A Universe from Nothing?

[Regolith Based Lifeforms]

Well, i Googled Maya and Brahma.....
Quite a head-full.
Then i watched this thread spiral into a singularity and basically end with God seeking and finding himself.
That story had a happy ending.
Now when i go to work, i can be free of my former delusions and daydreams. I can focus purely on any task at hand with a clear mind that operates most efficiently from an initial point of stillness that never goes away no matter how hectic and busy things are.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

s

Well, i Googled Maya and Brahma.....
Quite a head-full.
Then i watched this thread spiral into a singularity and basically end with God seeking and finding himself.
That story had a happy ending.
Now when i go to work, i can be free of my former delusions and daydreams. I can focus purely on any task at hand with a clear mind that operates most efficiently from an initial point of stillness that never goes away no matter how hectic and busy things are.

Yes I grant you that speaking of the mysteries must sound unsound to those who are unfamiliar, but thank you for offering what I presume is a satirical but humorous retort, I enjoyed it.

Btw,, we were talking about Brahman, absolute non-dual being, not Brahma, a deity associated with creation, a part of the dualistic tradition.

 

[Regolith Based Lifeforms]

s
Yes I grant you that speaking of the mysteries must sound unsound to those who are unfamiliar, but thank you for offering what I presume is a satirical but humorous retort, I enjoyed it.

Btw,, we were talking about Brahman, absolute non-dual being, not Brahma, a deity associated with creation, a part of the dualistic tradition.

Thanks for the good humor and the correction. i was in a hurry and debating which spelling to use, knowing there was a difference, big difference, but i was aiming at the absolute non-duality.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

Most theories ... AND religions ... begin with the universe being "nothing"; including Genesis: "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth. Now the Earth was formless and empty ...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Most theories ... AND religions ... begin with the universe being "nothing"; including Genesis: "In the beginning, God created the heavens and the Earth. Now the Earth was formless and empty ...

There are theories and religions that do not have a beginning, so the miraculous 'something from nothing' problem does not arise.

 

[osgart]

perhaps the universe goes in an endless cycle of physical causes. order to disorder, back to order again.

or it's an infinite regression of dominoes. But to say it all began from nothing is to me a total impossibility unless something outside of the universe does exist. Perhaps an endless sea of consciousness eternal.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

perhaps the universe goes in an endless cycle of physical causes. order to disorder, back to order again.

or it's an infinite regression of dominoes. But to say it all began from nothing is to me a total impossibility unless something outside of the universe does exist. Perhaps an endless sea of consciousness eternal.

Yes, there are endless cycles of creation and destruction going on, from the subatomic to galaxies, the cosmos is eternal.

If there were something 'outside' the universe, what would exist between the universe and that something?

 

[`mud]

Ahhhh....yes....what would be that container ???

 

[osgart]

well it's all speculation, but that's a fun thing to do.

whoever said the laws of physics are unchanging, one day those might break down as well. is it the big crunch, and than perhaps another big bang?

maybe there's space within space, and the universe is a giant accordion. speculation without evidence you could say a million things.

even with evidence of something about it we may not have the whole picture, and we may never.

didn't they recently map dark matter, in a distant galaxy? maybe dark energy and dark matter are the missing links to the whole puzzle.

I still think what lies outside of the universe is a valid question, but I wouldn't know how to answer it.

 

[gnostic]

whoever said the laws of physics are unchanging, one day those might break down as well. is it the big crunch, and than perhaps another big bang?

Newton's theory on gravity and motion were fine for centuries, but they were limited to what happened here on Earth, without consideration of what are really happening in deep space, in other parts of our solar system, our galaxy or more distant galaxies or the universe.

That's where Einstein's Relativity takes over.

And then there are matters that Newton have disregarded, like subatomic particles. Ancient Greeks and Indians have already postulate about atoms as early as mid-1st millennium BCE, but even Newton didn't know anything about what make up the atoms, such as nucleus, proton, neutron and electron. And he certainly wasn't aware of smaller particles of quantum size.

Newton's law still have their use, but it was quite limited.

Physics can only progress if they are allow to investigate and innovate.

Biology for instance, in regarding to evolution, we are not stuck with Darwin's original theory on Natural Selection. Over the decades, his theory has been corrected and updated by other biologists, and new evolutionary mechanisms have been introduced in the 20th century, like mutations, genetic drift and gene flow. Also advances in technology have also given us better understanding of evolution, including DNA and genome project.

You have to understand that science allow for not only progress, but also correcting and updating existing theories, or even replacing certain theories with better alternative, due to better evidences or better data.

 

[Polymath257]

Newton's theory on gravity and motion were fine for centuries, but they were limited to what happened here on Earth, without consideration of what are really happening in deep space, in other parts of our solar system, our galaxy or more distant galaxies or the universe.

Not true. Newton's theory of gravity works quite well in our solar system. It helped to predict the existence of Neptune, after all.

It is also quite useful for most binary star systems, and for many cosmic situations.

Where Newton's law fails is when speeds are close to that of light or when the gravitational field is much larger than that from the sun.

That's where Einstein's Relativity takes over.

And then there are matters that Newton have disregarded, like subatomic particles. Ancient Greeks and Indians have already postulate about atoms as early as mid-1st millennium BCE, but even Newton didn't know anything about what make up the atoms, such as nucleus, proton, neutron and electron. And he certainly wasn't aware of smaller particles of quantum size.

The modern atomic theory wasn't formulated until the early 1800's. Newton and his immediate followers generally assumed that matter was continuous and not discrete (as in atoms).

Newton's law still have their use, but it was quite limited.

Again, not quite true. Pretty much any machine made by humans works in the Newtonian realm. We send probes to other planets using Newton's laws. We build buildings and bridges using Newton's laws.

Now, if you want to investigate atoms (as opposed to chemistry), you will have to move away from Newtonian mechanics. If you want to investigate black holes or neutron stars, you will have to move away from Newtonian mechanics.

But if you want to send a probe to Pluto, Newtonian mechanics is plenty good enough. If you want to watch bacteria, Newton's laws are quite fine. If you want to look at most medium to small stars, Newtonian mechanics does quite well for the gravitational aspects. The nuclear aspects will go past Newton, though.

Physics can only progress if they are allow to investigate and innovate.

Agreed

Biology for instance, in regarding to evolution, we are not stuck with Darwin's original theory on Natural Selection. Over the decades, his theory has been corrected and updated by other biologists, and new evolutionary mechanisms have been introduced in the 20th century, like mutations, genetic drift and gene flow. Also advances in technology have also given us better understanding of evolution, including DNA and genome project.

You have to understand that science allow for not only progress, but also correcting and updating existing theories, or even replacing certain theories with better alternative, due to better evidences or better data.

Agreed.

 

[gnostic]

Again, not quite true. Pretty much any machine made by humans works in the Newtonian realm. We send probes to other planets using Newton's laws. We build buildings and bridges using Newton's laws.

I am not denying that Newton's theory are still being used today, because everything that I have learned in my civil engineering course, involved Newtonian physics of motion and gravity.

But there are still limits that Newton didn't foresee, when concerning large bodies in the cosmo, and any quantum particle smaller than electron.

I am not saying that Newtonian physics are obsolete, just that physicists of 20th century and onwards have extended the theory of gravity and motion.

For instance, Darwin had started evolution with natural selection, but later biologists not updated his own theory for the 20th century, but later biologists have discovered alternative mechanisms that Darwin has thought of.

We can look at General Relativity and Newton's physics as 2 distinct theories on gravity, or we can view as one theory on gravity as a system, with GR (and possibly the theoretical quantum gravity) as an extension of Newton's theory.

For me, it doesn't matter to me.

 

[gnostic]

didn't they recently map dark matter, in a distant galaxy? maybe dark energy and dark matter are the missing links to the whole puzzle.

DE & DM are still up in the air, but yes, there have been more data regarding to both, since the WMAP & Planck space missions, when these space probes have given us much more detailed images of CMBR (Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation).

CMBR are the oldest detectable and measurable photons of a young universe. CMBR is older than the earliest quasars and earlier than the first generation of stars.

With Dark Energy, they are trying to account for why the universe is still expanding, and even accelerating in its expansion.

You have mentioned the Big Crunch. That's still pretty much hypothetical and theoretical at this stage, because there are no observable evidences that the universe is contracting, and they think the Dark Energy is the reason why.

As to Dark Matter, Melissa O'Neil is a bad-4ss hottie.

I just love woman in black...with a pair of semi-autos.

Oops! Sorry, getting sidetracked here.

Where was I?

Oh, yeah. Dark Matter is matters that don't absorb or emit light (or other electromagnetic waves), but due to their masses, they have gravitational forces, so it can affect other cosmic bodies, like stars, gases, dust, etc.

 

[godnotgod]

As to Dark Matter, Melissa O'Neil is a bad-4ss hottie.

Melissa is too shallow for me. I much prefer someone like.....

Guanyin, also known as Guanyin Pusa, is Chinese “Goddess of Mercy”. She is considered to always help the distressed and hungry and gives comfort and aid wherever it is needed.

a reflection of heaven's beauty...where the real power lies.

 

[osgart]

devastating. guanyinian women are where it's at.

 

[godnotgod]

You have to understand that science allow for not only progress, but also correcting and updating existing theories, or even replacing certain theories with better alternative, due to better evidences or better data.

Science is like being in a dark room, and someone cracks the door just a bit to let a little light in. You begin to make out some images in the room, but still are not sure as to what they are. As the door is slowly opened, the imagery becomes clearer, so that what you thought was a certain thing, turns out to be something else. But you get hung up on the forms your attention is captivated by, and are not paying attention to the light that is illuminating them. The light is always the same; it is consciousness, but mind sculpts it into a narrow beam and thus creates a limited view which can never arrive at a true understanding of reality. This kind of view is called 'spotlight attention'. But when you pay attention to the light, it becomes 'floodlight attention', where the whole is taken in all at once.

"We create a certain theory and then there is the honeymoon with the theory. For a few years things go perfectly well. Then reality asserts itself. Reality brings up a few things and the theory gets into difficulty because we had excluded a few facts. Those facts will protest, they will sabotage your theory, they will assert themselves. In the eighteenth century science was absolutely certain, now it is certain no more. Now a new theory has come: the theory of uncertainty.

Just a hundred and fifty years ago Immanuel Kant came across this fact in Germany. He said that reason is very limited; it sees only a certain part of reality and starts believing ‘that this is the whole. This has been the trouble. Sooner or later we discover further realities and the old whole is in conflict with the new vision*. Immanuel Kant attempted to show that there were ineluctable limits to reason, that reason is very limited. But nobody seems to have heard, nobody has cared about Immanuel Kant. Nobody cares much about philosophers.

But science in this century has at last caught up with Kant. Now Heinsenberg, in physics, and Godel, in mathematics, have shown ineluctable limits to human reason. They open up to us a glimpse of a nature which is irrational and paradoxical to the very core. Whatsoever we have been saying about nature has all gone wrong. All principles go wrong because nature is not synonymous with reason, nature is bigger than reason.

Osho

Osho - Zen is paradoxical because Zen is not a philosophy - Captizen.COM

* As exemplified, for example, in the current conflict between the old materialist paradigm, and the new findings in Quantum Physics.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

As to Dark Matter, Melissa O'Neil is a bad-4ss hottie.

Don't mean to be a Killjoy but this.....

 

[godnotgod]

Don't mean to be a Killjoy but this.....

aahhh....too much baggage.

 

[gnostic]

Don't mean to be a Killjoy but this.....

Ah, yes, another hottie.

But we were talking about Dark Energy and Dark Matter...hence, Portia Lin aka Two.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Ah, yes, another hottie.

But we were talking about Dark Energy and Dark Matter...hence, Portia Lin aka Two.

We were, but now I'm off to catch another episode of Dark Matter and Killjoys...