Georges Lemaître lecturing, 1940s.
GL Archive / Alamy Stock Photo
Has the universe always existed, without a beginning or an end?
In the twentieth century, scientists fiercely debated this question. Many believed the universe was eternal, a view that stretched back to ancient thinkers such as Aristotle. However, new evidence was suggesting a startling conclusion: the universe had a beginning.
In 1931, Georges Lemaître, a Belgian cosmologist and Catholic priest, proposed a radical new theory of the universe’s origins. He called his theory the “primeval atom.” Today, most people know it as the “big bang theory.”
Georges Lemaître stands between American physicist Robert A. Millikan, left, and Albert Einstein, right.
Courtesy Vatican Observatory
Lemaître’s theory proposed that the universe burst into existence from an initial point in the finite past, rather than having existed eternally.
His previous studies of Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity had led him to conclude the universe was expanding. If so, then it would have been smaller and denser in the past. Go back far enough and everything in the universe emerged from a single “primeval atom.”
Lemaître’s theory was controversial, not just because some favored other theories, but because some believed it sounded too much like the biblical account of creation. It ultimately became the established model most scientists use today.
Georges Lemaître stands between American physicist Robert A. Millikan, left, and Albert Einstein, right.
Courtesy Vatican Observatory
Lemaître’s theory proposed that the universe burst into existence from an initial point in the finite past, rather than having existed eternally.
His previous studies of Albert Einstein’s general theory of relativity had led him to conclude the universe was expanding. If so, then it would have been smaller and denser in the past. Go back far enough and everything in the universe emerged from a single “primeval atom.”
Lemaître’s theory was controversial, not just because some favored other theories, but because some believed it sounded too much like the biblical account of creation. It ultimately became the established model most scientists use today.
