
Post a comment