Let's not talk about the Big Bang

[Ben Dhyan]

If you act properly, which means to avoid strawman arguments, avoid false dichotomies, learn what is and what is not evidence, and most important acknowledge when you are wrong, then you can begin to demand answers.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You explain it or be quiet. After all I have no duty to explain anything to you.

It didn't happen because timespace never had a beginning it always was.

 

[YoursTrue]

Hawking has changed his belief, he now believes that time existed before the BB, the link is somewhere back in the thread.

lol, he figured things out?

 

[YoursTrue]

It didn't happen because timespace never had a beginning it always was.

hmm so time was measured by something else I suppose. lol. goodness, now we have timespace. Although I worked for a publication that had sci-fi authors, famous ones, I wasn't too attached to science fiction even when I was an atheist. But this is a bit far out about 'timespace.' Anyway, God is greater than anything and everything, including you and me. So -- that leaves a lot open but -- timespace? Is it like e=mc2?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

lol, he figured things out?

He realized the BB from nothing scenario would be impossible to defend in the long run, but he only muddied the waters further by saying the time was bent time, whatever that is.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

hmm so time was measured by something else I suppose. lol. goodness, now we have timespace. Although I worked for a publication that had sci-fi authors, famous ones, I wasn't too attached to science fiction even when I was an atheist. But this is a bit far out about 'timespace.' Anyway, God is greater than anything and everything, including you and me. So -- that leaves a lot open but -- timespace? Is it like e=mc2?

Timespace is 3D space continuing to exist in time. So there was no timespace before the BB, then there was 3D space existing in time, ie. spacetime.
But what was outside the BB sphere of initially zero size? I think that is like asking what was before the BB, not allowed.

 

[YoursTrue]

Timespace is 3D space continuing to exist in time. So there was no timespace before the BB, then there was 3D space existing in time, ie. spacetime.
But what was outside the BB sphere of initially zero size? I think that is like asking what was before the BB, not allowed.

ooh ooh you're taking me back to my hippie days. timespace - 3D space - ok, sure sure.

 

[YoursTrue]

But! @Ben Dhyan we measure time by the earth's rotation or something like that.

 

[YoursTrue]

He realized the BB from nothing scenario would be impossible to defend in the long run, but he only muddied the waters further by saying the time was bent time, whatever that is.

Yeah, I'm reading his works as he opines about the universe and thinking, what? he knows? I don't think so. But that's me now. I wouldn't have thought he didn't really know what he was speculating about before I came to examine these things. Thanks. Just to say while I am sympathetic with him in a certain sense, I hope he is resurrected and will have a better life and come to terms with God.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

ooh ooh you're taking me back to my hippie days. timespace - 3D space - ok, sure sure.

Space itself is 3D, but because it continues to exist, the 3D space travels in time as the 4th dimension, ie., the 3D space just continues to exist and this continuation of existence is called time and so the 4D is spacetime.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

But! @Ben Dhyan we measure time by the earth's rotation or something like that.

Yes, so the concept of time is nothing more than existence keeping on existing, measurements of time periods like earth's rotation, etc., are periods of existence that involve regular periods, Then dividing that down into hours, minutes, and seconds, using as a proxy, pendulum swing counters, electronic cycle period counters, or some such, and bingo, humans have a standard for keeping a track of the passage of existence existing, known as time.

So time is not an independent entity, it is merely that fact that the universe continues to exist. Clocks are just instruments that act as a proxy for measuring standard periods of existence existing.

Now when the BB scientists say there was no "before" the BB, it is because there was nothing yet existing to continue to exist, hence no time. But if you say then there was nothing existing then, they say....well you know, it's just blasphemous to them.

 

[gnostic]

OK, Polymath, that statement is a big ambiguous and I'd like to know exactlyi what you mean. Are you saying that matter and energy were always there before the universe existetd? Or are you saying matter, energy and the universe always existed?

There is no before the universe "existed".

Everything that exist now, can only exist in the universe. That's also true in the first fraction of second of the Universe (eg the Planck Epoch).

There are no "before the universe", and no "outside of the universe".

 

[Polymath257]

But it is still a redshift not related to doppler, will you give me a yes on that, no further commentary required.

I answered this above. It is NOT a red-shift in the technical sense. It does not affect all wavelengths proportionally, like a red-shift does.

Compton scattering *can* produce a reddening, but it does so in a manner very different than a Doppler, gravitational, or expansion red-shift. And that is how we know that the cosmological red-shift is NOT due to Compton scattering.

That said, Compton scattering *is* studied and is one aspect of the anisotropies in the CMBR.

So, you are getting all of the specifics wrong when you say Compton scattering produces a red-shift.

 

[Polymath257]

You said that that time began at the BB, it follows logically that no time means nothing existing.

Which is why I phrase it as 'there is no before'. That doesn't give the ambiguity of your statement that seems to say that a *state* of nothingness exists. That is incorrect.

 

[Polymath257]

This no south of the south pole is irrelevant to my question, I deal in reality, not imagined scenarios.

Yes, that is a better reference, I will have a read, thank you.

Is not ""zero size" the equivalent of nothing.

No. Read the theory.

I am not asking about the state of the universe "before" the BB, I am saying that nothing is not a state, it is the absence of time, it is absolute nothing, and from nothing, the BB began. Or to put it another way, from no spacetime, the BB spacetime began.

No, there was no 'from nothing'. BB spacetime *exists*.

 

[Polymath257]

BB spacetime beginning from no time, explain the science or be quiet.

BB spacetime exists only after a start time. There is no before that time.

 

[viole]

If there is no time, no space, no space-time....

How does something start?

In the same way God started.
It doesn't.

For instance: it is absurd to ask when time started, since starting makes no sense without time. It is like asking where did space start?

Ciao

- viole

 

[Polymath257]

OK, Polymath, that statement is a big ambiguous and I'd like to know exactlyi what you mean. Are you saying that matter and energy were always there before the universe existetd? Or are you saying matter, energy and the universe always existed? Thanks.

I was very specific in what I said.

Whenever the universe existed, so did space, time, matter, and energy.

Once again, there was no 'before', so the answer to your first question is NO.

The second question is ambiguous: do you mean 'matter, energy, and the universe existed for all time'? If so, then the answer is yes.

Do you mean 'matter, energy, and the universe existed for an infinite amount fo time'? If so, the answer is no in BB cosmology, but we don't know in the real universe (it depends on which version of quantum gravity is correct).

 

[Polymath257]

You opinion is worth that from which the BB arose.

In standard BB cosmology, the BB did not 'arise'.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

BB spacetime exists only after a start time. There is no before that time.

Here is the joke about all positives and negatives. They are in the mind and work differently for the physical, formal cognitive, the social and the individual and when you try to add them up(coherence) as making positive sense you can't.
In effect you are a rationalist and I am a skeptic, when it comes to that game.