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 11-24-2011, 10:05 PM
 
Location: The Internet
355 posts, read 774,746 times
Reputation: 427

Advertisements

Where did the universe come from?

Personally, I agree with a lot of what this author has written. The premise is 'nothing' does not exist, because we exist and we are something. Something cannot come from nothing.

Based on this, we can dismiss the Big Bang theory because it theorizes an explosion came from nothing to create the Universe.

This leaves us with two options. A mysterious source of energy created the Universe or the Universe always existed. Some would refer to that energy as God. If God created the Universe, he/she/it would have had to have existed prior to the Universe.

But as the author states in the article, "If we ruthlessly apply Ockham's razor to the idea of introducing God into the model we are left with the universe always existing. However, for those of you of a religious nature allow me to make myself clear. I am NOT saying (here) that God does not exist, only that the idea of introducing God into the equation is not necessary in order to make it work."
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 11-24-2011, 11:10 PM
 
Location: Somewhere in northern Alabama
18,544 posts, read 55,469,830 times
Reputation: 32291
You cannot force the rules of the universe to only follow Newtonian physics, any more than a tropical fish can correctly claim that water is always wet and warm. Further, although the fellow mentions quantum physics, he largely ignores it. There was a recent nifty little demonstration of the Casmir effect creating photons out of nothingness (as commonly defined - IOW a complete vacuum). String theory posits about 11 or more dimensions. We think a lot of those recurse into themselves, but we don't know with any certainty. Consider also that photon wave/particles pass though billions and billions of miles of vacuum. If they are particles, then space would not be a vacuum, would it? If they are waves or vibrations, what do they vibrate in a vacuum? How about gravity or magnetism? Those exist in total vacuum as well, otherwise the space station would have gone off on a tangent into deep space.

The fellow needs to be exposed to more higher level math and physics, so he can be really confused like the rest of us. Fred Hoyle described something similar to what he just did, so he shouldn't be too upset for not getting it right.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2011, 08:24 AM
 
Location: Texas
5,070 posts, read 9,077,804 times
Reputation: 1632
One of the physicists that was talking about the universe (posted by Bazaar) was talking about whether or not the universe would continue to expand or if there would be a crunch and so forth. At the end of his talk, he speculated that the universe began with quantum fluctuations. Who knows, if that is true, then the same thing could be going on.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2011, 08:24 AM
 
13,138 posts, read 37,038,382 times
Reputation: 12142
Quote:
Originally Posted by RottenChester View Post

Based on this, we can dismiss the Big Bang theory because it theorizes an explosion came from nothing to create the Universe.
I didn't realise that there was nothing before the Big Bang as wasn't all the equivilant energy of our universe compacted into the size of an sub atomic pinhead?
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2011, 10:02 AM
 
5,205 posts, read 8,209,144 times
Reputation: 3188
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6 Foot 3 View Post
I didn't realise that there was nothing before the Big Bang as wasn't all the equivilant energy of our universe compacted into the size of an sub atomic pinhead?
Exactly. The problem is what a person thinks the term "nothing" represents in relation to preexisting conditions before the Big Bang, that is thinking it means being completely and utterly devoid of anything and everything. Most cosmologists seem to think there probably were some sort of conditions, but stop short of getting into it considering nothing is known about what those conditions might be. There are cosmologists who do hypothize on such scenarios, but most of them acknowledge we have no idea if or what anything preexisted the Big Bang. In any case, when most cosmologists talk about the universe forming out of nothing, the term "nothing" does not necessarily mean absolute nothingness. At the same time, certainly if the universe had a beginning, then it also means the Universe did not exist before the Big Bang. In effect the universe, relative to itself, became something from nothing.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2011, 10:07 AM
 
Location: The Internet
355 posts, read 774,746 times
Reputation: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by 6 Foot 3 View Post
I didn't realise that there was nothing before the Big Bang as wasn't all the equivilant energy of our universe compacted into the size of an sub atomic pinhead?
Right and if this was the case, everything that existed at that point in time was just that subatomic pinhead meaning it wasn't some speck suspended in a vast void, there was no void, because a void by definition means nothing could be contained in it. However, if the Universe was compacted into the size of a subatomic pinhead, what could have caused the massive amount of energy required to expand it to the vast Universe we see today?

The Big Big Theory postulates the Universe had a beginning. I think it is more logical that the Universe has no beginning, it has always existed, and is the de facto backdrop of our existence.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2011, 10:22 AM
 
Location: The Internet
355 posts, read 774,746 times
Reputation: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by harry chickpea View Post
=There was a recent nifty little demonstration of the Casmir effect creating photons out of nothingness (as commonly defined - IOW a complete vacuum).
Yes these were done in a vacuum however show me the Casimir effect where two metallic plates are not placed 10 nanometers apart. I would be more impressed if virtual photos appeared in a true vacuum, meaning nothing placed inside of it. In the Casimir effect, the photons aren't created from nothingness, but possibly by a reaction between plate particles at the quantum level.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2011, 10:36 AM
 
Location: The Internet
355 posts, read 774,746 times
Reputation: 427
Quote:
Originally Posted by Brian.Pearson View Post
One of the physicists that was talking about the universe (posted by Bazaar) was talking about whether or not the universe would continue to expand or if there would be a crunch and so forth. At the end of his talk, he speculated that the universe began with quantum fluctuations. Who knows, if that is true, then the same thing could be going on.
The observations of the Universe expanding are based on light sources that are 13 billion years old. There is no way to tell if the Universe is expanding right now.

Also, as the Sun rotates around the galaxy and brings the Earth along with it, wouldn't it seem the Universe is expanding if the Earth is traveling further away from an observed star or galaxy.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2011, 10:57 AM
 
Location: Texas
5,070 posts, read 9,077,804 times
Reputation: 1632
We can only see so far, so we have no idea what size the universe is. There've been attempts at guessing, but for now, I don't trust them.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 11-25-2011, 02:56 PM
 
Location: Somewhere in northern Alabama
18,544 posts, read 55,469,830 times
Reputation: 32291
Quote:
Originally Posted by RottenChester View Post
Yes these were done in a vacuum however show me the Casimir effect where two metallic plates are not placed 10 nanometers apart. I would be more impressed if virtual photos appeared in a true vacuum, meaning nothing placed inside of it. In the Casimir effect, the photons aren't created from nothingness, but possibly by a reaction between plate particles at the quantum level.
You mean this? :
http://www.nature.com/nature/journal/v479/n7373/full/nature10561.html (broken link)
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.

© 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