Science Stuff

[Wahesh]

Hahah. Yeah, I forgot about this one. When random websites put this up they said it would collide in August 2016. Nasa was quick to point out that it's fake.

Regardless, I'm sure if something like this were to happen, all the countries on the planet would launch their nuclear missiles towards it lol.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Regardless, I'm sure if something like this were to happen, all the countries on the planet would launch their nuclear missiles towards it lol.

An interesting thing they've been doing lately is running simulations on this kind of thing as we're quickly realising that we would have no way of stopping a planet killing asteroid. Some of the simulations were to see what would happen if we nuked a large asteroid and due to the velocity the asteroids generally travel at, nuking one would result in breaking up the asteroid but not changing its trajectory enough to stop it from hitting us. So instead of being hit by one massive asteroid, we'd be hit by thousands of smaller asteroids that would also wipe out earth.

On the plus side of it all, anything that is big enough to wipe out Earth, we'll know about it at least 2 weeks ahead of impact. On the down side, there's literally nothing we could do to stop it.

Even more scary is that city killing asteroids are generally too small for our detection until about 2-3 hours before it hits. Last year a city killer missed us but came fairly close and we didn't know about it until it was pretty much on top of us.

 

[Wahesh]

An interesting thing they've been doing lately is running simulations on this kind of thing as we're quickly realising that we would have no way of stopping a planet killing asteroid. Some of the simulations were to see what would happen if we nuked a large asteroid and due to the velocity the asteroids generally travel at, nuking one would result in breaking up the asteroid but not changing its trajectory enough to stop it from hitting us. So instead of being hit by one massive asteroid, we'd be hit by thousands of smaller asteroids that would also wipe out earth.

On the plus side of it all, anything that is big enough to wipe out Earth, we'll know about it at least 2 weeks ahead of impact. On the down side, there's literally nothing we could do to stop it.

Even more scary is that city killing asteroids are generally too small for our detection until about 2-3 hours before it hits. Last year a city killer missed us but came fairly close and we didn't know about it until it was pretty much on top of us.

Well I reckon given the amount of nuclear warheads all around the world (with Russia and the US leading the charge, as shown below), that they would need to fire a missile first, then, if possible, fire more towards them afterwards hopefully with the vision of homing in on the bigger parts that have broken off. I mean hey, the world is ending, you've got nothing to lose. It's worth a go.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Well I reckon given the amount of nuclear warheads all around the world (with Russia and the US leading the charge, as shown below), that they would need to fire a missile first, then, if possible, fire more towards them afterwards hopefully with the vision of homing in on the bigger parts that have broken off. I mean hey, the world is ending, you've got nothing to lose. It's worth a go.

True. I think if you managed to hit every largest piece then you could theoretically break it up enough that the rest would burn up in the atmosphere. But that would require massive calculations. You would have to initially break up the asteroid, then find out which parts are the largest, then hit those parts. But you would have a blocking problem. The smaller debris at the front would make it harder to hit the larger parts at the back. The other problem you get is that nukes aren't designed to fly into space. In order to send a nuke into space you would need an immense amount of energy which would not really leave any room for the payload as the payloads are heavy. And it's not just getting it up there. People think that when you send something into space then suddenly it becomes weightless, but that's not how gravity works. The International space station is in orbit around the Earth. At the distance it orbits it still has 90% of Earth's gravity pulling it down. The only reason it manages to stay up there is because... well, actually it doesn't manage to stay up there. What it's actually doing it constantly falling back down toward Earth. But it's also travelling extremely fast so the speed it falls is equal to the curve of the Earth. So effectively it's falling but missing the Earth constantly. The reason the astronauts are weightless in space is because technically they're constantly falling. It's like taking an infinite skydive, but they don't have wind or air resistance pushing against them.

When a missile leaves Earth's atmosphere it has to keep going really hard to get to its destination. This is possible but we would need to design unmanned space shuttles specifically designed to carry nuclear payloads. It would be a rush to get them up and running.

The main idea right now is to redirect other asteroids. Also very hard to do but we are surrounded by hundreds of thousands of asteroids. If we could redirect enough asteroids passed the large asteroid the hope is that the weight of the smaller asteroids would shift the larger asteroid's trajectory. But again we hit the problem that it's not easy to get something there to re-direct the asteroids. We have managed to land a probe on one asteroid and it died straight away 'cause the calculations and astronomical (pun)

One of the other ideas they came up with was to shift Earth's orbit. Only slightly. Small enough that it won't affect our weather but large enough to shift us out of the path of the asteroid. Problem with this is that we would need an immense amount of energy. More than we have on Earth or nearby. We would need to leave our solar system to re-direct icy bodies toward Earth to shift it's orbit. If we had the tech to do this (which we don't) it would take decades.

And if the asteroid is a planet even half the size of Earth, there's nothing we could do. We don't know how many nukes there are in the world but it's estimated between 15,000 - 19,000 nukes. These nukes range in power but if there were 19,000 nukes and every nuke was as powerful as our current maximum powered nuke and they were all set off at the same time at the same location. We'd end up with a very large crater that would we about 10km wide and 2km deep. So very large, but in comparison to the size of the Earth, nothing at all. It wouldn't even be enough energy to shift Earth's orbit. It would likely wipe out humanity, or at least severely cripple humanity. Those that survived the initial nuclear strike would find it hard to stay warm as the debris would coat the Earth in a cloud for possible thousands of years. Fallout would make it difficult to handle crops. But the Earth would survive.

 

[Squash the Berries!]

Science Stuff.

As a science enthusiast I’m fascinated in what we discover and what we are yet to learn. As such I’m going to dump interesting science stories in this thread on an ongoing basis.

I’m going to provide links where I can and explanations when I think I know, but I want peeps to correct me if I get something wrong about a story or article. Yes I want to be peer reviewed!! And if there is a science topic that peaks your interest, put it in here and I’ll grab some info on it to discuss. So load up your pocket protectors and straighten your bow ties, it’s time to get all Sciencey.

To start off with we’ll look at something close by and familiar to each of us, our Sun.

Fun Sun Facts:

We use our Sun as a unit of measure = 1 AU (Astronomical Unit) is the distance from the Sun to Earth. Saturn is an average of 9.6 AU from the Sun. Old Pluto’s average distance from the sun is 39.5 AU.

Our Sun sings and breathes - https://www.nasa.gov/feature/goddard/2018/sounds-of-the-sun

Our Sun Farts - https://solarsystem.nasa.gov/resources/2288/the-solar-wind-across-our-solar-system/

Our Sun is currently converting 600 million tons of hydrogen into helium every second - https://sunearthday.nasa.gov/2007/locations/ttt_solarenergy.php

Now that sounds like a lot, but when you think our Sun is only halfway through its lifecycle and has approximately 4 billion years of fuel left to burn, than you start to understand how big it is. If you want a visual of how big compared to Earth, check out the pic below.

View attachment 12609

The material of the Sun is so compressed and so dense, it takes a particle of light 3 million years to get from the core where it’s created to the surface of the Sun itself and then only 8 mins to reach Earth.

And yes our Sun does have a name, Sol. This name originates from the ancient Roman’s god of the Sun, Sol. This alternate name is where we get the term “solar system,” which literally means system of the Sun.

Inevitably our Sun will die and use up all its hydrogen fuel. When that happens it will grow into a Red Giant and consume Mercury, Venus and Earth as its outer layers expand to the reach and melt Mars. That will be the end of all the inner rocky planets of our Solar System and the outer gas giants will be stripped of their upper clouds and reduced to roughly 10-30% of their current size due to the increase in the power of the solar winds (farts). And when that expansion part of our Sun’s lifecycle is compete and it shrinks back to become a White Dwarf Star, our Solar System will be unrecognisable. Our Sun will then spend the rest of its 100billion year existence faintly flickering as part of the ocean of White Dwarfs that currently inhabit our Galaxy.

I would like your thoughts on the following:

When I was in my early 20's (35 years ago) I undertook an 18 week course at the Sydney Observatory on Astronomy.

The teacher and head Astronomer a hippy looking dude who got a job running the Parkes telescope soon after mentioned to us the following theory:

Multiple universes and the fact that our universe might just be one bubble like in a bubble bath.

Interested to hear about this and about the theory our universe was caused by matter being sucked into a black hole and coming out the other side as another universe in the big bang.

 

[Squash the Berries!]

One thing in the world of science I find most interesting is relativity. When I first learned about relativity as a kid my mind was blown. Relativity (General and Special) is too complex to go into detail for but here's some of the aspects of relativity that I find most interesting.

In special relativity, time is relative. I have seen many confusing explanations of what that means but the simplest way I have found to explain it is by saying, "Time is only relative to you based on where you are". A simple way to explain this is to imagine two trains driving along. If a train is driving at 60km/h and you're standing on a platform then the train passes you at 60km/h. If you're on another train driving alongside it and you're doing 40km/h then the train you're looking at is doing 20km/h.

That explanation may seem a bit stupid because you're still moving at 40km/h and the other train is still moving at 60km/h relative to the earth. But think of it another way...

Earth spins at different speeds depending where you stand. If you stand at the equator then you're spinning at the speed of 1,670km/h. If the train is travelling in the direction of the spin of the earth, then the train that's doing 60km/h is actually doing 1730km/h. But that's not the only speed. The Earth travels around the sun at around 107,000km/h. So your train is actually doing about 109,430km/h (Average. You're occasionlly going faster and occasionally going slower depending on the spin of the earth and your point on the earth at the time)

So speed is relative to where you are. That's the utter basics of special relativity.

But it's all affected by gravity too. When you look at a black hole, its gravity is so strong that light slows down. When it approaches the even horizon light slows down so much that it's barely moving. But light in the universe is constant so it's still moving at the same speed as everywhere else. What is actually slowing down is time.

Time is affected by two factors (both of which are actually related but that's a lot more complex). Gravity and speed. Under extreme gravity, time slows down. We have tested this. Using atomic clocks we put one on a plane and one on the ground. The one on the ground runs slightly behind the one on the plane. So every time you take a flight somewhere, you age slightly less than everyone else. Only a tiny bit.

The other factor is speed. No object can ever travel at the speed of light (based on our current undertstanding), but we believe we can get close to it. But the faster you travel the slower time goes. Again, this is that special relativity. Two trains travelling side by side. One at 60km/h, one at 40km/h. For passangers on the 60km/h train time is actually slowed ever so slightly. And we have been able to record this difference in time. It's inconceivably small though. But if we could travel fast enough then it becomes different.

The closest star is around 4.5 light years away. It would take us around 10,000 years to get there with current technology. But if we could develop technology to travel faster then we could get there quicker. If we could travel at close to the speed of light then we could get there is around 10 years. But travelling at that speed affects time. So we fly there and back and 20 years have passed. But when we get back to earth, 50,000 years have passed.

This gets even more interesting when you bring in concepts like Worm Holes. Based on Einstein's theories and work by Professor Kip Thorne, if you had an infinite amount of energy and a way to do it, you could use a wormhole to create a time machine effectively. Open a wormhole, grab one end and put it on a starship, send that starship at 90% speed of light to a distance star then step back through the wormhole and you're travelling back in time. It's probably the most useless time travel though as due to relativity, you couldn't go back past events that you already know about because your observation isn't going to travel faster than you can travel.

I'm impressed by your science knowledge and know understand why you recommended "Veritasium".

 

[Hacky McAxe]

I would like your thoughts on the following:

When I was in my early 20's (35 years ago) I undertook an 18 week course at the Sydney Observatory on Astronomy.

The teacher and head Astronomer a hippy looking dude who got a job running the Parkes telescope soon after mentioned to us the following theory:

Multiple universes and the fact that our universe might just be one bubble like in a bubble bath.

Interested to hear about this and about the theory our universe was caused by matter being sucked into a black hole and coming out the other side as another universe in the big bang.

I love the multi-verse theory. There's different versions of it. Many different versions including versions where at the Quantum level (very, very small, sub-atomic level) many Universes exist that pop in and out of existence. Other ones being the bubble Universe theory as you mentioned which postulates that bubble Universes (also known as Pocket Universes) exist possibly even inside our own Universe. These Universes wouldn't know there's anything outside them.

The other main theory on multiple Universes is the decision theory which is heavily linked with Quantum Physics. This has been covered in many TV shows including Red Dwarf which did a most excellent version of it with Ace Rimmer.

The theory is that for every action in the Universe, an alternative Universe is created. Think of it like a decision. If you are making a decision to buy a Mazda or a Holden, and you buy the Mazda. In an alternative Universe you bought the Holden. But the interesting part about this theory is that it stipulates that it becomes a Universal split. At the point one action happens, a new Universe is created. And not just for our decisions. For everything that happens in the Universe.

The black hole ejection theory is an interesting one too. It's more of a hypothesis as we don't really have anything to support it. But this was based on Einstein's theories. When he theorised that black holes exist he also theorised that white holes may exist. White holes being the other side of the black hole which could be another Universe. But this was expanded to become the theory of the Einstein-Rosen Bridge, aka The Wormhole. Wormholes being tiny black holes that open up at the Quantum level. The theory carried by Einstein and Rosen were that you could take these wormholes and stretch them out to create a pathway where you could instantly travel from one point to the other. Like a fold in space.

There's several problems with the theory. Professor Kip Thorne and Professor Stephen Hawking worked on this theory further. Hawking was the person who added that these tiny black holes would exist at the Quantum level. So we tried to find these wormholes. One of the lead projects on this was run by the Dr O'Sullivan and his colleagues in Australia. They developed a radio style technology to attempt to detect these mini-black holes. Unfortunately it failed and they never found the mini-black holes, but what they did discover is that the technology was able to transmit large amounts of data. This technology became the first Wi-fi and it's the reason we have Wi-fi and 4G/5G today.

CERN went on to work on this further but never found evidence of these tiny black holes or any kind of worm hole, but they did find the Higgs Boson which basically revolutionised all of Physics and Science in general.

 

[Wahesh]

Multiple universes and the fact that our universe might just be one bubble like in a bubble bath.

What you're referring to is the 'multiverse' and yes it does exist. Watch this video until the end.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Forgot to mention a few things about the Big Bang. One of the early Big Bang theories was the Big Bang/Big Crunch theory. It was believed that the Universe goes in an endless cycle. There's a Big Bang and the Universe explodes into existence then eventually collapses in on itself then does it all over again. Problem is if that were the case then the expansion of the Universe would slow down. Instead it's speeding up. So it's unlikely to collapse. Instead we'll suffer from Entropy where the Universe slowly dies as all matter burns out (Thermodynamics)

One thing people don't often understand about the Big Bang is the concept of the 4 dimensions. You hear this when people say, "What came before the Big Bang?". The answer is "Nothing" as time is a dimension. Big Bang theory suggests that everything in the Universe was in a single tiny point the size of a pin head. And that means everything. All of space and time. But with that level of compression time would not move, or it may move ever so slowly (100 billion years to pass only 1 second of our time). But we don't know what caused it to expand, and many scientists don't believe the Big Bang actually happened, but it's the best theory we have.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

I'm impressed by your science knowledge and know understand why you recommended "Veritasium".

Another good one is "Answers with Joe"

He's not a scientist but he's an intelligent guy that researches topics ranging from scientific phenomenon to just random interesting stuff. And he explains it in layman terms. It's really interesting and entertaining stuff.

 

[Mr 95%]

What you're referring to is the 'multiverse' and yes it does exist. Watch this video until the end.

If they wanted to start with the smallest thing in the multiverse..they should’ve started with my dick..

 

[Hacky McAxe]

Another thing I would suggest 8f you have an interest in Science is to listen to the following podcasts:

Sci Fri (Science Friday)
Science Rules with Bill Nigh
Science with Dr Karl

 

[Nano]

Did you have a read about the recent science finding that the universe isn’t actually infinite or every growing or whatever. There’s a point A and point B. Apparently when you reach point B you come straight back to point A.

That could sound like something of a circular nature where point A and point B are the same points, yet a circle has infinite points even though its circumference could be seen as something finite but once again pi is irrational so yeah it sounds like a pretty complex model to think about

Did you have a read about the recent science finding that the universe isn’t actually infinite or every growing or whatever. There’s a point A and point B. Apparently when you reach point B you come straight back to point A.

That could sound like something of a circular nature where point A and point B are the same points, yet a circle has infinite points even though its circumference could be seen as something finite but once again pi is irrational so yeah pretty co

Yep. Speed of light.

There's this interesting quantum theory about a collapsed boson. If a boson collapsed to a certain level (which is nearly impossible) then it's believed that it would destroy all space and time around it, and that would create a wave that travels at the speed of light and wipes out everything in front of it.

And if this happened we wouldn't know about it until it hit us as nothing can travel faster than the speed of light.

In regards to the speed of light, I remember reading somewhere a few years that anti neutrinos must travel faster than the speed of light to balance certain equations that show how matter interacts with each other. I know that they mistook neutrinos for going faster than the speed of light a few years ago but this was before that fix they made.

 

[Nano]

Another thing I would suggest 8f you have an interest in Science is to listen to the following podcasts:

Sci Fri (Science Friday)
Science Rules with Bill Nigh
Science with Dr Karl

I really enjoy when Science with Dr Karl comes on triple j when I'm driving to uni or back home from it, always new things to learn that are quirky

 

[Hacky McAxe]

That could sound like something of a circular nature where point A and point B are the same points, yet a circle has infinite points even though its circumference could be seen as something finite but once again pi is irrational so yeah it sounds like a pretty complex model to think about



That could sound like something of a circular nature where point A and point B are the same points, yet a circle has infinite points even though its circumference could be seen as something finite but once again pi is irrational so yeah pretty co


In regards to the speed of light, I remember reading somewhere a few years that anti neutrinos must travel faster than the speed of light to balance certain equations that show how matter interacts with each other. I know that they mistook neutrinos for going faster than the speed of light a few years ago but this was before that fix they made.

Yeah. Neutrinos was a mixed up thing. The original idea was that they travelled faster than light. Then the belief was that they travelled backward in time making them seem like they travelled faster than light.

CERN actually discovered neutrinos and their properties. Turns out they are dark matter. Or at least, they're as close as we get to dark matter. They don't travel faster than light and don't travel backward in time, but they also don't interact with anything in the Universe. They can pass through the earth without interacting with it.

Anti-neutrinos are the anti-particle of neutrinos. They also don't travel faster than light and don't travel backward in time. In fact, they are so similar to neutrinos that we think they may be the same thing.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

One important thing to know about the Universe in general is that we don't actually know the size of ths Universe as we can't observe the edges of the Universe. We also don't know what is at the edge of the Universe. But we can calculate how large the Universe is based on our observable Universe and measurements of light as a constant.

Using this we can estimate that the Universe is around 14 billion years old (around 13.8 at last estimation), but we can also estimate that the Universe is more than 98 billion light years across due to expansion.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

One thing that I find immensly interesting about the Universe is expansion.

Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. But the Universe is less than 14 billion years old, but over 98 billion light years wide. That seems impossible. But then look at the galaxies. They are moving away from us at faster than light speed.

This is because of expansion. The distance between everything is expanding. Think of it like a baloon. Take a baloon and blow some air into it. Then draw some dots on the baloon at different areas. Then blow some more air into the baloon. The dots will move further apart as the baloon expands.

The Universe works in a similar way. But here's where it gets complex. There is no such thing as an absolute void. No such thing as nothing. Every part of our Universe is filled with matter and energy. But energy can't be created from nothing. It can be converted but not destroyed or created. So technically the Universe can't get larger. But it is getting larger. And more interesting than that, as it gets larger it speed up. We believe dark energy is what is causing the expansion of the Universe. But dark energy is replicating. The faster the Universe expands the faster the dark energy replicates. But we have no idea how energy can come from nothing.

Well, not no idea. We have theories. One being that there's tiny pocket dimensions that hold quantum energy and this energy is bled into our Universe which creates more dark energy. But that's a bit of an immature theory based on string theory and we have no evidence that string theory is correct in any sense.

 

[Nano]

Yeah. Neutrinos was a mixed up thing. The original idea was that they travelled faster than light. Then the belief was that they travelled backward in time making them seem like they travelled faster than light.

CERN actually discovered neutrinos and their properties. Turns out they are dark matter. Or at least, they're as close as we get to dark matter. They don't travel faster than light and don't travel backward in time, but they also don't interact with anything in the Universe. They can pass through the earth without interacting with it.

Anti-neutrinos are the anti-particle of neutrinos. They also don't travel faster than light and don't travel backward in time. In fact, they are so similar to neutrinos that we think they may be the same thing.

I also remember reading that they can shape shift i.e. change through their known 3 flavours, pretty interesting properties they have

One thing that I find immensly interesting about the Universe is expansion.

Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light. But the Universe is less than 14 billion years old, but over 98 billion light years wide. That seems impossible. But then look at the galaxies. They are moving away from us at faster than light speed.

This is because of expansion. The distance between everything is expanding. Think of it like a baloon. Take a baloon and blow some air into it. Then draw some dots on the baloon at different areas. Then blow some more air into the baloon. The dots will move further apart as the baloon expands.

The Universe works in a similar way. But here's where it gets complex. There is no such thing as an absolute void. No such thing as nothing. Every part of our Universe is filled with matter and energy. But energy can't be created from nothing. It can be converted but not destroyed or created. So technically the Universe can't get larger. But it is getting larger. And more interesting than that, as it gets larger it speed up. We believe dark energy is what is causing the expansion of the Universe. But dark energy is replicating. The faster the Universe expands the faster the dark energy replicates. But we have no idea how energy can come from nothing.

Well, not no idea. We have theories. One being that there's tiny pocket dimensions that hold quantum energy and this energy is bled into our Universe which creates more dark energy. But that's a bit of an immature theory based on string theory and we have no evidence that string theory is correct in any sense.

With expansion and dark/anti matter and energies, I've read abit about what happens to x when y is around and etc but it always seems that when a normal and an anti collide they produce energy yet when certain energies interact they can produce particles which fits in with the whole it can be a particle or energy thing.

To me this could try explain that whole bit leading up to the bing bang, it might have been some finite volume/space just full of these particle and energy interactions happening until it exploded due to much of it happening and changed the nature of that finite volume/space to keep expanding. But the the big question again is how and what created that finite space and where did all these energies and particles come from to begin with.

I do like all this quantum physics material but I reckon that final frontier bit might be beyond what we are supposed to know as philosophy comes into play aswell.

 

[Hacky McAxe]

I also remember reading that they can shape shift i.e. change through their known 3 flavours, pretty interesting properties they have



With expansion and dark/anti matter and energies, I've read abit about what happens to x when y is around and etc but it always seems that when a normal and an anti collide they produce energy yet when certain energies interact they can produce particles which fits in with the whole it can be a particle or energy thing.

To me this could try explain that whole bit leading up to the bing bang, it might have been some finite volume/space just full of these particle and energy interactions happening until it exploded due to much of it happening and changed the nature of that finite volume/space to keep expanding. But the the big question again is how and what created that finite space and where did all these energies and particles come from to begin with.

I do like all this quantum physics material but I reckon that final frontier bit might be beyond what we are supposed to know as philosophy comes into play aswell.

Yeah, current theories are a lot like that. But it's more a particle and a wave instead of a particle and energy. Everything contains some level of energy or potential energy.

The particle and wave being the quantum collapse of a wave form which is most interesting because it's the one place where we have found something that happens that cannot be explained without time travel. At least, we can't explain it without time travel.

In regard to the Big Bang, there's heaps of different theories about what caused it to start, how the initial compressed dimensions came to be, etc. But one of the ones I love that has a lot of support in the astrophysics fields is the theory that Universes branch as they expand. So the multiverse is like a tree. As the Universe gets to a certain expansion it creates a compressed section of space which expands rapidly. Hence why our Universe was created. But each Universe is self contained so there's no way we could know what happened before our Universe existed. We couldn't look back at the tree.

 

[Nano]

Yeah, current theories are a lot like that. But it's more a particle and a wave instead of a particle and energy. Everything contains some level of energy or potential energy.

The particle and wave being the quantum collapse of a wave form which is most interesting because it's the one place where we have found something that happens that cannot be explained without time travel. At least, we can't explain it without time travel.

In regard to the Big Bang, there's heaps of different theories about what caused it to start, how the initial compressed dimensions came to be, etc. But one of the ones I love that has a lot of support in the astrophysics fields is the theory that Universes branch as they expand. So the multiverse is like a tree. As the Universe gets to a certain expansion it creates a compressed section of space which expands rapidly. Hence why our Universe was created. But each Universe is self contained so there's no way we could know what happened before our Universe existed. We couldn't look back at the tree.

I usually interchange wave and energy due to my classic mechanics background, when I see something that is described as say a gamma ray/photon its just energy being released to me lol

I was reading one theory (mainly based around pilot-wave theory which isn't really wrong as it can describe all the theories of quantum mechanics aswell) where they did consider these perfect shapes of space/volume (3d or 2d aswell) where quantum fluctuations would be occurring which allows the creation of particle-antiparticle pairs of virtual particles and that continuous cycle of uncertainty and chaos would lead to an expansion like the big bang. But what created that energy to be able to fluctuate