A new physics paper is challenging the idea that the moment before the Big Bang was a "singularity." The Big Bang and what preceded, the theorized "omega point" of the universe and the center of a black hole are considered beyond understanding with current models of physics, in other words, everything we know breaks down. The new paper aims to be a theoretical Tower of Babel, Express in the UK described it as paradigm-shattering:
<blockquote>"The physics to precisely explain the moment of creation would effectively render God and world religions redundant in a way which would make the Copernican revolution (proving the Earth was not the centre of the universe) seem a relatively minor moment in scientific history.
According to the current thinking of scientific giants like Stephen Hawking, Roger Penrose, Edwin Hubble and Alan Guth, post-Einstein physicists dictates that it is impossible to see or investigate the moment of origin of the universe because physics simply breaks down."</blockquote>
In the new paper, an international team of scientists and mathematicians aim to prove that there is more to these theories than the black box of a "singularity." The paper claims that the genesis point of the universe and the center of a black hole are understandable using complex math and cutting-edge physics. The paper, entitled "Quantum no-singularity theorem from geometric flows" aims to disprove the singularity notion that came before it. The paper would disprove the tenet of Einstein's general relativity that the laws of physics can't be applied to understanding singularities.
The absence of singularities would, theoretically according to the writers of the paper, allow science to explore the Big Bang, the center of black holes and even the moments before the Big Bang which is supposedly the origin point of the entire universe. Anyone who has studied the history and philosophy of science is sure to know that science, like a snake, is constantly molting. Though this paper aims to remove inconsistencies, it is likely that the models used will constantly be changing as our perceptions change and our paradigms shift.
Some say research like this could make God "redundant" but considering the fact that existing inconsistencies within science (how the theory of evolution presupposes life from nothing in violation of the law of biogenesis or how the Big Bang and evolution seemingly violate entropy, one of the fundamental laws of thermodynamics) calls into question exactly how precise our constantly changing views of reality are.
Twitter: <a target="_blank" href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%40TheGoldWaterUS%20%23Astrophysics ">#Astrophysics </a> <a target="_blank" href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%40TheGoldWaterUS%20%23BigBang ">#BigBang </a> <a target="_blank" href="https://twitter.com/search?q=%40TheGoldWaterUS%20%23Singularity ">#Singularity </a>