godnotgod
Thou art That
Last edited:
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
What came before the Big Bang?
- Thread starter yoda89
- Start date
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Yes, just as you are sure there is an afterlife. Surprise!
Maybe it's all in your head.
The universe.....all of it .....is in my head?
That could qualify me as ...God.
oh that's right.....you already think 'I AM!'
Ouroboros
Coincidentia oppositorum
All scientists have made mistakes and been wrong about something.
Let me ask you, are you always right? Have you been wrong sometime? If you have, does that mean that you always were wrong?
Yup.
If I remember right, Einstein predicted that but no one thought he was right back then. The acceleration was confirmed just some 10 years ago.
Because there's a lot of "hidden" energy (dark energy). There's more dark energy than "visible" energy.
godnotgod
Thou art That
You're asleep, and dreaming that the universe is something else. When you awaken you will see that it is none other than you.
You are the universe looking at itself through your eyes.
The universe is the Absolute as seen through the glass of Time, Space, and Causation.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
Check the gaming section.....
I just got thwacked with a big stick while I was getting a massage.....sort of....
btw....time does not exist.
ZooGirl02
Well-Known Member
I personally believe that God existed before the Big Bang and that He existed for all of eternity and will always exist. I personally believe that God created the Universe using the Big Bang. Did you know that recently Gravity Waves were discovered which means that the Universe did have a beginning and did not always exist? I believe this supports my theory of a Theistic Creation of the Universe.
Denny Crane!
Member
What came before the big bang is unknowable at present and thus irrelevant to any debate or idea of knowledge humans can have.
Thief
Rogue Theologian
ANY debate of knowledge?
How about the acquisition of knowledge as displayed in Genesis?
I strongly suspect God was behind THAT idea!
Denny Crane!
Member
Well suspicion is all you have since the only thing we can know for certain is that it was written by a man.
How do gravity waves show the universe has a beginning?
For me it shows that the universe came from a point where there was no time, no beginning, no end, and that this eternity is natural, no need to place it outside the universe, the source still resides within everything, is a part of the very structure of everything.
Yes I am sure everyone does.
godnotgod
Thou art That
Did you know that Sir Roger Penrose and a co-worker have discovered leftover Cosmic Background Microwave Radiation which suggests a cyclical universe?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=sM47acQ7pEQ
Thief
Rogue Theologian
yeah and he calls himself an atheist.....
And though he and Hawkins did once share a belief in singularities and black holes....Hawkins has recently discounted his previous position.
Redundant recreation is an idea of entertainment.
Currently the appearance would be....the universe will expand....
faster and faster ....and then cool into it's own death.
And God will likely do it again.
Maybe next time I get to play a part in the 'bang'.
shawn001
Well-Known Member
"Did you know that Sir Roger Penrose and a co-worker have discovered leftover Cosmic Background Microwave Radiation"
They didn't discover it.
"Cosmic Background Microwave Radiation which suggests a cyclical universe"
It suggest possible multiverses, especially with the new discovery if it is confirmed. It is also the afterglow in microwave of the Big Bang. Its been stretched into the microwave band with the expansion of space.
"Accidental Discovery
In 1964, Bell Laboratory scientists Arno Penzias and Robert Wilson were trying to detect sources of radiation that might potentially harm satellites. Their data, however, showed background noise from a microwave signal corresponding to a temperature of approximately 2.7 K that appeared to be emitted from every direction. This apparent aberration was recognized by scientists at Princeton as remnant radiation from the earliest observable moment in the evolution of the universe, now called the Cosmic Microwave Background."
The Universe Adventure - The Discovery of the CMB
godnotgod
Thou art That
Thank you. Allow me to make a correction to my post:
No, Penrose et al did not discover background radiation; he discovered the concentric rings associated with it that points to a previous universe or mulitverses:
'Professor Roger Penrose from Oxford University says concentric circles discovered in the background microwaves of the universe provides evidence of events that took place before the universe came into being.'
Big Bang theory busted: previous universe existed
A map of the cosmic background radiation (CMB) in the universe with circles which may signify events that took place before the Big Bang.
The gist is that the BB is just a continuation of previous events. The telltale key is low entropy, according to Penrose. Listen to the interview on YouTube I posted for his explanation of why this is the case.
According to his theory, when they have finished, all that will be left in the universe will be energy – which will then trigger the next Big Bang – and the new aeon.
Professor Penrose told the BBC: ‘In the scheme that I’m proposing, you have an exponential expansion but it’s not in our aeon – I use the term to describe [the period] from our Big Bang until the remote future.
‘I claim that this aeon is one of a succession of such things, where the remote future of the previous aeons somehow becomes the Big Bang of our aeon.’
Penrose
Last edited:
shawn001
Well-Known Member
Thank you. Allow me to make a correction to my post:
No, Penrose et al did not discover background radiation; he discovered the concentric rings associated with it that points to a previous universe or mulitverses:
'Professor Roger Penrose from Oxford University says concentric circles discovered in the background microwaves of the universe provides evidence of events that took place before the universe came into being.'
Big Bang theory busted: previous universe existed
A map of the cosmic background radiation (CMB) in the universe with circles which may signify events that took place before the Big Bang.
The gist is that the BB is just a continuation of previous events. The telltale key is low entropy, according to Penrose. Listen to the interview on YouTube I posted for his explanation of why this is the case.
According to his theory, when they have finished, all that will be left in the universe will be energy which will then trigger the next Big Bang and the new aeon.
Professor Penrose told the BBC: In the scheme that Im proposing, you have an exponential expansion but its not in our aeon I use the term to describe [the period] from our Big Bang until the remote future.
I claim that this aeon is one of a succession of such things, where the remote future of the previous aeons somehow becomes the Big Bang of our aeon.
Penrose
Yes, Penrose was looking for "Evidence" of a another universe in the Wmap data back in 2010.
"Signals from Before the Big Bang" --Were Telltale Patterns Glimpsed in the Afterglow?
This new evidence however support inflation.
also
"A search for concentric circles in the 7-year WMAP temperature sky maps
Authors: I. K. Wehus, H. K. Eriksen
Abstract: In a recent analysis of the 7-year WMAP temperature sky maps, Gurzadyan and Penrose claim to find evidence for violent pre-Big Bang activity in the form of concentric low-variance circles at high statistical significance. In this paper, we perform an independent search for such concentric low-variance circles, employing both chi^2 statistics and matched filters, and compare the results obtained from the 7-year WMAP temperature sky maps with those obtained from LCDM simulations. Our main findings are the following: We do reproduce the claimed ring structures observed in the WMAP data as presented by Gurzadyan and Penrose, thereby verifying their computational procedures. However, the results from our simulations do not agree with those presented by Gurzadyan and Penrose. On the contrary we obtain a substantially larger variance in our simulations, to the extent that the observed WMAP sky maps are fully consistent with the LCDM model as measured by these statistics."
Penrose's Cyclic Cosmology : Cosmic Variance
They also were using WMAP Data and now we have better ones using Planck satellite data.
There are different models for Cyclic cosmology and that is important when discussing it all. For example multiverses and bubble universes, much different then say the big crunch that they have basically ruled out now.
godnotgod
Thou art That
We can go on and on about Penrose. I think he addresses the arguments against his theory in the video I provided, which was made in 2013. Did you watch it? The original point, however, is that there is evidence that points to a universe or universes existing prior to the BB. Agreed?
Penrose has an interesting idea in the form of CCC. The evidence for his idea presented in 2010 was shot down by the community so i dont think we can count it as evidence for a prior big bang period. There was a further study that looks more robust and we shall have to see how it plays out.
But right now inflation is the front runner and not CCC, if the BICEP2 results are confirmed that will be even more the case, but it was already true before BICEP 2.
Right now there is no empirical evidence for a prior big bang. However there are many promising theories which predict that there was a prior big bang period and so we should be open minded about it. These ideas have not been ruled out by current data but neither are they confirmed.
shawn001
Well-Known Member
philh, summed it up very well.
This new discovery even supports inflation and hence
""It's hard to build models of inflation that don't lead to a multiverse," Alan Guth, a theoretical physicist at the Massachusetts Institute of Technology, said during a news conference in March 2014 concerning the gravitational waves discovery. (Guth is not affiliated with that study.)
"It's not impossible, so I think there's still certainly research that needs to be done. But most models of inflation do lead to a multiverse, and evidence for inflation will be pushing us in the direction of taking (the idea of) a multiverse seriously."
What Is the Big Bang Theory? | Space.com