[thedoc (OP)]

Arun asked the Naked Scientists:
   How did the Big Bang start from nothing? Generating such a huge energy and matter is possible from nothing?
What do you think?

[Ethos_]

Arun asked the Naked Scientists:
   How did the Big Bang start from nothing? Generating such a huge energy and matter is possible from nothing?
What do you think?

There are several credible theories floating around these days but because none us were around to observe the event, empirical evidence is lacking and could remain that way for a long time to come.

The three that I'm aware of that don't require a state of nothingness are the three that I'm listing below.

#1 One older theory suggests that the universe is cyclical and goes through periods of expansion and contraction. This theory doesn't require a state of nothingness before the big bang.

#2 Another theory proposes that our universe lays along side other universes. This is called M-theory because these other universes are thought to be  membranes, by analogy, and like 4 dimensional sheets lying one next to the other. This theory suggests that there are an infinite number of these analogous sheets. When one sheet bumps into an adjacent sheet, energy is transferred and a new big bang is the result. This theory, also doesn't require a state of nothingness prior to the big bang.

#3 There are other theories as well, but the one I prefer myself is a universe that is infinite and eternal. The big bang as we now understand it may not have been a singular event. It may have only been a local event in an infinite universe full of such events. If the universe is in fact infinite, other events like our big bang might be so distant and receding from us so fast, we would never be able to detect them.



 All we know for sure is our universal event occurred some 13.8 billions years ago and it is expanding at an ever increasing rate. Beyond that, not much more is known for sure about why it happened.   

[sam7]

For me, the only thing that makes any sense is a single predetermined universe.

We shouldn't invent universes that we have no evidence of. First, we need to fully understand the laws of our universe: space, time and force.

I am of the opinion that when done correctly, the realization is that you don't need other universes/ outside input for us to exist. Our brains are evolutionarily wired to find concepts of eternity hard because we have always needed to 'develop from something'. In this way, we have evolved under entropic laws to collect resources from prior states (when available) to predict and survive future states (when not available). Ultimately though, past present and future already exist which can be easily visualized via Feynman diagrams with each interaction being reversible along the time axis.

It's an idea more consistent with General Relativity and is not compatible with many assumptions made by Quantum Mechanics, although all testable observations are compatible. That is why I feel it to be the correct solution.

[Space Flow]

First let me start with the disclaimer.   
I do not know the answer to your question. 

I did make up a story once. That is all it is, just a story. 
But I find it helps me. Maybe it will help you too. 


Before the Big Bang

First we have to imagine that enough time has gone by, that black holes have swallowed everything. And then they swallowed each other. There is just one almighty black hole left and a couple of, no make that one cosmic ray left.

Spacetime is defined by the apparent separation between any two bodies of Matter. It is also defined by the space that a particle or collection of particles rotate in.
If there was no Matter left outside the Event Horizon of a Black Hole, how then can we define the existence of spacetime?
When a Black Hole has finished devouring all the available Matter, that means it has devoured ALL the available Matter, including any Matter that may or may not have it's creation origins in Hypothetical Hawking Radiation.
There exists for less than a Planck length of time only a Universe in a Black Hole.
There is nothing left to be separated by Spacetime.
As such Spacetime looses any defining characteristics and can no longer exist.

In fact as the last of whatever was considered the last separate bit of matter reaches the event horizon of the last Black Hole, which up to this point contains all the angular momentum of the Universe in it's spin rate, spacetime should immediately cease to exist.

With the sudden disappearance of Spacetime, the rapidly rotating Black Hole having nothing to relatively rotate to, comes to an immediate stop (Planck moment "0"). Thus transferring all that Kinetic Spin Energy, into Kinetic Straight line momentum, making every particle move away from every other particle.
Result? (Planck moment "1")
Thus restarting Timespace.(Spacetime)
A "Big Bang" or "another" Big Bang....

[guest39538]

Arun asked the Naked Scientists:
   How did the Big Bang start from nothing? Generating such a huge energy and matter is possible from nothing?
What do you think?

Disclaimer - I have no scientific academics and I am a ''crackpot'' but your question is open to opinion because of the prequel nature of the question.

I  believe yes before the big bang there was nothing, but relative to how a person  perceives  what nothing is.

[puppypower]

Mass cannot travel at the speed of light according to special relativity. It would takes infinite energy to move even the smallest unit of mass at the speed of light. Energy, on the other can move at the speed of light.

Say you were sitting on the speed of light reference looking around. You would never know there was such a thing as mass, since you would never see mass, since mass cannot be at the speed of light. Say our sun was burning mass and giving off energy; fusion and mass burn. Since in your speed of light reference, you would not know there was mass, what you would see is energy seeming to appearing from nothing. Energy from a void is appearing and heating your house and giving light. Inertial reference can see the entire equation of mass to energy, but in the speed of light reference, we don't see mass, since this phase is only theoretical pseudo-science speculated by people like me. We would only see energy teleporting into out reference, from nothingness.

The same, I would guess, is true of the BB. If there were phases of substance and potential that were not evident in inertial reference, but were common say in the speed of light reference, the BB would look like something from nothing, due to hidden phases. Many of the theories for where the universe began before before t=0, speculate other phases in other dimensions, for example, that may not be evident in our reference.

Here is my two cents to explain one possible conceptual basis for such other phases. Say you took the fabric analogy of space-time and separated the weave of the space-time fabric, into separate threads of time and threads of space. This is like the hole in blue jeans allows blue and white threads to separate so we can form two separate piles.

This separation of the fabric of space-time would allow one follow a time thread and move in time without the normal constraints of space. Or we could follow space tread and move in space without the normal constraints of time. The former allows you to know the history of any point in space; no space restrictions for substance or time, while the latter allows you to be anywhere in the universe in zero time. The ancients called these threads omniscience and omnipresence.

If we start in inertial reference and increase velocity to the speed of light, the universe will appear to be contracted to a point-instant. The point-instant universe is small and brief enough to do the separated time and space threads thing. The overlapping point-instant universe, means you are everywhere at the same time, while all of history is summarized in an instant. At the speed of light space-time fabric breaks down.

If you could move in time or space without the normal fabric weave requirements of inertial space-time references, new phases would be able to appear that are not possible if space and time restrict each other. For example, say we woven some extra time threads into space-time, embroidery, the space-time fabric will pucker. This is another way to model gravity and acceleration. Acceleration is two parts time and one part distance; d/t/t.

Conceptually, by making different weaves and embroideries with separate time and space threads, as well as adding these to space-time in different proportions, we can get all kinds of phases. However, since the single thread anomaly phases do not exist in inertial reference, where space-time is connected, these may appear to come from nothing.

If we have a particle pair synchronized in time over an extended distance, what we have is some extra treads of distance wove into space-time to get a local space pucker. The BB will need threads of space and time to be woven into space-time, while also adding embroidery of separate space and time threads for time puckers; force/acceleration, and space pucker; singularity simultaneity.