2
$\begingroup$

This question already has an answer here:

I'm not quite sure this question fits the format of this site but I try to word it the best I can to comply the rules.

The question is simple: How far can we go talking about the origin of the universe before admitting that the initial conditions cannot be explained without postulating some kind of god-like, physics-unexplainable, force/whatever?

I'm interested to know if there's a mainstream physics theory that aims to prove this.

$\endgroup$

marked as duplicate by John Rennie, Kyle Kanos, Valter Moretti, user10851, Brandon Enright Mar 8 '14 at 18:44

This question has been asked before and already has an answer. If those answers do not fully address your question, please ask a new question.

  • $\begingroup$ By "the universe", do you mean the observable universe or do you mean the Universe as in all there is, was, and ever will be $\endgroup$ – Alfred Centauri Mar 8 '14 at 12:54
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ possible duplicate of Before the Big Bang $\endgroup$ – John Rennie Mar 8 '14 at 13:01
  • $\begingroup$ We can at least come asymptotically close to the origin by computing evolution backwards in time, using current state as initial conditions. Nothing stops such a Cauchy problem from being solvable. $\endgroup$ – Ruslan Mar 8 '14 at 14:08
0
$\begingroup$

Physics generates theories that predict the behavior of the universe, and confirms or contradicts those theories with experiment. Physics ends where these activities do not work.

There is no mainstream theory of God in physics. Nobody has been able to do any reproducible experiment that demonstrates the existence or non-existence of God, or that relates the laws of physics unambiguously to God.

Many people establish these to their personal satisfaction through faith, where faith is belief without experimental evidence. But this is not part of mainstream physics.

$\endgroup$
0
$\begingroup$

In modern theoretical physics you can actually look back to a point in which they call "inflation" which is just 6.36 x 10^-34 of a second, i.e. the Planck Time, after the bang.

The moment just when "our time" starts up, or comes into being if that makes sense. We are pretty sure about 300,000 after the big bang the universe was so hot the leftover heat is all we can see present day and for ever because matter did not exist yet, due in part because there was no gravity yet. The E.M. force just broke away so that electrons could actually do some kind of motion which would be somewhat like a orbit around the atom.

Remember electromagnetism which is light, which is the cosmic background radiation, which is now measured as heat, which we see and measure today.

We had to wait until it was cool enough for electromagnetic force to even have an effect. So you would or could look back to see the leftover heat from the big bang.

Please Note: Currently in mainstream modern physics there our two theories.

 Big Bang Model and the "Cyclic Theory" 

(Cyclic theory came from = M-Theory = from a collective String theory = introduced by Edward Witten in 1995 during a summer conference.

The "Cyclic Theory claims that two Giant Mem-branes or P-Branes" banged into each other and have been banging into each other this introduces the exact same Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation of 2.65 degrees Kelvin which is actually observed and also predicted by the Big Bang Theory.)

Each model still needs the inflationary theory.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Gravity and matter were always there. The only thing that happened at age 300,000 is that matter changed from plasma to gas, thus becoming transparent to light. $\endgroup$ – user10851 Mar 8 '14 at 15:22

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.