No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning

big bangPhys Org – by Lisa Zyga

The universe may have existed forever, according to a new model that applies quantum correction terms to complement Einstein’s theory of general relativity. The model may also account for dark matter and dark energy, resolving multiple problems at once.

The widely accepted age of the , as estimated by , is 13.8 billion years. In the beginning, everything in existence is thought to have occupied a single infinitely dense point, or . Only after this point began to expand in a “Big Bang” did the universe officially begin.  

Although the Big Bang singularity arises directly and unavoidably from the mathematics of general relativity, some scientists see it as problematic because the math can explain only what happened immediately after—not at or before—the singularity.

“The Big Bang singularity is the most serious problem of general relativity because the laws of physics appear to break down there,” Ahmed Farag Ali at Benha University and the Zewail City of Science and Technology, both in Egypt, told

Ali and coauthor Saurya Das at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada, have shown in a paper published in Physics Letters B that the Big Bang singularity can be resolved by their in which the universe has no beginning and no end.

Old ideas revisited

The physicists emphasize that their quantum correction terms are not applied ad hocin an attempt to specifically eliminate the Big Bang singularity. Their work is based on ideas by the theoretical physicist David Bohm, who is also known for his contributions to the philosophy of physics. Starting in the 1950s, Bohm explored replacing classical geodesics (the shortest path between two points on a curved surface) with quantum trajectories.

In their paper, Ali and Das applied these Bohmian trajectories to an equation developed in the 1950s by physicist Amal Kumar Raychaudhuri at Presidency University in Kolkata, India. Raychaudhuri was also Das’s teacher when he was an undergraduate student of that institution in the ’90s.

Using the quantum-corrected Raychaudhuri equation, Ali and Das derived quantum-corrected Friedmann equations, which describe the expansion and evolution of universe (including the Big Bang) within the context of general relativity. Although it’s not a true theory of , the does contain elements from both quantum theory and general relativity. Ali and Das also expect their results to hold even if and when a full theory of quantum gravity is formulated.

No singularities nor dark stuff

In addition to not predicting a Big Bang singularity, the new model does not predict a “big crunch” singularity, either. In general relativity, one possible fate of the universe is that it starts to shrink until it collapses in on itself in a big crunch and becomes an infinitely dense point once again.

Ali and Das explain in their paper that their model avoids singularities because of a key difference between classical geodesics and Bohmian trajectories. Classical geodesics eventually cross each other, and the points at which they converge are singularities. In contrast, Bohmian trajectories never cross each other, so singularities do not appear in the equations.

In cosmological terms, the scientists explain that the quantum corrections can be thought of as a cosmological constant term (without the need for dark energy) and a radiation term. These terms keep the universe at a finite size, and therefore give it an infinite age. The terms also make predictions that agree closely with current observations of the cosmological constant and density of the universe.

New gravity particle

In physical terms, the model describes the universe as being filled with a quantum fluid. The scientists propose that this fluid might be composed of gravitons—hypothetical massless particles that mediate the force of gravity. If they exist, gravitons are thought to play a key role in a theory of quantum gravity.

In a related paper, Das and another collaborator, Rajat Bhaduri of McMaster University, Canada, have lent further credence to this model. They show that gravitons can form a Bose-Einstein condensate (named after Einstein and another Indian physicist, Satyendranath Bose) at temperatures that were present in the universe at all epochs.

Motivated by the model’s potential to resolve the Big Bang singularity and account for and , the physicists plan to analyze their model more rigorously in the future. Their future work includes redoing their study while taking into account small inhomogeneous and anisotropic perturbations, but they do not expect small perturbations to significantly affect the results.

“It is satisfying to note that such straightforward corrections can potentially resolve so many issues at once,” Das said.

More information: Ahmed Farag Ali and Saurya Das. “Cosmology from quantum potential.” Physics Letters B. Volume 741, 4 February 2015, Pages 276–279. DOI:10.1016/j.physletb.2014.12.057. Also at: arXiv:1404.3093[gr-qc].

Saurya Das and Rajat K. Bhaduri, “Dark matter and dark energy from Bose-Einstein condensate”, preprint: arXiv:1411.0753[gr-qc].

19 thoughts on “No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning

  1. I’ve always thought that gravity was a reaction to a much smaller particle passing between larger bodies. You will see the same behavior if you place two bobbers tied together placed a slight distance apart. Move the water between them and they will momentarily pull towards each other, the water on their surface area being momentarily displaced. A similar behavior can be observed with the way debris gathers around etties. Nature has a tendency to use scalable models. Water, gravity, air, radiation, they have similar behaviors.

  2. So there was no big bang. Time to go back to our faith in God. That seems to be the only obvious answer that makes sense these days.

    1. I there was a “big bang”, it was God’s “brainfart”. We humans think too highly of our evolved intellect and think we got it all figured out on the quantum physics chalkboard. To believe that there is no higher power is a fool’s errand.

  3. Are we all not manifestations of the same one (possibly conscious and infinite) energy source experiencing the universe as a seemingly separate consciousness? Like individual waves on the ocean, or a harmonic plucked on the cosmic guitar string? Will we wake from this existence/channel and think…what an awful nightmare?

    Gravity, to me, seems to be a weak tertiary force created by the flow of electromagnetic energy in a seemingly endless sea of energy. I suppose maybe the third wheel in the electromagnetic force combination. The galaxies, stars and planets being the knots in a net, and the net being gravity. Gravity being the tensor across the net. Could it also be stronger/concentrated where resistance to energy flow is higher?
    Is gravity infinitely pervasive or only where there’s energy flow?
    I don’t know and neither does anyone else.

    Concerning the ‘big bang’ and elohim (el is an ancient name for saturn) saying ‘let there be light’ you might find this so very interesting…

    Dwardu Cardona: Earth’s Primordial Stellar Host | EU2014


    1. I haven’t made it through to Dwardu Cardona’s material. It seems very dense and prolific. Maybe I’m just getting old and lazy?
      I wish he would write a condensed summary or laymans roadmap of his material to help guide me through his major works.
      I do, however, lean towards the electromagnetic theories as they seem to be a better fit for what we know and better predictors for what we explore and discover.
      Thanks to Donald Scott and Wal Thornhill for stimulating my scientific and creative thoughts.

    2. I don’t know flek, for someone to claim to have solved the question of our very existence seems, IMHO, to expose their own ignorance. It appears more like a “gangbang” of scientific eggheads about to fall off the wall like Humpty Dumpty.

  4. Models are just models, not reality.
    I’m glad new models are being entertained.
    The blind faith “religion” of the Big Bang, black hole, dark matter and dark energy purely mathematical model is obviously wrong in its explanatory and predictive value.
    It’s time for physics, and all of the sciences, to move along.
    All of the suppressed (occultted) knowledge by TPTB is holding back all of humanity. I can, literally, feel this knowledge bursting forth via what seems to be Rupert Sheldrake’s “Collective Consciousness”.

  5. “The big guy upstairs must really be getting a kick out of this.”

    “Professing themselves wise, they became fools,”
    Romans 1:22 KJV

  6. Did I do something incorrectly? Perhaps I simply missed posting it!
    Here is a pretty good read on the infinitely old universe from Alexander Shulgin:
    Not that I want to knock God. As this fun essay progresses, I hope to offer an alternative to the concept of origin. There might have been no origin. Our universe has always been here, it is infinitely old, and so God just might have been with us much longer than anyone ever suspected. All the weird observations that are part of our science will fit another explanation just as well, or even better, but the veil of prejudice must be put aside for a moment for us to see it. More of this iconoclasm later.

    Let me paint a brief word picture of the Big Bang religion first, using the vocabulary of the faithful. We have interpreted the evidence from our instruments to support a theory that the universe is expanding, and expanding at a remarkably rapid rate. And the further away something is, the faster it is moving away from us. This is our way of being at peace with the observation that the further away a light source is, the more the spectrum of that light is shifted to the red. This relationship, between how far away the light emitter is from us, and the red shift of the light emitted, is called the Hubble constant. The resemblance between this dynamic picture and an explosion has provided us an irresistible model for the origin of our universe. This is portrayed as a super explosion, and what we see now is the debris, the shards and fragments, still flying away in every direction. With this model in front of us, let us pretend that we can watch the passing of time in the reverse direction. Let’s run the movie projector backwards. Each frame takes you to an earlier point in time, so that the flying fragments appear to be coming together again, with the volume of the universe getting progressively smaller and the matter (or whatever it is) that is in it getting progressively hotter. As the film continues to roll backwards, everything appears to condense to a smaller and smaller volume, and then even this shrinks further to what looks like a point and that point is so hot that matter can’t even exist at all. Stop the projector right there. Look at that birth frame. If you closely inspect the image before you, you should see an extremely small something, at a temperature of a fantastically large number of degrees centigrade. The movie is said to have started from this point in the normal time direction and that is what the physicists call the Big Bang.
    If you edited it perhaps you could email me and tell me why?

    1. I happen to be sitting here with 978 pages of a book entitled “PiHKL: A Chemical love Story” written by Alexander Shulgin and Ann Shulgin. Diggerdan was a big fan and turned me on to Shulgin. I’ve been a fan ever since. The guy was brilliant. Wait a minute, I’m not sure if he’s “past tense” yet but, last I heard, he was still going strong pushing 100.

          1. De nada…I was introduced to PIHKAL during my latter years on popping in on Dead shows while I traveled the US (I wasn’t a hippie but hey, they were fun) then during the early 90’s in the rave ‘scene’ the book made more sense.
            Then (after meeting R.A.Wilson in Vancouver) it was made more pertinent when I realized or ‘awoke’ as is said now and looked at our culture slightly askew.
            I share(d) multiple friends with him since I was the first licensed medical cannabis grower in what has become Northern Kanuckistan. So I moved through some circles that most will never experience.
            Email me if you want a longer story.

Join the Conversation

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *