So, if the universe is expanding...

[BoomerD]

So...if, "in the beginning," there was no "HERE" here...where was the universe created...and from what materials? (and by whom?)

The whole "in the beginning, God created the heavens and earth" thing doesn't make sense...

 

[John Connor]

God created the heavens and earth" thing doesn't make sense...

For me personally I like to incorporate a bit of science with religion. I'm of the belief God set things in motion (no pun intended). He created all of the ingredients. And everything that is, was born under the sun was born from the sun.

 

[BoomerD]

For me personally I like to incorporate a bit of science with religion. I'm of the belief God set things in motion (no pun intended). He created all of the ingredients. And everything that is, was born under the sun was born from the sun.

Created from what...and where?

 

[John Connor]

Faith man. I mean it's flipping GOD! LOL

 

[BoomerD]

Faith man. I mean it's flipping GOD! LOL

Where was this "GOD" before the heavens and earth was created? Just cruising around nowheresville in a clown car?

 

[Malogeek]

Our sun being the origination of existence sounds just like USA being the most important country. It's a stupid concept that has no bearing on reality.

 

[futurefields]

That implies that space did not exist outside of the expanding universe.

You're starting to get it!

But obviously something existed even if that something was nothing. Since as we know from quantum mechanics, even empty space is a seething cauldron of virtual particles.

This is the part that we struggle with. It's hard to grasp the concept of absolute nothingness, but that's what the theory is.




Think of it like this, the poster above used an example of looking at a monitor screen and seeing space expanding, gradually taking over the unused part of the screen.

But it's really more like, the screen itself is expanding, and there is nothing beyond the screen.

 

[John Connor]

Where was this "GOD" before the heavens and earth was created? Just cruising around nowheresville in a clown car?

It's why they call it faith. It's part belief and part trust. Don't expect to understand what you don't know. For us to understand who and what God is and how everything came to be, we would more than likely have to have an IQ of 10,000. Our meager human minds that only formed, what? 300,000 years ago? simply can't comprehend who or what God is and the mystery's of the cosmos. And we may never know. At least not in this form of life we have. Perhaps in spirit we will have the answers. But judging by the way things work, I bet you have to earn that knowledge. I suppose some souls are older and wiser.

 

[John Connor]

But it's really more like, the screen itself is expanding, and there is nothing beyond the screen.

That's what I thought it was.

 

[slowsociopath]

It may not be infinite but on a scale larger than is capable of our minds to grasp the big bang was the pebble in the pond the ripple expansionist hindered by time or space that are expanding at the same rate. As for faith vs science working in cardiology we had mathematical formulas worked out over a hundred years before actually had the ability to see if they worked or not

Sent from my P008 using Tapatalk

 

[WHAMPOM]

... what exactly is it expanding into? Now, to preempt the regular gang of troll and losers, I get that the standard response is "its not expanding into anything, the universe ITSELF is expanding". Yea yea, I get it.

But imagine our universe as a 3d image on a computer screen. Imagine it take up half the screen. A billion years later, it takes up a good bit more than half the screen. What was in the area that got taken up by the universe in that billion years before the universe got there? I mean, maybe its "nothing", but even nothing is something in a sense. Does this "nothing" go on forever and ever?

I think this is just more evidence that what I basically proved in another thread is true - we are living in a simulated "universe", and the reason none of this shiat makes sense is because of this.

Thanks for any thoughtful responses. F U to the trolls, in advance.

Just look up the concepts of "infinity" and "eternity". This may seem to be an attempt to educate someone beyond their level of intelligence, but the quality of the OP's posts make it a certainty.

 

[Charmonium]

The interesting thing though is, if nothing, in an absolute sense, exists beyond the universe, then is it really infinite. I think you'd have to consider it more indefinite since we can't see beyond the horizon which was the big bang and the microwave background radiation.

 

[Thebobo]

My questions

If the universe is expanding from a single point, IE big bang. Then why are Galaxies running into each other in what looks like to be head on?

So we can create light, obviously. Then we are creating these photons that travel the speed of light, we just need to hitch a ride with those photons! Of course the Gs would kill you.

 

[Perknose]

Reading the entirety of this thread is like wandering into a small room wherein astrophysicists and short bus kindergarten students are endeavoring to debate this topic. I won't say which group the OP belongs to. It should be painfully evident.

 

[[DHT]Osiris]

Insofar as my understanding extends, I believe there's two 'answers' to this.

a) there is nothing outside of the expanding 'balloon' that is our universe, as in, there's a definable edge of quanta that's expanding at a (presently) accelerating rate. Beyond that physically does not exist, as if anything did exist it would by definition be part of the universe. It's something less than a pure vacuum, since a pure vacuum is still defined by the laws of physics which exist within our universe.

b) Some kind of quanta exists outside of our universe, and our universe is expanding into it. It has some capacity of information storage, capability of definition, or otherwise, but the status/capability of this is unknown/unknowable. This may/may not be the multiverse 'soup' that universes float through.

 

[DrunkenSano]

But imagine our universe as a 3d image on a computer screen.

Your question cannot be answered in 3 dimensions.

 

[ElFenix]

Doesn't OP already have a thread about the expansion of the universe? Did he really need another?

My questions

If the universe is expanding from a single point, IE big bang. Then why are Galaxies running into each other in what looks like to be head on?

So we can create light, obviously. Then we are creating these photons that travel the speed of light, we just need to hitch a ride with those photons! Of course the Gs would kill you.

The universe isn't expanding from a single point, it is expanding from all points.




Anyway in an attempt to seriously address a thread by an otherwise seemingly intelligent person who is clearly using this place to unwind and indulge himself: whatever is beyond the universe does not exist in any terms that we would recognize. As such, it is probably better to think of it through negative description. In other words, it isn't "nothing," it is "no thing," or, maybe more accurately, "not any thing."

 

[nakedfrog]

Where was this "GOD" before the heavens and earth was created? Just cruising around nowheresville in a clown car?

I think it was a Studebaker.

 

[IronWing]

The universe isn't expanding from a single point, it is expanding from all points.

Then why don't the points bump into each other?

 

[soulcougher73]

So...if, "in the beginning," there was no "HERE" here...where was the universe created...and from what materials? (and by whom?)

The whole "in the beginning, God created the heavens and earth" thing doesn't make sense...

Yeah that can just lead into an infinite loop of another god created this god, and another god created that god that created this god, etc. I always assume if a "god" can just exist, than so can we.

 

[BD231]

Why is the domino's driver married and I haven't been laid in 1.7 years, infinite universe's and not a single piece of poonacha in any of them for me.

This is a truly terrible existence, with no expansion pack.

 

[MrDudeMan]

There's no law that says there can't be other universes. I think a universe is a larger form of a galaxy. A bunch of crap collects in one place, explodes, and creates a universe. IOW, outside the universe is a bunch of almost nothing aside from bits of stuff here and there that sometimes accumulates to make a universe.

Either that, or I'm wrong. Doesn't really matter. Nothing out there affects my life. I'm more concerned about the dickheads that don't use their blinkers.

It depends on the situation. If you're in a left-turn only lane, using a turn signal is completely superfluous and any driver who doesn't understand what happens next shouldn't be on the road. I use it when it makes sense and I don't use it when it doesn't. If someone needs to know and the distances involved warrant its usage, I'll use it. Otherwise, I won't. E.g., if someone is 100' behind me before I need to change lanes - no turn signal. 30'? Yes.

 

[MrDudeMan]

With all due respect, I'm not sure how this relates to the thread topic. Sure, there might very well be other universes, or other simulated universes, but that doesn't answer the question as to what THEY are expanding into.

It's turtles all the way down.

 

[lxskllr]

It depends on the situation. If you're in a left-turn only lane, using a turn signal is completely superfluous and any driver who doesn't understand what happens next shouldn't be on the road. I use it when it makes sense and I don't use it when it doesn't. If someone needs to know and the distances involved warrant its usage, I'll use it. Otherwise, I won't. E.g., if someone is 100' behind me before I need to change lanes - no turn signal. 30'? Yes.

I always use a blinker. If I'm the only one on the road, the blinker still goes on because things done routinely become routine. In some kind on 'only turn' lane, it still reassures other drivers that you know what you're doing, and keeps things working smoothly. Everyone on the road doesn't know what they're doing, and are as predicable as a squirrel on acid, unless the definition of "predictable" is fucking up. I prefer being predictably competent.

 

[MrDudeMan]

I always use a blinker. If I'm the only one on the road, the blinker still goes on because things done routinely become routine. In some kind on 'only turn' lane, it still reassures other drivers that you know what you're doing, and keeps things working smoothly. Everyone on the road doesn't know what they're doing, and are as predicable as a squirrel on acid, unless the definition of "predictable" is fucking up. I prefer being predictably competent.

Just think of all of the time and energy I've saved by not using it when there wasn't a need.

In all seriousness, I am predictably competent and using or not using a turn signal in obvious situations doesn't change that. No, you can't know if I am or not as the other driver and I agree most people aren't competent at all. However, I prefer to examine most things beyond simple routine and turn signals fall squarely into that category. It's an optimization that is ultimately minor, but I like to engage in what I'm doing at all times instead of merely reverting to instincts or trained behaviors. It would be easy to use it 100% of the time and avoid the question, but I'd rather not.

As an aside, I've explained this to a police officer and he thought it was interesting. Punting on turn signals isn't a ticketed offense here, but the police still pull people over to have a chit chat. Somewhat amusingly, he said I'm the first person he's ever believed regarding not using a turn signal after I launched into the aforementioned speech about optimization theory and all of that junk. I mean it, but it's still junk and I know that.