What came before the Big Bang?

[Thief]

Life is not mystery to me. I'm actually very content with my life and have purpose with it.

I think you mean after life when you speak of spirit and souls. That, I have zero credit at the moment concerning preparation.

I'm perfectly ok with it. One important goal outside of raising my kids is to witness most of mans technological discoveries before dying.

A possible point of agreement.
We have five senses all geared to introduce this reality into our thoughts and feelings.

We are here to learn.
All that we can.
The body will produce a unique soul on each occasion.

 

[suncowiam]

A possible point of agreement.
We have five senses all geared to introduce this reality into our thoughts and feelings.

We are here to learn.
All that we can.
The body will produce a unique soul on each occasion.

Cool, man.

And I hope before I die, without any predisposition, that we can answer more of this question what happened before the big bang.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

No, not at all. We know what the center of something is in the finite world, but not in the world of the infinite, because there is none, and that is because all points are a center. All points are here, now, no matter where you stand, making them central. We can say that because there is no Absolute Center to invalidate them as centers. All ocean wave-forms are made of the same substance as the formless sea: water. Where is the center of water? Everywhere, because water has the same nature everywhere it exists. And so it is with the universe.

Reading the following may give you a better picture of what I am saying:

The Holographic Universe

There is no "center" of the ocean. Mainly because such a phrase would only be able to describe something that the ocean is not. It fits within boundaries and can be useful within certain boundaries.

That is all it is. That is what we mean by "center". However when you are talking about infinite terms then you loose that value. There is no "edge", "center" ect ect ect. How could "center" have any meaning except you want to twist it to try and fit your phrasing?

 

[godnotgod]

There is no "center" of the ocean. Mainly because such a phrase would only be able to describe something that the ocean is not. It fits within boundaries and can be useful within certain boundaries.

That is all it is. That is what we mean by "center". However when you are talking about infinite terms then you loose that value. There is no "edge", "center" ect ect ect. How could "center" have any meaning except you want to twist it to try and fit your phrasing?

It has meaning because consciousness gives it meaning. Wherever I stand, I am a conscious center. Because awakened people also see the universe as being conscious, any point in the universe is also a center. Consciousness is the key. Beyond that, there is no difference between the conscious universe and The Absolute, or what some call 'God'. Therefore,

'The universe is The Absolute as seen through the glass of Time, Space and Causation'

and....

'God is a circle whose circumference is endless and whose center is everywhere'

The universe is The Absolute because 1: there is only one universe (multiverses included) and 2: there is no 'other' to which it can be compared, meaning it is not relative to anything else, as there is nothing else.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

It has meaning because consciousness gives it meaning. Wherever I stand, I am a conscious center. Because awakened people also see the universe as being conscious, any point in the universe is also a center. Consciousness is the key. Beyond that, there is no difference between the conscious universe and The Absolute, or what some call 'God'. Therefore,

'The universe is The Absolute as seen through the glass of Time, Space and Causation'

and....

'God is a circle whose circumference is endless and whose center is everywhere'

The universe is The Absolute because 1: there is only one universe (multiverses included) and 2: there is no 'other' to which it can be compared, meaning it is not relative to anything else, as there is nothing else.

1) If other universes existed then this universe would not be the only one. That is a self contradiction statement.

2) Even if his circumference was infinite then that would not mean that his center was everywhere. It either would have a center or it would no be defined. It would not make it "everywhere"

 

[godnotgod]

1) If other universes existed then this universe would not be the only one. That is a self contradiction statement.

I said that 'universe' includes all multiverses. IOW, 'universe' refers to Everything, including intergalactic space.

2) Even if his circumference was infinite then that would not mean that his center was everywhere. It either would have a center or it would no be defined. It would not make it "everywhere"

The quote states that the God's circumference is endless, not infinite.

No, there is no absolute center to the Universe; the Absolute.

The center is everywhere not because of the circumference, but because consciousness is omnipresent. You are a center of consciousness; I am; and all points are, all of which expanded from a single point, the singularity.

Edit: The original quote comes from the philosopher Voltaire, which reads:

“God is a circle whose center is everywhere and circumference nowhere.”

..but it seems others have variations of it as well:

Hermes Trismegistus, “thrice-great Hermes” “God is an infinite sphere, the center of which is everywhere, the circumference nowhere.” Book of the 24 Philosophers.

(The source I originally took it from stated that the circumference is endless.)

Giordano Bruno... searched for the words that would explain Copernican space to mankind, and on one famous page he wrote: “We can state with certainty that the universe is all center, or that the center of the universe is everywhere and the circumference nowhere” ( De la causa, principio e uno, V)

Timaeus of Locris describes [God] under the image of “A circle whose centre is everywhere and circumference nowhere.” Plato adopted this emblem, and Pascal inserted it among his materials for future use, which he entitled his “Thoughts.”

by Timaeus of Locris (circa 400 B.C.)
as quoted by Voltaire (21 November 1694 – 30 May 1778)
from Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary

A similar quote is even attributed to St. Augustine. Some attribute the original quote to Empedocles, Greek, 5th cent.

Helena Blavatsky:
“Man is the microcosm of the macrocosm; the god on earth is built on the pattern of the god in nature. But the universal consciousness of the real Ego transcends a millionfold the self-consciousness of the personal or false Ego.”

The zero point condition is the centre out of which a higher dimensional holographic physics produces the manifestations of life. Modern scientists regard all of the causes of life phenomena as resulting from random and fortuitous concurrence of matter and energy. They never entertain the possibility that life is the product of higher intelligences informing material creation within-without through zero point dynamics.

... space-time is created by being squeezed out of a point. ... a space-time structure (is created) out of a single point! With this interpretation of space-time, certain paradoxes of nonlocality which require super-luminal speeds are no longer paradoxes. The reason is that everything is always connected because everything is really part of the same point. ...
divinem_IV8fohats

 

[Monk Of Reason]

I said that 'universe' includes all multiverses. IOW, 'universe' refers to Everything, including intergalactic space.

Intergalactic refers to multiple galaxies. The universe definitely has those. We even have higher degrees of classification beyond galaxies called clusters.

However the "universe" is our universe. Your definition would be "the multiverse" which would include several universes.

The quote states that the God's circumference is endless, not infinite.

No, there is no absolute center to the Universe; the Absolute.

The center is everywhere not because of the circumference, but because consciousness is omnipresent. You are a center of consciousness; I am; and all points are, all of which expanded from a single point, the singularity.

Edit: The original quote comes from the philosopher Voltaire, which reads:

“God is a circle whose center is everywhere and circumference nowhere.”

..but it seems others have variations of it as well:

Hermes Trismegistus, “thrice-great Hermes” “God is an infinite sphere, the center of which is everywhere, the circumference nowhere.” Book of the 24 Philosophers.

(The source I originally took it from stated that the circumference is endless.)

Giordano Bruno... searched for the words that would explain Copernican space to mankind, and on one famous page he wrote: “We can state with certainty that the universe is all center, or that the center of the universe is everywhere and the circumference nowhere” ( De la causa, principio e uno, V)

Timaeus of Locris describes [God] under the image of “A circle whose centre is everywhere and circumference nowhere.” Plato adopted this emblem, and Pascal inserted it among his materials for future use, which he entitled his “Thoughts.”

by Timaeus of Locris (circa 400 B.C.)
as quoted by Voltaire (21 November 1694 – 30 May 1778)
from Voltaire’s Philosophical Dictionary

A similar quote is even attributed to St. Augustine. Some attribute the original quote to Empedocles, Greek, 5th cent.

Helena Blavatsky:
“Man is the microcosm of the macrocosm; the god on earth is built on the pattern of the god in nature. But the universal consciousness of the real Ego transcends a millionfold the self-consciousness of the personal or false Ego.”

The zero point condition is the centre out of which a higher dimensional holographic physics produces the manifestations of life. Modern scientists regard all of the causes of life phenomena as resulting from random and fortuitous concurrence of matter and energy. They never entertain the possibility that life is the product of higher intelligences informing material creation within-without through zero point dynamics.

... space-time is created by being squeezed out of a point. ... a space-time structure (is created) out of a single point! With this interpretation of space-time, certain paradoxes of nonlocality which require super-luminal speeds are no longer paradoxes. The reason is that everything is always connected because everything is really part of the same point. ...
divinem_IV8fohats

A great poetic statement from Plato but none the less incoherent garbage if attempted to be applied scientifically. Plato was a brilliant man and his theory of forms is a personal favorite topic of mine. But the analogy was meant to be poetic not prophetic. Do you understand the difference between the two?

 

[godnotgod]

Intergalactic refers to multiple galaxies. The universe definitely has those. We even have higher degrees of classification beyond galaxies called clusters.

However the "universe" is our universe. Your definition would be "the multiverse" which would include several universes.

Sorry. My working definition of 'universe' here is simply Everything, as defined here:

The Universe is all of spacetime and everything that exists therein, including all planets, stars, galaxies, the contents of intergalactic space, the smallest subatomic particles, and all matter and energy.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#cite_note-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#cite_note-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#cite_note-6 Similar terms include the cosmos, the world, reality, and nature.

Wikipedia

The space that is between multiverses is what interconnects them as one universe, without which they would not be multiverses.

A great poetic statement from Plato but none the less incoherent garbage if attempted to be applied scientifically. Plato was a brilliant man and his theory of forms is a personal favorite topic of mine. But the analogy was meant to be poetic not prophetic. Do you understand the difference between the two?

Sorry, but Plato was not a poet. His view here would have been philosophical. I think he meant exactly what he said.

Once again, Everything comes from the singularity, a single point, and Everything still is the singularity, only expanded. That there exists a multiplicity is illusory. The singularity can be thought of as the center, and Everything in the expanded singularity is a center that is everywhere.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

Sorry. My working definition of 'universe' here is simply Everything, as defined here:

The Universe is all of spacetime and everything that exists therein, including all planets, stars, galaxies, the contents of intergalactic space, the smallest subatomic particles, and all matter and energy.http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#cite_note-1http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#cite_note-2http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#cite_note-3http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#cite_note-4http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#cite_note-5http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe#cite_note-6 Similar terms include the cosmos, the world, reality, and nature.

Wikipedia

The space that is between multiverses is what interconnects them as one universe, without which they would not be multiverses.

Then you don't understand what a multverse is. You don't even seem to know what a universe is. You are on the right track. Technically, from our perspective, nothing exists outside our universe.

Sorry, but Plato was not a poet. His view here would have been philosophical. I think he meant exactly what he said.

Once again, Everything comes from the singularity, a single point, and Everything still is the singularity, only expanded. That there exists a multiplicity is illusory. The singularity can be thought of as the center, and Everything in the expanded singularity is a center that is everywhere.

Have you actually spent time studying Plato? I have. I have studied the Socratic philosophers for years and in collegiate courses rather than just internet searches.

Yes. Plato was a poet. He wrote scores of poetry. And prose, and nearly every manor of writing in ancient Greece at his time.

But please, by all means, explain exactly what your point is and how his work supports it.

 

[godnotgod]

Then you don't understand what a multverse is. You don't even seem to know what a universe is. You are on the right track. Technically, from our perspective, nothing exists outside our universe.

There is no inside or outside. My working definition for universe is Everything.

Have you actually spent time studying Plato? I have. I have studied the Socratic philosophers for years and in collegiate courses rather than just internet searches.

Yes. Plato was a poet. He wrote scores of poetry. And prose, and nearly every manor of writing in ancient Greece at his time.

But please, by all means, explain exactly what your point is and how his work supports it.

In your study of Plato, did you find that his poetry was in harmony with his philosophy?

 

[Thief]

There is no inside or outside. My working definition for universe is Everything.

Aren't you the guy professing to know circles.....just a few posts back?

Circles and spheres have only two sides....inside and out.

Try to be.....better......

 

[godnotgod]

Aren't you the guy professing to know circles.....just a few posts back?

Circles and spheres have only two sides....inside and out.

Try to be.....better......

We are talking about the universe. There is no inside or outside.

 

[`mud]

If the Big Bang ever occured, and it didn't, what contained the expanding new substances that emerged from the inflation.
Into what entity did, and presently now, these entities expand into, two 'into's there, I probably need more.
If the single 'universe' is a single entity, where is it going, into what container is it increasing into, another friggin 'into'.
Single, meaning 'one', unit of single occupancy inside an area of some amount of 'nothingness'.
Damn....there there's that 'nothingness' again ! How can we have an 'amount' of 'nothingness' ?
Expansion into what ?? Expanding into what ?? Contained by what ?? Sharing the Cosmos with what ??
The only answer is "multiuniverses" or most accurately, the Cosmos.
There is NOT any nothingness, never was.
But....play your games anyway, keep looking for the end of the "universe", you won't find it !
nuff stuff
~
'mud

 

[Thief]

We are talking about the universe. There is no inside or outside.

I will count you out.

 

[godnotgod]

If the Big Bang ever occured, and it didn't, what contained the expanding new substances that emerged from the inflation.
Into what entity did, and presently now, these entities expand into, two 'into's there, I probably need more.
If the single 'universe' is a single entity, where is it going, into what container is it increasing into, another friggin 'into'.
Single, meaning 'one', unit of single occupancy inside an area of some amount of 'nothingness'.
Damn....there there's that 'nothingness' again ! How can we have an 'amount' of 'nothingness' ?
Expansion into what ?? Expanding into what ?? Contained by what ?? Sharing the Cosmos with what ??
The only answer is "multiuniverses" or most accurately, the Cosmos.
There is NOT any nothingness, never was.
But....play your games anyway, keep looking for the end of the "universe", you won't find it !
nuff stuff
~
'mud

Everything you are describing depends on Nothingness. You cannot have Something without it existing or being manifested out of a background. That background is Nothingness. The basic character of the universe is Nothing, and out of it, comes Everything.

The State of Nothing, here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYCxC2UKD9E

Nothingness is the purest state. It cannot be contaminated. It is Unborn; Deathless. It is the Indestructible Sunyata, and you're It, pretending not to be It.

 

[Thief]

Everything you are describing depends on Nothingness. You cannot have Something without it existing or being manifested out of a background. That background is Nothingness. The basic character of the universe is Nothing, and out of it, comes Everything.

The State of Nothing, here:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iYCxC2UKD9E

Nothingness is the purest state. It cannot be contaminated. It is Unborn; Deathless. It is the Indestructible Sunyata, and you're It, pretending not to be It.

Nay.
The void may have been perfect.
But ...Let there be light....would then be the contamination.

I have said so somewhere in these many postings.....
Light is an aberration.

 

[idav]

I am not really sure when the big bang occurred(if it is applicable) but where it occurred, everywhere. The big bang occurred at every point in our space but outside spacetime.

 

[`mud]

I'm wondering...when, and if, the BB occured, not saying that it did, with no temperature right before,
and no motion until, where did the "light" come from ? There weren't any atoms yet, what made the protons ?
Where'd the light come from ? I'm really missing something here !
I'm getting really, really old and a little tired, soooooo...splainitome ?
~
'mud

 

[idav]

I'm wondering...when, and if, the BB occured, not saying that it did, with no temperature right before,
and no motion until, where did the "light" come from ? There weren't any atoms yet, what made the protons ?
Where'd the light come from ? I'm really missing something here !
I'm getting really, really old and a little tired, soooooo...splainitome ?
~
'mud

When is the tougher question cause time didn't exist. But when I say time doesn't exist, I mean spacetime didn't exist, which is what time is to us. Time without space is timeless. So when in comparison to timelessness is in every point in time, just like the answer every point in space is where bb happened.

 

[Monk Of Reason]

There is no inside or outside. My working definition for universe is Everything.

Then you must accept that your definition will be different from mine.

In your study of Plato, did you find that his poetry was in harmony with his philosophy?

I find that he was wrong on a lot of ways and his greatest student, Aristotle, proved that without a reasonable doubt. He had many great ideas but his theory of forms was thrown out after Aristotle brought in a much better philosophical view.