The Cosmologists always have this dilemma: did the Universe come out of Nothing or something cannot come out of Nothing? The Cosmologists have always been obsessed with finding the beginning of the Uinverse and obsessed with the idea that the beginning must be small.
As per the Cosmic Myth @2011, in the beginning there was only infinitely dense energy in an infinitsimal point. But this small beginning had to immediately adopt of Big Bang - not an explosion but a sudden large expansion. Space, elementary particles of matter and time did not exist at the beginning and emerged from the very small energy concentrate. The only things that the Cosmic Myth of 2011 did not explain are: where did the energy-concentrate come from, where did this high-density energy point lie and why did the original energy started reducing its density. Maybe someday we shall be able to answer these three questions. We can explore these questions later.
But at this point it is clear that the Cosmic Myth @2011 based on Big Bang has identified a beginning and that beginning is a small size one. And, this small size enegy concentrate apparently came from Nothing, If we combine Big Bang with Big Cruch, we avoid the obsession of a begining (and therfore also avoid the obsession with small beginning) because with Cosmic expansion and cosmic contraction alternating like a sinsodial curve, the question of when did it all start vanishes. But the question of where from the energy come still remains and the answer is that it has always been there. This the same thing as saying that the energy came from Nothing.
One surprising thing about elementary particles of matter are particles! It is not clear why particles, rather elementary particles, emerged as particles - whether point particles or string particle? Why was it necessary for the Universe to start with Energy being converted into elementary particles like Quarks and Gluons? Could not energy directly produce atoms and then atoms started splitting of into elementary particles and the latter started recombining, re-spliting add infinitum? The obvious answer is that from a point-like concentrated and condensed energy one cannot produce atoms as these required more space which was scarce in the beginning: cosmic inflation has to generate space first to accommodate larger units of matter like atoms.
True, but why not we start with a huge mass of matter in concentrated or condensed form that then converts into high density energy and then energy start reducing its density rapidly?
Alternatively, why could not the beginning start with the most expanded form of the Universe and then the process of a Big Crunch start. If we could start with, for example, a mutiple of the present size of the Universe with space, matter and energy all available and then through a continous process of deflation we arrive at a point-like energy concentrate?
If we start with the an infinitely large Universe with galaxies, black holes, stars and plannets and then start the process of concentration or deflation, we need a domain of the largest size of the Universe. This is the Domain of every thing: the space, the matter and the energy. Cosmic Deflation would have led to a point-like energy or matter concentrate floating in an infinitely large Domain. Once this Domain is available, energy or matter or space could then undergo both inflation as it had happened after the Big Bang or contraction as explained by Big Cruch.
This Domain can in fact be called as a Great Zero (Maha Sunnya or MS) or Nothing in which all physical matter, energy, space and time rests. At any point of time, any point in Nothing or MS will have either some matter or energy or space or a mixuture of all three.
Let's explore this concept of Nothing or MS from which the Uinverse has arisen in this blog later. After all we have no way out of the conclusion that the Universe has come out of Nothing.
No comments:
Post a Comment