The origins of the universe

Toggle sidebar Toggle sidebar

What is hardest to comprehend

  • Big bang (Nothing existed before, not even time)

  • The Universe has always existed

  • Nef

Results are only viewable after voting.
Gunslinger08

Gunslinger08

Lifer
Nov 18, 2001
13,234
2
81
Not being a physicist, my opinion means absolutely nothing.

That said, I think the idea of an expand/contract cycle makes a lot of sense. Regardless, if you assume that all information is lost during the contraction, it doesn't really matter - we will never have a way to determining what happened before or what happens next in the cycles.
 
lxskllr

lxskllr

No Lifer
Nov 30, 2004
60,008
10,502
126
The "universe" existed as a part of a greater whole, like our solar system is part of a greater galaxy. Beginning and end isn't so meaningful in that context. All imo of course.
 
glenn1

glenn1

Lifer
Sep 6, 2000
25,383
1,013
126
calvin-on-man-in-the-universe.gif
 
disappoint

disappoint

Lifer
Dec 7, 2009
10,132
382
126
I think I may have read someplace, some time ago, that it isn't science if it can't be tested. Now I ask you, are you pursuing science or something else?
 
moonbogg

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,731
3,440
136
Even the most respectful, most well intended and honest ATOT poster will find little success with a thread like this, especially in OT. Good luck.

That said, I already spilled my theory of everything in DC and I stand by it.
 
Newell Steamer

Newell Steamer

Diamond Member
Jan 27, 2014
6,894
8
0
What is hardest to comprehend
Big bang (Nothing existed before, not even time) <--- this one.

The observation we've made, and still maintained, is that the universe is moving / expanding.

So, we've theorized that it was all in one mass or one atom at some point and something hit it and everything fell out; minerals, gravity, time, higher/lower dimensions, etc.

Now, it is suggested, the universe was as is (minerals, gravity, time, higher/lower dimensions), but something kicked it into it's expansive direction - the Big Bang.

So, the Big Bang theory isn't going away.
"A new paper in Physical Letters B has the popular press wondering if there was no Big Bang, but the actual paper claims no such thing... The Big Bang is a robust scientific theory that isn't going away, and this new paper does nothing to question its legitimacy."
Click to expand...

But, the idea that everything in the universe came from one piece of matter (or some singular focal point) has become more so as something that is hard to comprehend and prove.

The universe always existing and will continue to exist is still no easy thing to comprehend, but it makes much more sense than thinking we came from one sole piece of something as a result of the Big Bang.
 
Last edited:
irishScott

irishScott

Lifer
Oct 10, 2006
21,562
3
0
Neither really, it's only "hard" if you hold onto the false notion that time is a constant.

Regarding the big bang theory, remove time from the equation and there is no before, after, or present. Ergo everything merely exists, presumably in a super-dense mass given what we know. If it changes it changes relative to some other medium than time.

Regarding the infinite universe theory, that's even easier to comprehend. Time has no beginning and no end. It simply exists. Asking "what came before?" is a non-question.


Humans are wired to interpret pretty much everything in terms of time, but there's no reason to assume that time is required for existence or even change.
 
Braznor

Braznor

Diamond Member
Oct 9, 2005
4,767
435
126
Before the Big Bang, there was the SuperCosmos, a place I call The Great Unknown. This is because The Great Unknown cannot be defined in terms of any logic or rule we uphold inside this universe. Similarly This Great Unknown cannot be measured from our universe in terms of spatial distance. All that we see around us is the interior of the universe.

This universe came into being because of a collision between two objects 'concepts' in this Great Unknown.

These two objects can be classified as follows:

1. The Absolute Truth : The Absolute Truth is the basic ingredient that makes up all that is within this universe. By the virtue of its nature, it is impossible to know what the Absolute Truth is actually is. This quandary can be best described by asking this question:

If all mass is energy and all energy is just mass in another form, then what are both composed of?

The answer is that we shall never know. Trying to know the Absolute Truth will always make us hit a boundary at a level beyond which further observations will be impossible. There are certain properties of this Absolute Truth, but all that can be dealt with later in some other post.

2. The Singular Truth : This is the concept aka the object which gives the Absolute Truth it's structure within our universe. All that we see and sense aka Mass, Energy, Space, Time and gravity are manifestations of the Absolute Truth (the basic ingredient) coupled with the Singular Truth (the structural symmetry) Why do I call this the Singular Truth? It is because the Singular Truth manifests in such a way that it always lends a physical and logical center point to all things inside this universe.

Everything inside this universe is the manifestation of this Absolute Truth and Singular Truth mixed up together within various levels of the existence of that object.

This is my theory of everything.
 
biostud

biostud

Lifer
Feb 27, 2003
19,925
7,034
136
It is not as much as much about what is the correct answer, but how to understand eternity or nothingness.
 
JM Aggie08

JM Aggie08

Diamond Member
Jan 3, 2006
8,413
1,007
136
Some form of higher being. Assuming that no such thing exists is baffling to me.
 
moonbogg

moonbogg

Lifer
Jan 8, 2011
10,731
3,440
136
biostud said:
It is not as much as much about what is the correct answer, but how to understand eternity or nothingness.
Click to expand...

Nothingness is an imaginary concept. It exists as an idea in our head only. The only thing that is actually real is stuff that exists.

Eternity is how things are. We make it hard by imagining that time has a beginning and maybe an end. Time, as we understand time, is the same kind of confusion that we get when trying to think about nothingness.
 
SlitheryDee

SlitheryDee

Lifer
Feb 2, 2005
17,252
19
81
They're both really hard to comprehend. Hard to imagine what a place with no time is like and perhaps can't even be properly considered a "place" at all. It's also hard to imagine something that never started, but is.
 
Last edited:
IronWing

IronWing

No Lifer
Jul 20, 2001
72,834
33,874
136
SlitheryDee said:
They're both really hard to comprehend. Hard to imagine what a place with no time is like and perhaps can't even be properly considered a "place" at all. It's also hard to imagine something that never started, but is.
Click to expand...

It's like that non-time, non-place where you wait for the doctor after getting checked into the clinic.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

TRENDING THREADS

COMPANY
RESOURCES
FOLLOW
Top Bottom