"Jeff R." wrote in message
u...

"Strabo" wrote in message
...
ignator wrote:
On Nov 21, 10:43 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:

I'm not a theoretical physicist, but sure would like it if everything
made logical and intuitive sense.

It does.


What was there before the big bang?

Logically and intuitively, please.

--
Jeff R.
(many thanks)


the remnants of previous big bangs, the burned out cinders of previous big
bangs, what we call "dark matter". when they describe the results of the
big bang they try to explain why it didn't expand homogeneously, they try to
explain why it became lumpy. it became lumpy because there was some stuff
already there in the way. and that stuff had gravity, therefore the
"inflation" (was being drawn out instead of exploding out).

b.w.

William Wixon wrote:
"Jeff R." wrote in message
u...
"Strabo" wrote in message
...
ignator wrote:
On Nov 21, 10:43 pm, "Ed Huntress" wrote:
I'm not a theoretical physicist, but sure would like it if everything
made logical and intuitive sense.
It does.

What was there before the big bang?

Logically and intuitively, please.

--
Jeff R.
(many thanks)


the remnants of previous big bangs, the burned out cinders of previous big
bangs, what we call "dark matter". when they describe the results of the
big bang they try to explain why it didn't expand homogeneously, they try to
explain why it became lumpy. it became lumpy because there was some stuff
already there in the way. and that stuff had gravity, therefore the
"inflation" (was being drawn out instead of exploding out).

b.w.



I've always wondered if that wasn't the case.
And if we couldn't some day determine the number of prior cycles based on
the amount of dark matter.
It all depends on there being enough gravitational attraction to have all matter
return to the source. Enough matter to matter?

Richard