Welcome Slashdotters, who have been popping by after reading Far Future Will See No Evidence of Universe’s Origin to take a look at my post, In 100 billion years, cosmologists will be very, very wrong. Be sure to follow the link there to the original paper, which is quite readable, and thank the stars for the open access arXive.
While you’re here, you might also be interested in taking a look at the following paper about the Big Bounce, published online in Nature Physics today:
- Martin Bojowald, What happened before the Big Bang? Nature Physics (2007) doi:10.1038/nphys654 (press release)
- Note: This paper is not available at arXive or at his faulty website, so you’ll need a subscription.
From the paper’s abstract, which is notable for its ‘we can never really know’ conclusions:
Was the Universe before the Big Bang of classical nature, described well by a smooth space–time? Or was it in a highly fluctuating quantum state? This is one of the most basic questions that we may ask once it is accepted that there was something before the Big Bang. Loop quantum gravity applied to isotropic models has shown that the quantum evolution of a wavefunction extends through the Big Bang. Although a general demonstration is still lacking, this may suggest that calculations, and possibly future indirect observations, may allow us to see the Universe as it was before the Big Bang. Here, we analyse an explicit model with a pre-Big Bang era, indicating limitations that would imply that it is practically impossible to answer some of our questions. Assumptions (or prejudice) will remain necessary for knowing the precise state of the Universe, which cannot be fully justified within science itself.
Fascinating. Philosophy of science folks who enjoy cosmological speculations will have fun deconstructing this.