Let's not talk about the Big Bang

[mikkel_the_dane]

There was no 'before'.

All that exists, yes.


No, you are giving existence to the non-existent. It is NOT the case that there was a point *before* the BB. There was no 'then', which implies a progression. The universe of spacetime simply exists. No progression. Just existence. No t<0, only t>0.

Existence and non-existence is philosophy as abstract concept you can't measure in ether case with scientific instruments and you can't observe that.

 

[We Never Know]

There was no 'before'.

All that exists, yes.


No, you are giving existence to the non-existent. It is NOT the case that there was a point *before* the BB. There was no 'then', which implies a progression. The universe of spacetime simply exists. No progression. Just existence. No t<0, only t>0.

That's your belief.
It didn't exist. It did exist. It poofed.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

I hear what you’re saying, but the thing is, if that is true then “time” is an utterly abstract entity, and merely descriptive of other things which do exist while having no existence of its own. See what I mean?

You could say the same about literally everything.

IE: "cats" don't exist. only collections of atoms exist and "cat" is an abstract concept referring to one specific way in which such atoms are collected.

I don't see the point in such drivel.

 

[TagliatelliMonster]

That's your belief.
It didn't exist. It did exist. It poofed.

Not a belief.
Instead, a logical consequence of what we observe to be the case.

"Always" = a period of time. All of time, to be exact
Pick any point in time. There was a universe then.
At no point in time did the universe not exist.

Therefor, the universe has always existed.
There is no point in time when the universe did not exist.

If you think there was, then please point to that point in time when you think there was no universe.

 

[ratiocinator]

That's your belief.
It didn't exist. It did exist. It poofed.

Yet again: if time started at BB, then it never (there was never a time at which it) didn't exist.

 

[We Never Know]

Yet again: if time started at BB, then it never (there was never a time at which it) didn't exist.

"If"

All you have to do is go all the way back and show your "if". But wait, you can't. Its a belief.
It wasn't. It was. It poofed.

 

[We Never Know]

Not a belief.
Instead, a logical consequence of what we observe to be the case.

"Always" = a period of time. All of time, to be exact
Pick any point in time. There was a universe then.
At no point in time did the universe not exist.

Therefor, the universe has always existed.
There is no point in time when the universe did not exist.

If you think there was, then please point to that point in time when you think there was no universe.

How did the BB start?

 

[Polymath257]

Yes you did. You quoted only the very first sentence in my post and completely ignored the second sentence that says "No time, no universe because there was no pre correct?"

What existed before the BB?
-No time, no universe because there was no pre correct?
.
What existed after the BB?
-Time, the universe, etc. existed post BB correct?

It wasn't then it was is straight forward with the BB theory

What wasn't-Time, the universe, etc. No pre BB
Then what was- Time, the universe etc. Post BB

Don't use the word then.

Here's another way to think about it: *outside* of the universe there is no space or time.

Inside of the universe, there is space and time, but only time after a certain time.

 

[Polymath257]

"If"

All you have to do is go all the way back and show your "if". But wait, you can't. Its a belief.
It wasn't. It was. It poofed.

No, there is no proof of that 'if'. And, in fact, that is part of the point: we don't know. But in our best description right now, there is no before the BB.

 

[Polymath257]

How did the BB start?

Meaningless question: it assumes causality when it doesn't apply.

 

[We Never Know]

Don't use the word then.

Here's another way to think about it: *outside* of the universe there is no space or time.

Inside of the universe, there is space and time, but only time after a certain time.

Don't claim there wasn't when its unknown.

 

[Polymath257]

So you quote mine my post completely ignoring the second sentence thats says..

"What existed before the BB?
-No time, no universe because there was no pre correct"

Which already addressed your quote mine.

Once again, the answer to 'what existed before the BB?' is precisely the same as 'what exists south of the south pole?'

If you say so.... I'm the one stuck in a box

Well, you seem to be caught in a loop by always asking what existed before the BB or saying there was nothing *then* there was something (do you not see that implies a progression in time?).

 

[We Never Know]

Meaningless question: it assumes causality when it doesn't apply.

lol. Its unknown.

How can the BB, which caused time, space, space-time, the universe ..... be uncaused.

 

[Polymath257]

Knowing doesn’t require verification. At least not for me.

It's sort of in the definition of 'knowledge': justified true belief. To justify is another way of saying verify.

 

[Polymath257]

lol. Its unknown.

How can the BB, which caused time, space, space-time, the universe ..... be uncaused.

Because all causality exists within time.

 

[Polymath257]

The reasoning is they are reasonable

Nope. That's circular. It doesn't justify anything.

 

[Polymath257]

Don't claim there wasn't when its unknown.

I'm discussing the best theory we have at this point. That is where the BB terminology comes from.

 

[We Never Know]

Once again, the answer to 'what existed before the BB?' is precisely the same as 'what exists south of the south pole?'


Well, you seem to be caught in a loop by always asking what existed before the BB or saying there was nothing *then* there was something (do you not see that implies a progression in time?).

It didn't exist. Then it did.

Look at it this way....There was no expansion, then there was expansion. Even the BB model supports that.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

I'm discussing the best theory we have at this point. That is where the BB terminology comes from.

Best in part theoretical theory as I understand it. Or otherwise you just switch between theory and theoretical and don't state so?

 

[We Never Know]

I'm discussing the best theory we have at this point. That is where the BB terminology comes from.

You don't know. I don't know.
As long as you claim(believe) there wasnt, I will claim(believe) there was.