Is there genuinely good evidence that the universe could have been eternal/infinite into the past?

[Heyo]

Yeah I'm struggling to understand it.

You are not alone.

 

[QuestioningMind]

So don't bother thinking about it then? Since there's so much that we don't know?

Personally I find it fascinating to contemplate, just don't go expecting any definitive answers anytime soon.

 

[firedragon]

Philosophy is used by far to many people to prove to themselves anything that strikes their fancy happens to be true.

You just used philosophy in your sentence. So does what you said apply to you?

 

[Valjean]

So why believe that the universe is 14 billion years then?

Several observations. The clearest is to take the observed rate of expansion and extrapolate backwards to singularity
How old is the universe?
Age of the universe - Wikipedia

So our minds create reality?

Yes, in several senses.
1. The Copenhagen model of quantum theory describes how a quantum state is indeterminant; "reality" exists in superposition, as a sort of field of potentiality, which only collapses into an observable state when actually observed. So when you wake in the morning and open your eyes, the world collapses into an observable reality. Here's How Schrodinger's Cat Works

2. In another sense, your senses are both very limited, and very abstract. What you see when you observe something in no way represents the actual thing (if there even is a thing). It's an abstraction created in your mind from identical electrochemical neural impulses sorted into a workable representation that enables you to navigate the world.

Imagine a pilot on a moonless night landing a plane by instrument at an airfield. She can see nothing out the window, but all the dials and gauges give a representation of external reality sufficient for her purposes.
Like the dials on the dashboard, the 'reality' we observe is not "real" reality, but it's sufficient for practical purposes. It's a self-generated abstraction.

 

[Aupmanyav]

So why believe that the universe is 14 billion years then?

That is since inflation. Science does not know what happened earlier than that.

So our minds create reality?

Our minds create a scene, not reality.

 

[RestlessSoul]

So again, if beginnings and endings don't actually exist, then we're infinite beings then?

As dewdrops on a lotus leaf

 

[Meow Mix]

Thanks for taking the time to respond to my question and simplifying it as much as possible. I'm gonna have to read over a couple things a few times to understand them but overall I think I get what you're saying. Can you please explain the difference between the universe itself and the present local state? Cause I'm struggling to see the difference between the two.

I am on a camping trip right now, but I can type this up on my phone: by local state, I mean the visible universe. The state of what we see can be said to have began, but that doesn’t mean that “existence began” if that makes sense. There could have been stuff existing before all of this. (In metatime, for instance, other universes in inflation as one example. There are other examples. In LQG, loop quantum gravity, and others, it is possible that universes are created as special solutions in black holes. So there is another possibility where a universe “begins” but isn’t an ontological beginning. Etc.)

 

[WalterTrull]

So our minds create reality?

Doesn’t seem likely, because of shared realities. Likely mind is the only reality. It would seem to create the light that we share. It also seems that we are able to walk in that light and have a reasonable ability to filter and shape it. Kind of interesting and fun.

 

[Brickjectivity]

So why believe that the universe is 14 billion years then?

Its a model, and it fairly accurately shows the formation of stars and galaxies in our observable section of space. Its based on the spread of space using telescopes. To all appearances space converges to a point 14 billion years ago.

 

[Meow Mix]

Re: all these questions about the age of the universe.

i have a series of posts in Science & Religion section called Understanding Cosmology.

The sections on the density parameters and the benchmark model goes into some depth on how we know the age of the universe very accurately.

 

[viole]

Now, I'm no cosmologist and I'm terrible at understanding science but are there good philosophical and scientific reasons to believe that the universe could be eternal/infinite into the past and thus didn't need to have a beginning and thus a God/creator to begin it? Or is an uncreated/beginning-less universe just wishful thinking? Please let me know and for you scientists and sophisticated philosophers out there, can you please explain it to me like I'm 5? I'd really appreciate it lol.

There are good reasons to believe that, for the Universe as whole, time does not flow. And therefore, it has not a past.

Ciao

- viole

 

[nPeace]

You can't put borders on beginning and endings.

It's impossible. Because everything has dimension and dynamics which goes into infinity.

Essentially you cannot contain any beginning or ending like a box because there's always going to be an 'outside' of that box.

Yes. The begining and end has no boundary or containment. That is impossible. Isaiah 43:10 ; Isaiah 44:6 ; Revelation 22:13

 

[nPeace]

Its a model, and it fairly accurately shows the formation of stars and galaxies in our observable section of space. Its based on the spread of space using telescopes. To all appearances space converges to a point 14 billion years ago.

Are you sure appearances is the correct word to use here?
Certainly it's not to all appearances, but from many reasoning...

For example, it is assumed that there was a super sonic inflation that defied the laws of physics. Then it was assumed that that inflation encountered Zeus or Thor, whose powers were too great to overpower, and so the inflation rate leveled out to a constant flow for roughly 13 billion year. Just a bit of humor added.

Wouldn't the word reasoning be more accurate, and somewhat better than assuming, do you think?

 

[URAVIP2ME]

Now, I'm no cosmologist and I'm terrible at understanding science but are there good philosophical and scientific reasons to believe that the universe could be eternal/infinite into the past and thus didn't need to have a beginning and thus a God/creator to begin it? Or is an uncreated/beginning-less universe just wishful thinking? Please let me know and for you scientists and sophisticated philosophers out there, can you please explain it to me like I'm 5? I'd really appreciate it lol.

In Scripture God is eternal-infinite according to Psalms 90:2
When God sends forth His spirit things are created - Psalms 104:30
The God of the Bible is also Creator - Revelation 4:11
So, in that sense God created both the invisible realm and the visible realm.
As to how really far back, we'd have to wait until those new scrolls (books) become available - Revelation 20:12

 

[URAVIP2ME]

So why believe that the universe is 14 billion years then?

As to why believe 14 billion is based on the accuracy of microwaves CMBR (Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation)
As to how such microwaves would react in different situations I suppose that still remains to be seen.

 

[Brickjectivity]

Are you sure appearances is the correct word to use here?
Certainly it's not to all appearances, but from many reasoning...

For example, it is assumed that there was a super sonic inflation that defied the laws of physics. Then it was assumed that that inflation encountered Zeus or Thor, whose powers were too great to overpower, and so the inflation rate leveled out to a constant flow for roughly 13 billion year. Just a bit of humor added.

Wouldn't the word reasoning be more accurate, and somewhat better than assuming, do you think?

I'm not attempting to fool anybody. I hear you, but the key word is 'Model'. The Big Bang Theory is a model, and it does a good job providing a calendar. Currently 14 billion years is modeled age which based upon observations and calculations, measurements and reason. Its not the final answer, but it is something that helps. You have to have some sort of time scale when studying stars, the distances between them, the expansion of space, the immense energies in stars and black holes. All of that energy is like an accounting problem. Our sun is an accounting problem, too. Why does it not explode or burn itself out? We have to try and measure its size, measure its content, measure the rates at which it does things etc. Physics is an accounting problem, and Astronomy is too. Its all about finding out what goes in, what comes out and making sure every bit is on the spreadsheet.

 

[nPeace]

I'm not attempting to fool anybody. I hear you, but the key word is 'Model'. The Big Bang Theory is a model, and it does a good job providing a calendar. Currently 14 billion years is modeled age which based upon observations and calculations, measurements and reason. Its not the final answer, but it is something that helps. You have to have some sort of time scale when studying stars, the distances between them, the expansion of space, the immense energies in stars and black holes. All of that energy is like an accounting problem. Our sun is an accounting problem, too. Why does it not explode or burn itself out? We have to try and measure its size, measure its content, measure the rates at which it does things etc. Physics is an accounting problem, and Astronomy is too. Its all about finding out what goes in, what comes out and making sure every bit is on the spreadsheet.

I don't think you had any motive, or bad intention.
I just latched on to your word usage, since it doesn't convey the truth, and I think that's important. That all.

I really have no problem with people saying what they believe. if that's what they believe, it's their belief.
However, to all appearances... ?
Are you sure that's correct. We're talking pure conjecture here - an opinion or conclusion formed on the basis of incomplete information.

Isn't that what religion is accused of.
We say there is evidence of God in the world.... by all appearance? It is clearly evident - clearly seen.
So clear... by all appearances... that only those who supress the truth, deny it.

Perhaps I am reading too much out of your expressions?
Edit @Brickjectivity
If a story is created, in order to make sense of reality, or to convey reality, do we not consider that a myth, though?

 

[nPeace]

Seems the conjectured singularity is also wishful thinking.

 

[Etritonakin]

If universe basically means the "one thing", then it boils down to the idea that there could never have been absolutely nothing -as absolute nothing can not become anything.
Otherwise, time really doesn't apply in the same way at a point where the one thing is a simple as possible.
The one thing never did not exist (sometimes a double negative is best) -so it has "always" been -it's just different now.

 

[nPeace]

Big Bang - Wikipedia
For several decades, the scientific community was divided between supporters of the Big Bang and the rival steady-state model which both offered explanations for the observed expansion, but the steady-state model stipulated an eternal universe in contrast to the Big Bang's finite age. In 1964, the CMB was discovered, which convinced many cosmologists that the steady-state theory was falsified, since, unlike the steady-state theory, the hot Big Bang predicted a uniform background radiation throughout the universe caused by the high temperatures and densities in the distant past. A wide range of empirical evidence strongly favors the Big Bang, which is now essentially universally accepted.

Promoting the eternal universe idea is also promoting wishful thinking.