A Universe from Nothing?

[Ben Dhyan]

In those models where time is finite, nothing enters or leaves the universe. There is still conservation of mass/energy. The universe exists throughout time.

You seem to be saying that those finite models do not consider how the universe as a universe came to be, or its fate, but deal with the finite theories of its apparent history and future in the context of developing finite understanding of its finite internal aspects?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I disagree. It is something that describes the fact that there *is* change (movement) in the universe. How those changes happen is part of the definition of time.

I would rephrase it to say that there is relative finite movement of apparent finite aspects *within* the universe. We use the concept of finite time to describe the how those finite changes happen in an eternal universe.

 

[Thief]

A particular motion within the universe may have a beginning as perceived my man, but the universe as a whole does not move.

the universe is expanding.....and gaining speed as it does so

 

[Ben Dhyan]

the universe is expanding.....and gaining speed as it does so

The claimed expansion, if true, is a natural internal aspect of the universe, it does not define the universe as a whole. So what do you think the universe is expanding into, nothing or just more universal space?

 

[Thief]

The claimed expansion, if true, is a natural internal aspect of the universe, it does not define the universe as a whole. So what do you think the universe is expanding into, nothing or just more universal space?

I saw the documentary
current observations lean to the notion our universe is like a gigantic firework pinwheel

it will spin out into the nothing.....literally
and burn out

I suppose you need a definition for ....void

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I saw the documentary
current observations lean to the notion our universe is like a gigantic firework pinwheel

it will spin out into the nothing.....literally
and burn out

I suppose you need a definition for ....void

If you saw it on TV, a gigantic firework pinwheel, I suppose it must be true..

But of course, because a state of nothing is impossible?

 

[Thief]

If you saw it on TV, a gigantic firework pinwheel, I suppose it must be true..

But of course, because a state of nothing is impossible?

the motion indicates a common starting 'point'
the motion then indicates the end ....over vast distance

back to the void

 

[Ben Dhyan]

the motion indicates a common starting 'point'
the motion then indicates the end ....over vast distance

back to the void

The motion, it true, involves a natural aspect of the universe, it is not the universe, and why would an expansion of whatever over a vast distance indicate the end?

You did not answer my question, what is the void, a nothing or what?

 

[Thief]

The motion, it true, involves a natural aspect of the universe, it is not the universe, and why would an expansion of whatever over a vast distance indicate the end?

You did not answer my question, what is the void, a nothing or what?

we get to ask God when we get there
Genesis uses the word....void
seems to describe a lack of form.....not even an atomic structure
it speaks of water.....closes tangible item having hydrogen

spot yourself as God trying to describe the most basic of structure (hydrogen)
to a wandering Jew

 

[Polymath257]

The claimed expansion, if true, is a natural internal aspect of the universe, it does not define the universe as a whole. So what do you think the universe is expanding into, nothing or just more universal space?

First of all, I consider the universe to be all of spacetime, not just one instance of it. Space is expanding into the future, but spacetime simply exists. It is similar to the fact that latitude lines 'expand' as you move north from the south pole and 'contract' again as you pass the equator. The Earth itself isn't expanding or contracting in that; only the latitude lines.

 

[Polymath257]

I would rephrase it to say that there is relative finite movement of apparent finite aspects *within* the universe. We use the concept of finite time to describe the how those finite changes happen in an eternal universe.

Yes, time is part of the universe that describes how things move within the universe.

 

[Polymath257]

You seem to be saying that those finite models do not consider how the universe as a universe came to be, or its fate, but deal with the finite theories of its apparent history and future in the context of developing finite understanding of its finite internal aspects?

Close, but not quite. These theories consider all of space and time to be combined into a single geometry-spacetime. In this, the 'universe' is all of spacetime--all of space and all of time. Since time is part of that whole, and since causality only makes sense inside the universe, the whole notion of 'coming to be' is problematic. There is nothing outside the universe. The universe just is. There is no 'becoming' because there is no time outside to have a process of becoming.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

we get to ask God when we get there
Genesis uses the word....void
seems to describe a lack of form.....not even an atomic structure
it speaks of water.....closes tangible item having hydrogen

spot yourself as God trying to describe the most basic of structure (hydrogen)
to a wandering Jew

Ok, then the void is a part of the universe....the universe is an indivisible one.

Names for all the aspects do not represent the whole, they are just distinctions made to help man in understanding it conceptually.....gravity, zpe, redshift, void (as you define it), dark energy, dark matter, mass, C, space-time, space, time, em radiation, atomic particles, singularities, etc., etc.... the reality represented by each concept are describing observed or theorized aspects of one thing, the universe, the one that is the all.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Yes, time is part of the universe that describes how things move within the universe.

Close...time though is not real in the sense the things that are moving are real, it is real in the sense of being a abstract conceptualization to help describe the movement in terms the human mind can comprehend.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Close, but not quite. These theories consider all of space and time to be combined into a single geometry-spacetime. In this, the 'universe' is all of spacetime--all of space and all of time. Since time is part of that whole, and since causality only makes sense inside the universe, the whole notion of 'coming to be' is problematic. There is nothing outside the universe. The universe just is. There is no 'becoming' because there is no time outside to have a process of becoming.

Ok, I agree that the universe just is, and there is nothing outside the universe. But one must therefore conclude that the universe is infinite, for to suggest it is not is to imply a boundary on its size, and since nothing does not exist, it is not possible for a boundary to exist.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

First of all, I consider the universe to be all of spacetime, not just one instance of it. Space is expanding into the future, but spacetime simply exists. It is similar to the fact that latitude lines 'expand' as you move north from the south pole and 'contract' again as you pass the equator. The Earth itself isn't expanding or contracting in that; only the latitude lines.

I do not see how your analogy wrt lines of latitude shows the existence of spacetime. Analogies, metaphors, etc., are handy to convey principles, but if the principle itself is not valid, then the analogy is meaningless. Spacetime is a mental construct used in some models of the universe, but there is no proof that spacetime exists as something real as space is real, or matter is real.

 

[MysticPhD]

Close, but not quite. These theories consider all of space and time to be combined into a single geometry-spacetime. In this, the 'universe' is all of spacetime--all of space and all of time. Since time is part of that whole, and since causality only makes sense inside the universe, the whole notion of 'coming to be' is problematic. There is nothing outside the universe. The universe just is. There is no 'becoming' because there is no time outside to have a process of becoming.

This is not quite true. The time we measure and experience is a function of our awareness, but our awareness takes some time to form ("quantum time") before we can begin to measure and experience time. Therefore, there IS time outside to have a process of becoming. The quantum time that enables our awareness to form is what Whitehead referred to as the "creative advance of nature" which he distinguished from our measured time. This quantum time is what enables the entire volume of space-time to expand giving the appearance of exceeding the speed of light. In short, our reality is "growing" at an increasingly accelerated rate which violates the constraints within the "measured" reality we inhabit.

 

[Polymath257]

Close...time though is not real in the sense the things that are moving are real, it is real in the sense of being a abstract conceptualization to help describe the movement in terms the human mind can comprehend.

Time is just as real as space. Both are, in a sense, conceptualizations. In both, we use instruments (parts of the universe) to measure them. One physicist said "Time is defined so that motion looks simple".

 

[Polymath257]

Close...time though is not real in the sense the things that are moving are real, it is real in the sense of being a abstract conceptualization to help describe the movement in terms the human mind can comprehend.

Is space 'real'? Time is just as real as space. In fact, the two are deeply connected via the geometry of the universe (spacetime).

 

[Polymath257]

Ok, I agree that the universe just is, and there is nothing outside the universe. But one must therefore conclude that the universe is infinite, for to suggest it is not is to imply a boundary on its size, and since nothing does not exist, it is not possible for a boundary to exist.

Your mistake is thinking that finiteness requires a boundary. If spacetime is curved, then it is possible to be finite and have no boundary.