age of the universe

[miriam_e]

I was just reading a piece discussing the expansion of the universe. The writer was extrapolating backwards to find an estimate of how old the universe is, but the particular passage was written before evidence was found that the expansion looks to be accelerating.

As most readers of my ramblings will know, I'm not fond of the idea that the universe started in a Big Bang. I'm not saying it definitely didn't happen, just that I find it very unconvincing. I've often stated my reservations this way:

"Europe is the center of the universe"
"Oops. The Earth is a sphere, not flat."
"Well, Earth is the center of the universe."
"Oops. We travel around the sun."
"Oh. Well, The sun is the center of the universe."
"Uh, see those stars in the night sky? They are suns... and ours is a pretty ordinary one."
"Well we are in a big thing called the Milky way; the only one."
"Wrong again. Lots of those things that look like stars are galaxies containing billions of stars each."
"Well, it all expanded from one single thing at a certain time in the past."
"Ummmm..."

Well, I was thinking... assuming the expansion is real and not an error in our deductions, and what we can see of the universe really is expanding non-linearly then it is conceivable that there never was a time when it was a single point-source. If the graph of size against time is a curve that becomes less and less steep further and further in the past then who is to say it ever intersects the zero-size mark on the graph? It could approach forever, asymptotically, some size, not necessarily even a small size.

I know a lot of people have problems with infinity, but if the universe is infinite in size (something I "prefer" because I find it easier to imagine) then the universe could have been expanding forever but always been infinitely big... just becoming a larger infinity. :) (That pop you just heard was your mind breaking.) Or it could have "bounced" long before reaching the zero point, having previously collapsed to some density limit.

And yes, I know there is other observational data like the makeup of galaxies as we peer back in time with our telescopes, but none of that says conclusively that there was a big bang. It could be that there was a local catastrophic event, or that galactic births follow cycles. We don't really know.

I don't count the cosmic microwave background radiation as "proof" of the big bang. I remember when I was a kid reading science journals the microwave background was at one point considered evidence against a big bang.

My point is not to say what did happen, but to point out that believing there was a big bang seems a mistake. Such belief is based on inferences that always looked to me less than convincing at best, and "magical" thinking at worst. It seems to me that it jumps to conclusions, when there may be other ways of looking at the data.

Just to reinforce my point: I'm not saying a big bang did not happen. I'm just saying I find it hard to swallow, and so long as I can come up with alternatives I'm not going to believe any single explanation... even ones that feel right to me. I reserve judgment. I certainly won't believe something just because others do.

Comments

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

"That pop you just heard was your mind breaking."
Well thank you, that doesn't happen very often. :)

Anyhoo, makes sense to me.
I'm sure I haven't researched it the way you have but the thinking seems good.
I've always thought well maybe a big bang but so far it seemed a stretch to call it *the* big bang.

Your words reminded me of my junior high science class wherein our teacher took a single class period to explain a few origin of the universe theories. I think it was big bang/evolution, creation, and a combo of the two. I know, we didn't explore it very deeply.
But it got me thinking, I started trying to imagine infinity, or imagine what before the big bang, and especially I started to wonder why anything at all, rather than eternal nothing. My mind was a knot of wonder for a bit there. That there is anything at all seems like the most beautiful miracle.
:)

Anyhoo, thank you.

[miriam-e.livejournal.com]

:) Thank you.

On the point of why there is anything at all, it may be less surprising that it seems. There are theories that there may be countless universes, some essentially empty. The idea is that most will have different fundamental settings that cause the forces of nature to operate differently. In those life will most likely not arise. Only in this one and some tiny fraction of all the universes (though even that fraction might still be an infinite number) will there be life. When we look around we marvel at a world that produced us... because we couldn't have developed in any of the others.

What I like about that possibility is that it would explain so much, while making the world even more wonderful. I get a cozy feeling from it, like snuggling up in bed when a big storm rages outside. :) Of course my delight for it doesn't make it true; there may well be other, even cooler explanations. I hope I live to see more. Living and learning are grand!

[dorjejaguar.livejournal.com]

It never was exactly surprising to me, it was just a wonder, cause to me it could have gone the other way and it didn't, at least not in this here/now.
Or yes, as you say both ways. I tend toward thinking AND is the most likely thing. So though I hadn't heard these theories before, it sits real comfortably with me too. Thank you. I like that coziness. :)
It's a wonder that we are at all. It's pretty fancy that. :)