wbur.org
support wbur today!
Listen to this story
Forget the Big Bang Theory
photo

By host Tom Ashbrook:

We all know the story, delivered in grade school textbooks across the country, of how the universe began. The Big Bang. Fourteen billion years ago. Space and time and everything, exploding into being in a flash, and still exploding as celestial bodies race apart across the cosmos.

Well, maybe so. But the Big Bang theory has taken its lumps in recent years.

Now, renegade physicists are making a new case. That it didn’t all start in an instant. That there is no beginning, and no end. And those are fighting words in the halls of science.

This hour On Point: the big rumble over the Big Bang.


Quotes from the Show:

“I think the challenge we’re raising is that the usual picture of the Big Bang is based on an assumption which is that time, space, matter, energy, everything began at the Big Bang. And that assumption was made in the 60s when people got the first strong observational evidence that the Big Bang happened. But it’s really just an assumption and our point of view has come out of new development in physics which are enabling us to describe the behaviour of matter in very extreme conditions such as were present around the Bang. And what we’re seeing is that the Big Bang doesn’t have to be the beginning of time. It’s perfectly possible that the Big Bang was just a violent event in a pre-existing universe.” Neil Turok

“This picture emerged out of a new understanding of the laws of physics which is called M Theory. … [a]ccording to this picture, the world may be comprised of two objects called branes, short for membranes. … And so the picture is that we live in a three-dimensional world, just the height, width and length of ordinary space but separated from our dimensions by a very tiny distance are another three-dimensions and so the whole world is four-dimensional in this picture and these two sets of dimensions can actually collide with each-other. What we discovered is, if they do collide, then something like a Big Bang happens but the density of matter and the size of the universe is not zero at that point. It’s as if two objects clash together and this clash is what releases radiation which fills space.” Neil Turok

“In the what I would regard as the conventional version of the inflationary theory, the Big Bang was also not in that theory the origin of everything but rather one had a very long period of this exponential expansion of the universe, which is what inflation means, and, at different points, different pieces of this inflating universe had stopped inflating and become what I sometimes call pocket universes.” Alan Guth

“… What we call the Big Bang was almost certainly not the actual origin of time in either of the theories that we’re talking about. … The main difference I think [between the inflationary theory and Neil and Paul's theory] is the answer to the question of what is it that made the universe large and smooth everything out. … The inflationary version of cosmology is not cyclic. … It goes on literally forever with new universes being created in other places. The inflationary prediction is that our region of the universe would become ultimately empty and void but meanwhile other universes would srput out in other places in this multiverse. ” Alan Guth

“There’s a little more resistance to the cyclic model but maybe that’s because of the successes so far of inflation. Yet, we do know that there are fundamental things about the early universe and the Big Bang that we don’t understand. … String theory or M theory or these other models of fundamental physics are going to be important in terms of formulating that early universe picture but they’re not complete yet.” Janna Levin

Guests:

Neil Turok, professor of mathematical physics at Cambridge University. He is the co-author of the new book, “Endless Universe: Beyond the Big Bang.”

Alan Guth, professor of physics at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology. He is the author of “The Inflationary Universe: The Quest for a New Theory of Cosmic Origins.”

Janna Levin, professor of physics and astronomy at Barnard College. She is the author of “How the Universe Got Its Spots: Diary of a Finite Time in a Finite Space.”

 
 
Listener comments
  • I’d like to see a discussion of physics and history. Specifically I’m curious to hear what astrophysics has to say about the relevance of history.

    If time is a mathematically provable illusion, what does that observation say about the thing that Doris Kearns Goodwin recounts and interprets and which the President of the United States is seen to be making?

    If time is an illusion, is history truly bunk or is it perhaps a component of something embedded in our collective life of mind which exists beyond the reality that physics charts?

    Posted by Eric Hagglund, on January 11th, 2009 at 8:42 PM
Recent Shows
After ‘No Child Left Behind’
Thursday, March 18, 2010

The Obama administration wants to rewrite No Child Left Behind. We’ll ask what’s coming for American education.

Comments [48]
 
The U.S.-Israel Blowup
Thursday, March 18, 2010

Top Pentagon brass complain the Israel-Palestinian impasse is undermining American interests. We’ll look at the US-Israel moment of crisis.

Comments [159]
On Point Blog
Sonny Rollins on Race and Jazz’s Future

Jazz legend Sonny Rollins joined us to reflect on his storied career and give us his thoughts on the future of music. To celebrate his 80th birthday, the hugely influential tenor saxophonist is embarking on yet another national tour.

More »
 
IED’s in Afghanistan: Hard Numbers

The Department of Defense provided On Point with some statistics about IED attacks in Afghanistan, where there has been an increase in the use of such weapons over the past 14 months. It’s striking to see the spike in numbers — from 2,677 IED incidents in 2007 to 8,159 last year.

More » | Comments [2]
 
Christopher Hill: U.S. Troop Withdrawal ‘On Schedule’

U.S. Ambassaor to Iraq Christopher Hill spoke with On Point live from Baghdad today as early voting gets underway, part of the run-up to Sunday’s elections. “So far so good,” Hill said, despite scattered violence. Hill said that the plan to withdraw U.S. combat troops by Sept. 1, and to leave only a residual advisory force of 50,000 or fewer, remains “very much on schedule.” Observers worry that a spike in violence could derail that timeline.

More »