A new theory claims that Einstein was wrong and that the Big Bang was not the beginning of the universe

A group of scientists question Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity, and challenge the idea that the universe is constantly expanding and that implies the “beginning” of everything, or the Big Bang.

Currently, the idea of ​​the Big Bang has been accepted by the scientific community, but another theory wants to replace it with a new understanding of space, time and the beginning of the universe. Or rather, the absence of the beginning.

Many consider it a theory Incomplete general relativity, and despite its effectiveness in explaining the universe on a large scale, the idea put forward by Einstein is incompatible with quantum mechanics and black holes.

In other words, Einstein’s work cannot explain how The infinitesimal point is called the singularity, theoretically smaller than any known particle, could have such an intense gravitational field.

This brings us to the Big Bang, as the most classic theory that the universe originated from a singularity. Therefore, some physicists have created some theories such as strings and causal groups, and these theories are newer.

It is noteworthy that both theories Chains when causal groups are merely hypotheses, since their predictions cannot be tested and monitored by the scientific method.

A slightly older theory suggests that space and time have a base unit, or quantum. According to the idea, spacetime consists of its own “packets”, as if it were quantum “packets of energy”.

If spacetime is a quantum, then a series of effects must be taken into account. There will be fundamental particles, or discrete units of space-time, and some limits will be imposed on the events that can occur in the universe.

If the opportunity set theory is correct, then there is a limit to how close two points can be to each other, and this limit is limited by the size of the “spacetime particle” itself.

In this way, not only time becomes a physical manifestation, singularity becomes impossible. With no singularities in the universe, there are no longer struggles with gravity to solve.

However, if there were no singularities in the universe, there wouldn’t be a Big Bang either. So how did the universe originate?

New article made by Bruno Bento and Stav Zalel, from the University of Liverpool and Imperial College London, respectively, are trying to chart a new path. Basically, they claim that the universe has always existed based on everything we know.

According to scientists, there will be no Big Bang as a start, because the causal set will be infinite in the past, so there is always something before.

Many scientists even accept some hypotheses about the events that occurred before the Big Bang, including the scientist Roger Penrose, who won the Nobel Prize for demonstrating, along with Stephen Hawking, the properties of black holes.

Researchers Penrose and Hawking vigorously defended the idea that there was another universe before ours, specifically another universe that expanded and then regressed, until it returned to a singularity.

The difference between this hypothesis and causal group theory is that, in the latter, there is no singularity. Pinto and Zalil’s work is in preprint on arXiv and awaits peer review.

So, do you think both worlds are on the right track? Tell us in the comments below!