Time did not begin with the Big Bang - Stephen Hawking

[james bond]

Time is a condition of a current event.

Time exists ONLY in terms of motion. Distance = speed X time or transposed time = distance/speed, for example.

Close, but no cigar. Motion exists because of time. We know this from particle-wave theory. Space and time had to come first or there would not be quantum or any particles in motion providing energy and entropy.

Energy exists in 3 THREE forms, Kinetic, Potential and Heat, only kinetic energy is the energy of motion, so energy is NOT dependent on motion.

And again, I repeat time exists ONLY in terms of motion, please show me an equation for time that does not involve motion of some kind.

I do not know where you get your science, but there is more than three types of energy. Also, you started with d = rate x time which is algebra for calculating distance, rate and time problems. Where does energy come into it?

Why don't we start with the following before you go rambling on to try and determine which came first space, time, motion, matter and force? These five are the basics before we get into energy or calculations.

What we want to discuss is the physics of space, time, motion, matter and force. These are the five fundamental manifestations of natural phenomena.

"Physics evolved from Newton's Mechanics which is founded on a Metaphysics of Space and Time, which require the further concepts of the Motion of Matter 'particles' and thus also gravity 'forces' to connect these discrete matter 'particles'. The problem for physics was how are all these things connected."

Time: On the Physics / Metaphysics of Time due to the Wave Motion of Space. The Metaphysics of Space and Motion (not Time)

I think we agree that all of these things are required in the natural world and it leads to energy in the above graph -- 10 Types of Energy and Examples.

Where we will probably disagree is how they came to be? According to God (force), the universe is a matrix of space, time, matter, and motion. All of it has to be existing at the same conflux. It all has to come together or none of it exists. One cannot exist without the other. The entire continuum must have existed simultaneously from the beginning or the universe would not form.

 

[toobfreak]

without space you cannot have time.

Actually it is without motion you can't have time.

Sorry, no. Better think again. Motion was created by the expansion of space. Space is motion. Motion is energy. It takes energy to expand space. All energy is in motion. Without space in motion, there is no vector of time. Before the expansion of space, therre could be no motion, therefore, no time.

You just affirmed what he said like 12 times in a single paragraph.

He said "without motion you cant have time."

You went on a diatribe ending in, "no motion, therefore, no time."

You sure go a long way just to argue for no fuckin reason.

God damn are you dense or what? Time is NOT a property of motion since motion itself is a property of SPACE. Why do I waste my time on a forum where one guy calls Trump a dictator for wanting truth in journalism, another guy argues the planet will be dead in 12 years, another guy claims the government is run by Putin, and yet another guy thinks the 9/11 disaster was a secret plot faked by the CIA using explosives hidden in the building, and now in a thread about Hawking and the Big Bang, you guys end up arguing books of the Bible and then tell me I can't possibly know something which is written in practically every book on cosmology and QFT for the past 50 years, meantime, I have some twit telling me to settle down, I might learn something!

USMB, the National Enquirer of social forums.

 

[edthecynic]

without space you cannot have time.

Actually it is without motion you can't have time.

Sorry, no. Better think again. Motion was created by the expansion of space. Space is motion. Motion is energy. It takes energy to expand space. All energy is in motion. Without space in motion, there is no vector of time. Before the expansion of space, therre could be no motion, therefore, no time.

Therefore motion can exist in the contraction of the universe also. Again only kinetic energy is the energy of motion. Potential energy is for example the energy of position.

 

[edthecynic]

Time is a condition of a current event.

Time exists ONLY in terms of motion. Distance = speed X time or transposed time = distance/speed, for example.

Close, but no cigar. Motion exists because of time. We know this from particle-wave theory. Space and time had to come first or there would not be quantum or any particles in motion providing energy and entropy.

Energy exists in 3 THREE forms, Kinetic, Potential and Heat, only kinetic energy is the energy of motion, so energy is NOT dependent on motion.

And again, I repeat time exists ONLY in terms of motion, please show me an equation for time that does not involve motion of some kind.

I do not know where you get your science, but there is more than three types of energy. Also, you started with d = rate x time which is algebra for calculating distance, rate and time problems. Where does energy come into it?

Why don't we start with the following before you go rambling on to try and determine which came first space, time, motion, matter and force? These five are the basics before we get into energy or calculations.

What we want to discuss is the physics of space, time, motion, matter and force. These are the five fundamental manifestations of natural phenomena.

"Physics evolved from Newton's Mechanics which is founded on a Metaphysics of Space and Time, which require the further concepts of the Motion of Matter 'particles' and thus also gravity 'forces' to connect these discrete matter 'particles'. The problem for physics was how are all these things connected."

Time: On the Physics / Metaphysics of Time due to the Wave Motion of Space. The Metaphysics of Space and Motion (not Time)

I think we agree that all of these things are required in the natural world and it leads to energy in the above graph -- 10 Types of Energy and Examples.

Where we will probably disagree is how they came to be? According to God (force), the universe is a matrix of space, time, matter, and motion. All of it has to be existing at the same conflux. It all has to come together or none of it exists. One cannot exist without the other. The entire continuum must have existed simultaneously from the beginning or the universe would not form.

Your STUPID chart leaves out HEAT, the third form of energy. All the other types of energy in your chart are varieties of either kinetic or potential energy, the other 2 FORMS of energy.

Types of Energy - Knowledge Bank - Solar Schools
Forms of energy
There are many different types of energy, which all fall into two primary forms – kinetic and potential. Energy can transform from one type to another, but it can never be destroyed or created.

 

[edthecynic]

If you understand the Big Bang happened around 14 billion years ago how hard is it to understand there was a time 29 billion years ago. That time did exist. This universe may not have existed but time as we know it is eternal.

The Big Bang theory is that everything including time came into existence at that moment. Before that there was nothing.

No there was always energy, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, so there never was nothing and there never will be nothing.

Let's explore that. All the energy of the universe (because there was no matter) was contained in a singularity that had nothing to restrain it from expanding (because none of the forces, including gravity, existed, even time). Is that what you're saying?

That naturally leads to the inevitable question, what put all that energy in that state if forces like gravity didn't exist to pull it together and hold it?

I think it's at least safe to say there was nothing, and no energy, in the universe because the universe itself didn't exist. The energy then had to come from outside the universe. It had to be placed in that singularity so it could expand.

And remember, we cannot allow any intelligence to be guiding any of this.

But if it is a universe there is no "outside the universe," if it is the universe then it is everything. It always has to come back to energy can neither be created nor destroyed. And as you know the energy of motion contains inertial mass which according to Special Relativity is indistinguishable from gravitational mass.

Wrong. Your very first sentence is wrong my brother.

You’re like a tardigrade who can only see what’s inside your drop of water. Your observable universe is all you can see but there’s more beyond. Don’t be ignorant and arrogant at the same time

And the rest of your comment is ramblings I don’t even understand.

Energy can’t be created? Are you sure about that?

There’s so much you don’t know but act like what you think is fact. It’s not

It is a PROVEN by a repeatable experimental FACT that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, AKA The First Law of Thermodynamics.

And inertial mass equaling gravitational mass is Einstein's "principal of equivalence" the very foundation of relativity.

 

[toobfreak]

without space you cannot have time.

Actually it is without motion you can't have time.

Sorry, no. Better think again. Motion was created by the expansion of space. Space is motion. Motion is energy. It takes energy to expand space. All energy is in motion. Without space in motion, there is no vector of time. Before the expansion of space, therre could be no motion, therefore, no time.

Therefore motion can exist in the contraction of the universe also.

Of course. Motion exists even at absolute zero. There is always motion so long as there is space. Understand that the expansion or contraction of space itself is not "motion" since space is merely a framework relative to itself.

Again only kinetic energy is the energy of motion.

I can't agree with that. Kinetic energy is inertial, but thermal energy is motion of the atoms. People are trying to define and simplify things like motion and energy here, saying this or that, and there is truth to all of it, but it is a lot more complicated than that. There are different contexts for defining different forms of motion and energy.

Potential energy is for example the energy of position.

I'd be happier relating to potential energy as STORED energy.

 

[edthecynic]

Also, you started with d = rate x time which is algebra for calculating distance, rate and time problems. Where does energy come into it?

It doesn't and I never said it did. I gave that as an example of time existing only in terms of motion. Someone else brought up energy to try to counter the fact that time exists only in terms of motion.

 

[edthecynic]

Of course. Motion exists even at absolute zero.

Sorry but the very definition of absolute zero is the temperature at which ALL motion stops!

What is absolute zero? | Cool Cosmos
What is absolute zero?
Absolute zero is the lowest temperature possible. At a temperature of absolute zero there is no motion and no heat. Absolute zero occurs at a temperature of 0 degrees Kelvin, or -273.15 degrees Celsius, or at -460 degrees Fahrenheit.

 

[toobfreak]

Of course. Motion exists even at absolute zero.

Sorry but the very definition of absolute zero is the temperature at which ALL motion stops!

What is absolute zero? | Cool Cosmos
What is absolute zero?
Absolute zero is the lowest temperature possible. At a temperature of absolute zero there is no motion and no heat. Absolute zero occurs at a temperature of 0 degrees Kelvin, or -273.15 degrees Celsius, or at -460 degrees Fahrenheit.

That is not quite true. Try reading these:

What Is Absolute Zero in Science?

absolute zero | Definition & Facts

 

[zaangalewa]

Of course. Motion exists even at absolute zero.

Sorry but the very definition of absolute zero is the temperature at which ALL motion stops!

What is absolute zero? | Cool Cosmos
What is absolute zero?
Absolute zero is the lowest temperature possible. At a temperature of absolute zero there is no motion and no heat. Absolute zero occurs at a temperature of 0 degrees Kelvin, or -273.15 degrees Celsius, or at -460 degrees Fahrenheit.

That is not quite true. Try reading these:

What Is Absolute Zero in Science?

absolute zero | Definition & Facts

That's a little more complex. A "negative temperature" is more hot than -273°C (460°F). A positive temperature is a gas, where situations of particles with low energy are more likely than situations of particles with high energy. Ulrich Schneider and Immanuel Bloch realized a gas where particles with high energy are more likely than particles with low energy. This is describeable as an inverted Boltzmann distribution = a negative Boltzmann distribution = a negative temperature. This gas is not colder - it is even hotter as any other gas at any positive temperature. The temperature stops not at any infinite positive value but switches there into negative values. This is written in other words in your source too. So "absolute zero" stays to be the "absolute lowest" - better to say now "absolute coldest" temperature.

 

[hadit]

Of course. Motion exists even at absolute zero.

Sorry but the very definition of absolute zero is the temperature at which ALL motion stops!

What is absolute zero? | Cool Cosmos
What is absolute zero?
Absolute zero is the lowest temperature possible. At a temperature of absolute zero there is no motion and no heat. Absolute zero occurs at a temperature of 0 degrees Kelvin, or -273.15 degrees Celsius, or at -460 degrees Fahrenheit.

Due to the uncertainty principle, absolute zero cannot be achieved because those pesky little electrons keep jumping around.

 

[G.T.]

without space you cannot have time.

Actually it is without motion you can't have time.

Sorry, no. Better think again. Motion was created by the expansion of space. Space is motion. Motion is energy. It takes energy to expand space. All energy is in motion. Without space in motion, there is no vector of time. Before the expansion of space, therre could be no motion, therefore, no time.

You just affirmed what he said like 12 times in a single paragraph.

He said "without motion you cant have time."

You went on a diatribe ending in, "no motion, therefore, no time."

You sure go a long way just to argue for no fuckin reason.

God damn are you dense or what? Time is NOT a property of motion since motion itself is a property of SPACE. Why do I waste my time on a forum where one guy calls Trump a dictator for wanting truth in journalism, another guy argues the planet will be dead in 12 years, another guy claims the government is run by Putin, and yet another guy thinks the 9/11 disaster was a secret plot faked by the CIA using explosives hidden in the building, and now in a thread about Hawking and the Big Bang, you guys end up arguing books of the Bible and then tell me I can't possibly know something which is written in practically every book on cosmology and QFT for the past 50 years, meantime, I have some twit telling me to settle down, I might learn something!

USMB, the National Enquirer of social forums.

WTF does this rant have to do with your dumb-ass post, exactly?

 

[sealybobo]

The Big Bang theory is that everything including time came into existence at that moment. Before that there was nothing.

No there was always energy, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, so there never was nothing and there never will be nothing.

Let's explore that. All the energy of the universe (because there was no matter) was contained in a singularity that had nothing to restrain it from expanding (because none of the forces, including gravity, existed, even time). Is that what you're saying?

That naturally leads to the inevitable question, what put all that energy in that state if forces like gravity didn't exist to pull it together and hold it?

I think it's at least safe to say there was nothing, and no energy, in the universe because the universe itself didn't exist. The energy then had to come from outside the universe. It had to be placed in that singularity so it could expand.

And remember, we cannot allow any intelligence to be guiding any of this.

But if it is a universe there is no "outside the universe," if it is the universe then it is everything. It always has to come back to energy can neither be created nor destroyed. And as you know the energy of motion contains inertial mass which according to Special Relativity is indistinguishable from gravitational mass.

Wrong. Your very first sentence is wrong my brother.

You’re like a tardigrade who can only see what’s inside your drop of water. Your observable universe is all you can see but there’s more beyond. Don’t be ignorant and arrogant at the same time

And the rest of your comment is ramblings I don’t even understand.

Energy can’t be created? Are you sure about that?

There’s so much you don’t know but act like what you think is fact. It’s not

It is a PROVEN by a repeatable experimental FACT that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, AKA The First Law of Thermodynamics.

And inertial mass equaling gravitational mass is Einstein's "principal of equivalence" the very foundation of relativity.

Wow that’s deep. It can be transformed not created. So the electricity coming to my house isn’t being created at the electric company and sent to me? I’m not smart enough to fully understand without further explanation. Cool shit.

 

[zaangalewa]

Of course. Motion exists even at absolute zero.

Sorry but the very definition of absolute zero is the temperature at which ALL motion stops!

What is absolute zero? | Cool Cosmos
What is absolute zero?
Absolute zero is the lowest temperature possible. At a temperature of absolute zero there is no motion and no heat. Absolute zero occurs at a temperature of 0 degrees Kelvin, or -273.15 degrees Celsius, or at -460 degrees Fahrenheit.

Due to the uncertainty principle, absolute zero cannot be achieved because those pesky little electrons keep jumping around.

This fluctuations of particles in the vacuum are only virtual: A particle and its anti-particle start to exist and to destroy each other again. This is "zero". As far as I know only the event horizon of a black hole is able to separate such a particle from its anti-particle. This is called Hawking-radiation: One of both falls into the black hole and the other goes to another place. The energy for this process comes from the black hole in this case. The black hole "evaporates" (=it loses energy).

 

[toobfreak]

without space you cannot have time.

Actually it is without motion you can't have time.

Sorry, no. Better think again. Motion was created by the expansion of space. Space is motion. Motion is energy. It takes energy to expand space. All energy is in motion. Without space in motion, there is no vector of time. Before the expansion of space, therre could be no motion, therefore, no time.

You just affirmed what he said like 12 times in a single paragraph.

He said "without motion you cant have time."

You went on a diatribe ending in, "no motion, therefore, no time."

You sure go a long way just to argue for no fuckin reason.

God damn are you dense or what? Time is NOT a property of motion since motion itself is a property of SPACE. Why do I waste my time on a forum where one guy calls Trump a dictator for wanting truth in journalism, another guy argues the planet will be dead in 12 years, another guy claims the government is run by Putin, and yet another guy thinks the 9/11 disaster was a secret plot faked by the CIA using explosives hidden in the building, and now in a thread about Hawking and the Big Bang, you guys end up arguing books of the Bible and then tell me I can't possibly know something which is written in practically every book on cosmology and QFT for the past 50 years, meantime, I have some twit telling me to settle down, I might learn something!

USMB, the National Enquirer of social forums.

WTF does this rant have to do with your dumb-ass post, exactly?

Why is it always when you find someone who chooses to miss 95% of what you say, that they always then demand you to repeat or expound on it, so that they can then miss 95% of that as well? The very idea of comprehension is the ability to see between the lines to realize the import and ramifications of a statement. Space defines time, yes. Space sets forth motion, yes. But the expansion of space is like the tip of the iceberg; you cannot unify gravity with QT when gravity is not even a bosonic force carrier but a field responding to a phenomena barely recognized in the nascence of modern theory! We can barely extrapolate dark matter indirectly and only hypothesize "dark energy;" that leaves our current physics like a three-legged chair with two of the legs with cracks in them!

 

[sealybobo]

Of course. Motion exists even at absolute zero.

Sorry but the very definition of absolute zero is the temperature at which ALL motion stops!

What is absolute zero? | Cool Cosmos
What is absolute zero?
Absolute zero is the lowest temperature possible. At a temperature of absolute zero there is no motion and no heat. Absolute zero occurs at a temperature of 0 degrees Kelvin, or -273.15 degrees Celsius, or at -460 degrees Fahrenheit.

Due to the uncertainty principle, absolute zero cannot be achieved because those pesky little electrons keep jumping around.

This fluctuations of particles in the vacuum are only virtual: A particle and its anti-particle start to exist and to destroy each other again. This is "zero". As far as I know only the event horizon of a black hole is able to separate such a particle from its anti-particle. This is called Hawking-radiation: One of both falls into the black hole and the other goes to another place. The energy for this process comes from the black hole in this case. The black hole "evaporates" (=it loses energy).

Just remember there is so much we don't know. Don't assume you know.

And do you think something you know proves something? If so what?

New discoveries are causing astronomers to question if the Big Bang really happened, and using the latest science, they investigate if it wasn't just the start of our universe but many mysterious multiverses.

Did the Big Bang Really Happen? | How the Universe Works

This is a great episode. It talks about what we know, what new discoveries we've recently made, and how we are now starting to wonder if there is more out there beyond our observable universe.


What we don't know? What's outside our observable universe? What caused the big bang? What was before our universe.

A lot of the things we assume are wrong. Or might be wrong. We need the next Einstein to come along and figure all this out for us.

Astronomers say the Boomerang Nebula is the coldestknown object in the universe. They've learned that its temperature is one degree Kelvin (minus 458 degrees Fahrenheit). That's even colder than the faint afterglow of the Big Bang, which is the natural background temperature of space: colder than space itself.

They think this coldest place in the universe might be where another universe collided with ours.

 

[edthecynic]

Of course. Motion exists even at absolute zero.

Sorry but the very definition of absolute zero is the temperature at which ALL motion stops!

What is absolute zero? | Cool Cosmos
What is absolute zero?
Absolute zero is the lowest temperature possible. At a temperature of absolute zero there is no motion and no heat. Absolute zero occurs at a temperature of 0 degrees Kelvin, or -273.15 degrees Celsius, or at -460 degrees Fahrenheit.

Due to the uncertainty principle, absolute zero cannot be achieved because those pesky little electrons keep jumping around.

The discussion was not about whether absolute zero could be achieved, it can't, but if it theoretically could be achieved that electrons would stop rotating around the nucleus of the atom.

 

[edthecynic]

No there was always energy, energy can neither be created nor destroyed, so there never was nothing and there never will be nothing.

Let's explore that. All the energy of the universe (because there was no matter) was contained in a singularity that had nothing to restrain it from expanding (because none of the forces, including gravity, existed, even time). Is that what you're saying?

That naturally leads to the inevitable question, what put all that energy in that state if forces like gravity didn't exist to pull it together and hold it?

I think it's at least safe to say there was nothing, and no energy, in the universe because the universe itself didn't exist. The energy then had to come from outside the universe. It had to be placed in that singularity so it could expand.

And remember, we cannot allow any intelligence to be guiding any of this.

But if it is a universe there is no "outside the universe," if it is the universe then it is everything. It always has to come back to energy can neither be created nor destroyed. And as you know the energy of motion contains inertial mass which according to Special Relativity is indistinguishable from gravitational mass.

Wrong. Your very first sentence is wrong my brother.

You’re like a tardigrade who can only see what’s inside your drop of water. Your observable universe is all you can see but there’s more beyond. Don’t be ignorant and arrogant at the same time

And the rest of your comment is ramblings I don’t even understand.

Energy can’t be created? Are you sure about that?

There’s so much you don’t know but act like what you think is fact. It’s not

It is a PROVEN by a repeatable experimental FACT that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, AKA The First Law of Thermodynamics.

And inertial mass equaling gravitational mass is Einstein's "principal of equivalence" the very foundation of relativity.

Wow that’s deep. It can be transformed not created. So the electricity coming to my house isn’t being created at the electric company and sent to me? I’m not smart enough to fully understand without further explanation. Cool shit.

That's right, the electricity coming to your house is not "created," it is generated from the energy already existing and stored in the fuel used to run the turbines.

 

[hadit]

Of course. Motion exists even at absolute zero.

Sorry but the very definition of absolute zero is the temperature at which ALL motion stops!

What is absolute zero? | Cool Cosmos
What is absolute zero?
Absolute zero is the lowest temperature possible. At a temperature of absolute zero there is no motion and no heat. Absolute zero occurs at a temperature of 0 degrees Kelvin, or -273.15 degrees Celsius, or at -460 degrees Fahrenheit.

Due to the uncertainty principle, absolute zero cannot be achieved because those pesky little electrons keep jumping around.

The discussion was not about whether absolute zero could be achieved, it can't, but if it theoretically could be achieved that electrons would stop rotating around the nucleus of the atom.

If that were to happen, the electrons would be immediately pulled into the nucleus due to the charge differential, where they would fuse with the protons to form neutrons.

 

[sealybobo]

Let's explore that. All the energy of the universe (because there was no matter) was contained in a singularity that had nothing to restrain it from expanding (because none of the forces, including gravity, existed, even time). Is that what you're saying?

That naturally leads to the inevitable question, what put all that energy in that state if forces like gravity didn't exist to pull it together and hold it?

I think it's at least safe to say there was nothing, and no energy, in the universe because the universe itself didn't exist. The energy then had to come from outside the universe. It had to be placed in that singularity so it could expand.

And remember, we cannot allow any intelligence to be guiding any of this.

But if it is a universe there is no "outside the universe," if it is the universe then it is everything. It always has to come back to energy can neither be created nor destroyed. And as you know the energy of motion contains inertial mass which according to Special Relativity is indistinguishable from gravitational mass.

Wrong. Your very first sentence is wrong my brother.

You’re like a tardigrade who can only see what’s inside your drop of water. Your observable universe is all you can see but there’s more beyond. Don’t be ignorant and arrogant at the same time

And the rest of your comment is ramblings I don’t even understand.

Energy can’t be created? Are you sure about that?

There’s so much you don’t know but act like what you think is fact. It’s not

It is a PROVEN by a repeatable experimental FACT that energy can neither be created nor destroyed, AKA The First Law of Thermodynamics.

And inertial mass equaling gravitational mass is Einstein's "principal of equivalence" the very foundation of relativity.

Wow that’s deep. It can be transformed not created. So the electricity coming to my house isn’t being created at the electric company and sent to me? I’m not smart enough to fully understand without further explanation. Cool shit.

That's right, the electricity coming to your house is not "created," it is generated from the energy already existing and stored in the fuel used to run the turbines.

But doesn’t a machine have to create it?

Seems like they are creating something from nothing.

Where can I get some electricity?