Maybe the wrong forum but the facts aren’t exactly clear when discussing some topics.
I understand there are various ideas regarding the universe and its origins. The one I’d like some input on is the notion of singularity. Without too much patronizing please explain what your take is on the idea.
As I understand it the universe was compressed (if you will) to a single infinitely dense point from which all matter derived.
I hadn’t planned on pulling out a bunch of cites (but can if necessary) since I thought this idea was fairly well understood and accepted by most. I am apparently mistaken.
As a guest I don’t have search capability. I’m almost certain you people have covered this subject before. Probably several times. Thanks
How about one of you guys do a quick search on a past SDMB discussion regarding this topic and post a link for me? thanks
I’m not reading all the way through to see if these are exactly what you’re looking for, but here are some General Questions threads:
The Big Bang is not proven fact; it is opinion. - The BBQ Pit - Straight Dope Message Board (Actually, this one is a Pit thread)
Mass and density of the Big Bang's "superatom" - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board
Stupid Question about the Universe - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board
Why did Big Bang happened? - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board
Origins: Where is the center of the Universe? - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board
Where is the center of the universe? - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board
Infinite density: matter occupying same space or nil space? - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board
Can Singularities Really Exist? - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board
Big Bang Theory - Factual Questions - Straight Dope Message Board
Hope these help!
“We must try to understand the beginning of the universe on the basis of science. It may be a task beyond our power, but we should at least make the attempt” Steven Hawking
Beyond our power is apparently correct. Thanks JohnT… I appreciate you taking the time to post these links for me. Apparently the concept of singularity is more complicated than I understood.
I have been interested in astronomy and astrophysics for many years now. At first as a hobby then later in college I hit the books, took every subject in astronomy, physics, astrophysics, trig. etc… I finally got bogged down in the math and I majored in math. 
Anyway…after several research papers and a thesis on Dark matter I thought I had a grasp on the basics. Until singularity reared its’ ugly head. The debates you posted show a definite confusion in that regard. So, I looked around the net for a definition that could be considered paradigm. No luck so far.
It seems that describing the universe pre-bang is a tough nut. The closest anyone seems to get is comparing it to what maybe found in a blackhole. The problem as I see it is that blackholes exist inside the universe and can therefore be defined in space/time as having dimension.
The universe having zero dimensions due to the absence of space/time make size meaningless. Thus singularity defined in terms used by our knowledge of physics cannot apply. So, does this mean the concept is a myth? a massive “blackhole” or just a garbage dump in space, where matter is torn apart, mixed and mashed then ultimately spewed back into the dimensions of space and time to be randomly rearranged.
The idea of a one dimensional universe is intriguing. It gives rise to the possibility of incredible speed. A string…of infinite length with the force of the universe lighting the way. But not singular, so forget it.
I could cite a bunch of definitions but none are quite adequate IMHO.
Gotta run, but… I’ll be back.
It all started with a spore.
[QUOTE=jimbeam…
It seems that describing the universe pre-bang is a tough nut. …[/QUOTE]
I think that you have a far better grasp on cosmological things than I do here, so I’m just going to focus on this one snippet.
And, it comes not from me, but from one of my profs at school a long time ago, so I don’t claim any great personal insight into this, even. But it went something like this:
“The problem with the “Pre-our-universe” thing is not that we don’t have the math, or the knowledge so much, it is that we lack the CONCEPT to talk about it.”
What he meant was we don’t even have the words or the science to make a theory about it. I guess, from my poor attempt to explain it, it would rather be like trying to explain God to a very curious amoeba. The circuits just aren’t there to even formulate the question properly, let alone an understandable explanation.