U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Space
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 11-26-2011, 02:02 PM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 75,366,687 times
Reputation: 36174

Advertisements

Whether you consider the universe to be a micropoint, or at its full expansion, you are still left to ponder the evolutionary events which led to the universe being where it is (and not somewhere else), and which led to the universe expanding when it did (and not sooner or later). Both questions imply that a reality preceded what we call the universe, spatially outside what we call the universe.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-26-2011, 09:40 PM
 
Location: The Internet
355 posts, read 774,590 times
Reputation: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
But an infinite and eternal universe is more satisfactory to you? How so? And on what basis?
Yes, through deductive reasoning. I've stated my arguments earlier in this thread and will provide further reasoning in this response.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
The vids I posted represent one hypothesis regarding the origin of the universe. It was to help clarify what another poster was trying to say. That said, there are certainly other hypotheses.
I know you were trying to clarify with the videos and I appreciate you posting them, but I believe it was fair of me to challenge the one video. I have yet heard or seen scientific evidence against my claims.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
I have yet to see any validation to assert such a claim of an eternal, or infinite universe is even plausible. Are you saying that quantum fluctuations are not possible? All you suggested was that some kind of unknown energy source regenerates the universe. Would you mind elaborating on any effects of this unknown energy that would give reason to consider it plausible?
Sure it's plausible:
Terrence A. Lynch, naturalist, persecuted because of new theory promoting the infinite nature of the universe

"New findings from the Hubble Space Telescope as relates to the size, age and nature of the universe are making Lynch's theory of an eternal universe seem yet more plausible. "

and

The Myth of the Beginning of Time: Scientific American

"String theory suggests that the big bang was not the origin of the universe but simply the outcome of a preexisting state"

I'm not saying that quantum fluctuations are not possible.

I'm not saying that some kind of unknown energy source regenerates the universe. Perhaps you are referring to dark energy which at this point in time is speculation and is not believed to be even dense enough to measure.

Dark energy - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
"Since it is not very dense—roughly 10−29 grams per cubic centimeter—it is hard to imagine experiments to detect it in the laboratory."

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
I agree with his 'new definition' of the term "nothing", although there's nothing there's new about that. I assume you feel the universe has always existed, that in effect it is an eternal structure. And that's fine. However, the suggestion that the universe as something from nothing cannot be true is utter nonsense.
The suggestion that the universe as something from nothing cannot be true is not nonsense. However, the fact the Big Bang theory is taught in schools and is widely accepted as true is.

Quote:
Originally Posted by NightBazaar View Post
Assuming that the universe had a beginning, then regardless of whatever field of conditions it may have originated from, or how it came to be, there was a point when the universe did not exist (nothing). In other words, we have a valid example of something (the universe) from nothing which is relative to the universe itself, not to any possible preexisting conditions. Frankly, the only thing known for certain is that we are limited to the confines of the universe, whether it's finite or infinite, and as such there isn't any way to know what conditions may have preexisted it. And since you prefer to view an eternal universe scenario, you're still bound and limited by the particle horizon of the observable universe.
An eternal Universe would have no preexisting conditions.

The debate between whether the Universe is infinite or not is ultimately pointless because for our purposes, if we were to travel the speed of light into outer space, we would be long dead before the Milky Way could be fully seen in view. That being the case, I still lean towards an infinite Universe model.


Journey to the Edge of the Universe - YouTube
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-27-2011, 09:47 AM
 
Location: Richardson, TX
8,703 posts, read 12,014,384 times
Reputation: 3730
Quote:
Originally Posted by RottenChester View Post
After, "The Mind was it's own ignitor..." the rest doesn't make sense in the English language.

He thinks he is using a language translation program. Unfortunately, it is actually a random word generator.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-10-2011, 10:10 PM
 
1,107 posts, read 2,001,481 times
Reputation: 1074
Schopenhauer wrote that if the universe is infinite in time then everything that could possibly happen in the universe has already happened.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2011, 01:36 AM
 
Location: Victoria TX
42,663 posts, read 75,366,687 times
Reputation: 36174
Quote:
Originally Posted by Angorlee View Post
Schopenhauer wrote that if the universe is infinite in time then everything that could possibly happen in the universe has already happened.
Just because you don't remember being you once before doesn't mean it didn't happen.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-11-2011, 03:04 PM
 
Location: Texas
5,070 posts, read 9,076,032 times
Reputation: 1632
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6 Foot 3 View Post
Well it's all just proposed theories no matter side your on of this subject however my thoughts are that the universe ''may'' have always existed however there still could had been a big bang. If the universe was compacted into an sub atomic pinhead then it still was existing just only in that scope of size and so all the big bang did was to expand it out to it's current size and continuing on to an unknown size until either stopping or recontracting possibly back into it's original sub atomic pinhead size at some unknown point of time.

As for ''what'' caused the initial explosion obviously know one knows however we see chain reactions all the time through out the universe and so why not an universal law of chain reaction whether on earth, a supernova or even the so called big bang.
Not a big deal, but it wasn't exactly an explosion, but it was fast, and continues to expand faster.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2011, 10:34 AM
 
13,138 posts, read 37,033,070 times
Reputation: 12142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian.Pearson View Post
Not a big deal, but it wasn't exactly an explosion, but it was fast, and continues to expand faster.
Well it was a quantum explosion or chain reaction.

Do you not believe in the Big Bang Theory and instead ascribe to Hoyle's ''Steady State Theory''?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-12-2011, 07:59 PM
 
Location: Texas
5,070 posts, read 9,076,032 times
Reputation: 1632
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6 Foot 3 View Post
Well it was a quantum explosion or chain reaction.

Do you not believe in the Big Bang Theory and instead ascribe to Hoyle's ''Steady State Theory''?
I believe in the Big Bang theory but not the Steady State theory. I suspect dark energy was the culprit for expansion.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-14-2011, 08:38 AM
 
13,138 posts, read 37,033,070 times
Reputation: 12142
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian.Pearson View Post
I believe in the Big Bang theory but not the Steady State theory. I suspect dark energy was the culprit for expansion.
I've pondered that thought myself however it's probably most likely that all forms of the laws of quantum physics (e.g. electrostatic force) currently known in our universe didn't apply in the ''pre'' big bang quantum realm.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 12-15-2011, 11:44 PM
 
Location: Texas
5,070 posts, read 9,076,032 times
Reputation: 1632
I guess it all had to start either at the same time or very close to it.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Science and Technology > Space
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 11:54 AM.

© 2005-2019, Advameg, Inc. · Please obey Forum Rules · Terms of Use and Privacy Policy · Bug Bounty

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top