If we take a straightforward look at the interpretation of general relativity, we will come to understand that the Big Bang was not the beginning of ‘everything.’
One of the most significant scientific enigmas is to understand what exactly happened and took place before time and space came into existence.
The Big Bang has long been taken to be our universe’s beginning.
However, recent Oxford University research, published in Physics Letters B, has explained that Earth’s universe may have existed before the point we refer to as the Big Bang.
As explained by this article from the University of Oxford, Stephen Hawking and Roger Penrose proved the “singularity theorems” in the 1960s.
These formulae demonstrated that Einstein’s model of the early universe always reaches a point in the past at which it cannot continue.
This point is what most physicists have taken to be the beginning of time.
However, recent findings suggest that although the interpretation of Einstein’s work breaks down, the reality of physics continues.
According to Science Alert, a few clues can be found in Hawking’s work “the Beginning of time.”
“At this time, the Big Bang, all the matter in the universe, would have been on top of itself. The density would have been infinite,” Stephen Hawking once explained in his lecture on The Beginning of Time.
The ’emptiness we think exists in space’ has been described via different models used by physicists. One is Einstein’s General relativity, which describes gravity as it relates to the geometry of the universe’s underlying fabric.
Experts like Hawking and Mathematician Roger Pernors argue that solutions to general relativity’s equations on an infinitely constrained scale, like those that reside inside a singularity, are far from complete.
Modern physics stops at the singularity, which in turn results in a mixture of speculations on the little data we can actually digest and understand, and still makes sense.
Stephen Hawking gave his view on the matter in an interview with Neil deGrasse Tyson. Hawking explained that space-time dimensions of the Big Bang are actually similar to Earth’ South Pole.
“There is nothing south of the South Pole, so there was nothing around before the Big Bang,” Hawking explained.
But not everyone agrees that we can compare the Big Bang to the south Pole.
Other experts in the field argue that there’s got to be something beyond the Big Bang.
But physicists from Oxford have come up with a new idea.
The new theory from Oxford University researchers claims that time didn’t begin with the Big Bang — time existed before the Big Bang.
While similar to other theories proposed in the past, this one is also entirely different.
Previous theories have attempted to solve the Big Bang singularity problem by rewriting the fundamentals of the Big Bang itself. But the theory of the flipped universe keeps these fundamentals.
In fact, as explained by experts, no modifications to Einstein’s theory of general relativity are needed.
Instead of disputing the Big Bang, the new study only calls into question the Big Bang’s position as the beginning of time.
As explained by experts, it is a matter of interpreting the theory differently, rather than reworking it.
In other words, the beginning of the universe isn’t the big bang.
This means that we could conceive differently what we think of our universe.
It also means that if time did exist before the Big Bang, something else must have existed on the other side, and one explanation is another universe, only flipped back-to-front.
This flipped universe could look very similar to our own, with a few important reversals.
Scientists suggest that for starters, there would be an inversion of “chirality,” which means that objects that appear right-handed in our reality (universe) instead turn out to be left-handed on the other side.
Entropy is inverted as well, which means that for someone living on the other side, time would seem to run in the opposite direction from our own.
In fact, from their perspective, our universe would be their definitive past.