Goodbye to the Big Bang theory ?: the universe could have always existed

The Big Bang or the great explosion gave rise to all the matter in the universe. That is what science encyclopedias explain to us so far, as it is the most accepted theory. However, there may be another possibility: what if the cosmos never had a beginning and will not come to an end? This new proposal, which shakes the foundations of human conventions, comes from the physicist Bruno Bento, from the University of Liverpool, and Stav Zalel, from Imperial College London.

To do this, it is necessary to get rid of the singularity of the Big Bang and accept that the universe did not begin 13.8 billion years ago As is currently estimated, but the fabric of the past and the future would be infinite, a difficult concept to understand especially when doing the exercise of freeing ourselves from popular knowledge.

Singularity is a point with infinite density that cosmologists always cite to refer to areas where physical properties lose all meaning. For example, the physicist-mathematician Roger Penrose, at the age of 34 and after Einstein’s death, discovered that the collapse of a star could result in a singularity, which was named a black hole two years later.

Another example of singularity would be the beginning of the universe according to big Bang Theory where everything that exists was compressed into a single point until it was released and marked the beginning of space and time, both intertwined in one: space-time.

In a preliminary study published on the Arxiv platform, it is stated that to find out what happened before the Big Bang, “we must resort to quantum gravity” or causal set theory, in which space and time are decomposed into fundamental units and they are not taken into account as a great reality.

In other words, the big bang would have only been part of the evolution of matter, thus eliminating the awkward concept of singularity according to the researchers.

Seen in this way, causal set theory he no longer considers space-time as a whole, but as fragments or atoms. Then, there would be strict limits between some events and others.

For example, if we look at a computer screen with the naked eye, it seems fluid and continuous, that is, it is a tapestry where all reality is concentrated as the space-time that we all know. But if we look at this screen with a magnifying glass, we see that in reality that concentration is illusory because there are pixels that divide everything. “It is impossible to bring two images together on your screen closer than a single pixel,” astrophysicist Paul Sutter told Livescience.

In that sense, matter cannot be compressed into points that are smaller than an atom of the space time. Therefore, a singularity like the one that triggered the Big Bang could not exist.

“Classically speaking, a causal set grows out of nothing into the universe we see today. In our work, however, there would be no Big Bang as a beginning since the causal set would be infinite for the past, so there is always something before ”, explained Bento.

Expert Bruno Bento indicated that this argument is demonstrated in a possible and mathematically feasible framework. Will the causal approach allow it to coexist with other physical theories? Will they reach a conciliation? It remains to be seen if this new contender wins the battle with the Big Bang theory.

Source-larepublica.pe