1
$\begingroup$

I have read that the Big Bang created space-time, but how could this be possible? The Big Bang was itself a singularity, and a singularity is a point in space-time where the curvature becomes infinite. So how could the Big Bang create something without which its existence would not have been possible?

$\endgroup$
  • 4
    $\begingroup$ I'm voting to close this question as off-topic because it really belongs on Physics (although it is probably a dupe of a few there) $\endgroup$ – Rory Alsop Sep 17 '18 at 15:44
  • $\begingroup$ The models can't predict what were in the Planck epoch ($10^{-43} s$ "after" the Big Bang). This singularity is a model whose domain start after the Planck epoch. Maybe the string theory... $\endgroup$ – peterh says reinstate Monica Sep 17 '18 at 17:00
  • 3
    $\begingroup$ Going backwards on the semi-axis of positive real numbers, we can approach the number zero as much as we like, without ever touching it. However, zero is not a strictly positive number, per se. Furthermore, $f(x)=1/x~$ is not defined in zero, since its value there would be infinity, which, as any self-respecting mathematician will tell you, is not a number. Indeed, zero is the infimum rather than the minimum of all positive reals. $\endgroup$ – Lucian Sep 17 '18 at 19:13
  • $\begingroup$ I've voted for this question to be reopened - see meta discussion $\endgroup$ – Chappo Says Reinstate Monica Sep 28 '18 at 22:16
4
$\begingroup$
  1. It is impossible to measure anything that happened in the Planck Era, so physicists are unsure whether the universe actually began from a singularity or whether the singularity in the Big Bang theory represents an inability to describe the universe at that time. In fact, "Most physicists believe that this is a mathematical artefact and does not describe what actually happened."

  2. It would be more accurate to say that the Big Bang is the beginning of space-time, than that it "created" space-time.

The Big Bang is a description of how the universe evolved in its earliest stages, not exactly a resolution to why the universe came to be. The latter is really a question for philosophy, not something that can be addressed by science per se. Science informs our philosophy, but does not make philosophical claims.

$\endgroup$
3
$\begingroup$

There are questions on this topic on Physics.SE, but they require a certain level of understanding of the subject matter. Your question has some incorrect assumptions around the Big Bang. One being the definition of singularity - in reality this singularity is a point where certain variables may tend toward infinity, meaning our mathematics breaks down.

And the creation of space-time doesn't require anything to cause it - in fact it specifically implies that in our universe nothing could cause it, as there was nothing before it (there was no before)

If I were you I'd visit Physics.SE and read one of the 700 questions over there on this topic.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Rather than say "nothing could cause it", you should probably say something like "the big bang could have happened out of nothing". "Nothing could cause it" is too familiar a term that can cloud what you're saying. $\endgroup$ – userLTK Sep 17 '18 at 16:34

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

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