Reason's Greetings

[DC Tom]

If one believes that Time had a starting point. Then you obviously would have to believe that there was a vacuum. That nothing ever existed before Time started.

 

So if you believe in this concept, then rationally speaking, you would HAVE to believe in a greater force to create time and open the vacuum for matter to exist and evolve.

 

The question is, is this "greater force" merely energy or is it something greater than that? If it was merely just a random energy force that opened the vacuum to create time, then how is it possible for an energy force to exist without time?

 

 

No it's not irrelevent, it is my opinion and since you or I or even Tom (don't get too cocky) can't prove otherwise, it is all conjecture.

 

This wasn't meant to be a "religous" topic, I am simply following what logic tells me.

 

Actually, you're following what "belief" tells you. Logically, there's no empirical evidence either way to make a claim. Fact is, we don't know, and we can't know. The Big Bang represents a hard space/time boundary on what is and is not knowable. Anything outside that (a true "information edge" to the universe) can't be known, just taken on faith...hence, is a religious topic whether you want it to be or not.

 

And furthermore, the best theory is that time and space were created in the Big Bang...it's not just an explosion of "stuff", but an actual and literal creation and inflation of dimensionality. Whatever may or may not have existed before cannot be time as we know it, as such did not and could not exist before - indeed, "before the Big Bang", as a time-like expression, isn't even defined or definable.

[Magox]

Actually, you're following what "belief" tells you. Logically, there's no empirical evidence either way to make a claim. Fact is, we don't know, and we can't know. The Big Bang represents a hard space/time boundary on what is and is not knowable. Anything outside that (a true "information edge" to the universe) can't be known, just taken on faith...hence, is a religious topic whether you want it to be or not.

 

And furthermore, the best theory is that time and space were created in the Big Bang...it's not just an explosion of "stuff", but an actual and literal creation and inflation of dimensionality. Whatever may or may not have existed before cannot be time as we know it, as such did not and could not exist before - indeed, "before the Big Bang", as a time-like expression, isn't even defined or definable.

In order for the Big Bang to have.... well... Banged! then it would of have to have been induced by an energy. Don't you agree?

Edited December 23, 2010 by Magox

[DC Tom]

In order for the Big Bang to have well... Banged then it would of have to have been induced by an energy. Don't you agree?

 

Nope. That's an unknowable and unprovable hypothesis. Furthermore, "inducement" is an action. Action requires time. Time was created in the Big Bang. Ergo, no action could take place until the Big Bang happened.

 

And there's plenty of physical processes that aren't induced by anything. Radioactive decay, for one. Quantum vacuum fluctuations, for another. I'm personally perfectly comfortable with "that **** just happened."

[Adam]

The problem is that while we all exist in the real world, we also live in our own little reality. What makes sense to one, is utter nonsense to someone else. The majority can deal with that just fine, but some people just want to persuade everyone else that their alternate reality is better and more real than anyone else's.

 

Personally, I believe there is a god. I believe that religion is very important, as is science. What that means to anyone else......couldn't care less.

 

And before anyone blows a gasket, this isn't in response or retort to any specific post. I hope you all have a Merry Christmas, Happy Kwanzaa, or any other holiday you celebrate. If you don't celebrate anything, have an enjoyable vacation and hopefully some time with the family.

Edited December 23, 2010 by Adam

[Gene Frenkle]

The problem is that while we all exist in the real world, we also live in our own little reality. What makes sense to one, is utter nonsense to someone else. The majority can deal with that just fine, but some people just want to persuade everyone else that their alternate reality is better and more real than anyone else's.

 

Personally, I believe there is a god. I believe that religion is very important, as is science. What that means to anyone else......couldn't care less.

No offense, but what's the point of being involved in this discussion then?

[whateverdude]

Nope. That's an unknowable and unprovable hypothesis. Furthermore, "inducement" is an action. Action requires time. Time was created in the Big Bang. Ergo, no action could take place until the Big Bang happened.

 

And there's plenty of physical processes that aren't induced by anything. Radioactive decay, for one. Quantum vacuum fluctuations, for another. I'm personally perfectly comfortable with "that **** just happened."

Yes, but he is free to speculate about realities (GOD) outside of the big bang or space and time.

[Magox]

Nope. That's an unknowable and unprovable hypothesis. Furthermore, "inducement" is an action. Action requires time. Time was created in the Big Bang. Ergo, no action could take place until the Big Bang happened.

 

And there's plenty of physical processes that aren't induced by anything. Radioactive decay, for one. Quantum vacuum fluctuations, for another. I'm personally perfectly comfortable with "that **** just happened."

Well, this is why it is such a great debate that we most likely will never ever know.

 

And I don't buy that all of a sudden a tremendous burst of energy was created out of nothing without there being an energy to create that burst. That in my view isn't logical

[Gene Frenkle]

Well, this is why it is such a great debate that we most likely will never ever know.

 

And I don't buy that all of a sudden a tremendous burst of energy was created out of nothing without there being an energy to create that burst. That in my view isn't logical

It isn't very satisfying, there's just likely no way to ever know.

[Magox]

Nope. That's an unknowable and unprovable hypothesis. Furthermore, "inducement" is an action. Action requires time.

Exactly my case btw.

[whateverdude]

Exactly my case btw.

What if you're not bound by time?

[Magox]

It isn't very satisfying, there's just likely no way to ever know.

You're right, it isn't very satisfying. I use to obsess over this topic and not knowing the answer and coming to the realization that I will never know the outcome, drives me a little crazy. Specially considering that there is no earthly explanation. The only thing that I can think of that makes sense to me is that there is a greater energy that exists, that is !@#$ing with all our minds in some sort of twisted experiment.

 

And I say that with all seriousness.

 

What if you're not bound by time?

Maybe time is a dimension, another piece of the puzzle that was created through a greater energy source. I could possibly accept this.

[Gene Frenkle]

You're right, it isn't very satisfying. I use to obsess over this topic and not knowing the answer and coming to the realization that I will never know the outcome, drives me a little crazy. Specially considering that there is no earthly explanation. The only thing that I can think of that makes sense to me is that there is a greater energy that exists, that is !@#$ing with all our minds in some sort of twisted experiment.

 

And I say that with all seriousness.

I've come to respect the fact that science or the universe or whatever doesn't always make sense to "us" and isn't always intuitive. I see this as a failing of the human mind more than anything. You can't always rely on common sense, only observable evidence.

 

Maybe you're just a Brain in a Vat, there's no way to know. The best we can probably do is to try to explain what we can observe, impartially and systematically. Perhaps that will lead to some clue about the "bigger" questions.

[DC Tom]

Yes, but he is free to speculate about realities (GOD) outside of the big bang or space and time.

 

Never said he wasn't. I' m ntot arguing right or wrong here, I'm arguing the boundary between what is knowable and what must be taken on faith.

[whateverdude]

Never said he wasn't. I' m ntot arguing right or wrong here, I'm arguing the boundary between what is knowable and what must be taken on faith.

Fair enough

[Adam]

No offense, but what's the point of being involved in this discussion then?

I find it interesting. Always good to look at other point of views, even if they don't change your own.

 

Well, this is why it is such a great debate that we most likely will never ever know.

 

And I don't buy that all of a sudden a tremendous burst of energy was created out of nothing without there being an energy to create that burst. That in my view isn't logical

It isn't very logical. But, the beginning of everything that exists defies human logic, or at least, my logic.

Edited December 23, 2010 by Adam

[Gene Frenkle]

I find it interesting. Always good to look at other point of views, even if they don't change your own.

 

 

It isn't very logical. But, the beginning of everything that exists defies human logic, or at least, my logic.

 

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it.

--Aristotle

[Booster4324]

It isn't very satisfying, there's just likely no way to ever know.

 

You just have to take it on faith huh?

[Magox]

 

Maybe you're just a Brain in a Vat, there's no way to know. The best we can probably do is to try to explain what we can observe, impartially and systematically. Perhaps that will lead to some clue about the "bigger" questions.

I never heard of this before, but I've actually thought about something similar to this. Or maybe it was just because I saw the movie Matrix and THEN I thought of this. Unfortunately, I have burnt too many brain cells to recall which came first.

[DC Tom]

Well, this is why it is such a great debate that we most likely will never ever know.

 

it's axiomatic that there will always be things we can't know (Goedel and Heisenberg pretty much proved that).

 

And I don't buy that all of a sudden a tremendous burst of energy was created out of nothing without there being an energy to create that burst. That in my view isn't logical

 

Logical or not, it is empirical, explained and predicted by theory, and has in fact been observed. Wish I could explain it...bottom line is you're assuming time is extra-universal when it is in fact a feature of the universe (General Relativity), assuming a tangible physical set of properties can be attributed to the "pre" Big Bang singularity that are probably inaccurate (but in your defense, physics can't explain those characteristics yet either), and presuming "action" as a necessity to an event, which is demonstrably false as a physical principle (again, radioactive decay - an event precipitated by no triggering action).

[Magox]

You just have to take it on faith huh?

Yeah, like you're going to "induce" THAT answer out of him.

 

Logical or not, it is empirical, explained and predicted by theory, and has in fact been observed. Wish I could explain it...bottom line is you're assuming time is extra-universal when it is in fact a feature of the universe (General Relativity), assuming a tangible physical set of properties can be attributed to the "pre" Big Bang singularity that are probably inaccurate (but in your defense, physics can't explain those characteristics yet either), and presuming "action" as a necessity to an event, which is demonstrably false as a physical principle (again, radioactive decay - an event precipitated by no triggering action).

Well, as the saying goes, that is "above my pay grade".