What or how did everything start?

[viole]

I came to the conclusion about time by thinking about it.
To answer the Dinosaur and Napoleon question without theology I would say that they do not exist now,,,,,,,,,that they existed in the past.

Well, if that is the case, you are still stuck in A-theory of time. That is why asked the question. Most people think A theory, which is what our brains evolved, and it is therefore difficult to escape. Perfectly natural, but very likely illusory.

There in no "now" in B theory. Only when we fully understand that the B theory might be correct, we can understand that the Universe is eternal and unchanging. And that any questions about its origins would be pointless, since there is no origin. There is no origin of basically anything.

Despite Big Bang cosmology still being true, and this Universe still be the only one (albeit not necessarily)

Ciao

- viole

 

[sayak83]

How? (is it possible for time to have gone back into the infinite past)

What is the problem with an infinite sequence of causally connected events?

 

[Polymath257]

Can anyone explain to me what or how this universe come to existence, and i do not accept answers like.

It was the big bang...
It just happend.
It has always been there.
It is a string of universes (tell about the first one then)

What triggered the existence of the universe?

You ask a question and then eliminate all of the possible answers.

The most fundamental mystery is why there is something rather than nothing.

Science can't answer this (the physical laws need to be assumed). Religion can't answer this (a deity needs to be assumed).

And, if you think about it, the question itself shows there *cannot* be an answer: for if nothing existed, how could anything answer 'why?'.

One problem with your question is that you assume there was a 'trigger'. But that begs the question of how the trigger was triggered.

So the only answer is that there *cannot* be a trigger. As counter-intuitive as it seems, the most fundamental part of existence *cannot* have an explanation.

At some point, existence simply exists.

 

[Spirit of Light]

You ask a question and then eliminate all of the possible answers.

The most fundamental mystery is why there is something rather than nothing.

Science can't answer this (the physical laws need to be assumed). Religion can't answer this (a deity needs to be assumed).

And, if you think about it, the question itself shows there *cannot* be an answer: for if nothing existed, how could anything answer 'why?'.

One problem with your question is that you assume there was a 'trigger'. But that begs the question of how the trigger was triggered.

So the only answer is that there *cannot* be a trigger. As counter-intuitive as it seems, the most fundamental part of existence *cannot* have an explanation.

At some point, existence simply exists.

Actually i was hoping someone picked up on this.

Yes, science has no true answer to how everything started they have theories

Religion have faith and belief

 

[Brian2]

Well, if that is the case, you are still stuck in A-theory of time. That is why asked the question. Most people think A theory, which is what our brains evolved, and it is therefore difficult to escape. Perfectly natural, but very likely illusory.

There in no "now" in B theory. Only when we fully understand that the B theory might be correct, we can understand that the Universe is eternal and unchanging. And that any questions about its origins would be pointless, since there is no origin. There is no origin of basically anything.

Despite Big Bang cosmology still being true, and this Universe still be the only one (albeit not necessarily)

Ciao

- viole

I am probably stuck in the A theory of time and I even think of the B theory in A theory thought.
Eg- all of space time in a box that has been there for eternity. (or something like that)

 

[ChristineM]

Yes. An theist probably believes everything was created except the creator and an atheist believes the universe was not created.

Do not assume what an atheist believes. You know what happens when you assume?

 

[Brian2]

What is the problem with an infinite sequence of causally connected events?

We cannot add to an infinite number so we would not be at the infiniteth event yet.
"Infinity" in Mathematics is no doubt a tool and an unreal number but we are not talking about mathematics, we are talking about reality.
(I suppose saying Mathematics is not reality is no doubt anathema to some )

 

[ChristineM]

I don't need to be biased to see that if time went into the past for infinity, we would not be here yet, or there could not have been an infinity number of universes coming and going into the past. (Stupid maybe, but not biased)

Your misunderstanding of time is irrelevant. Time can be said to be an ongoing sequence of events.

Ask professor Andrei Linde how many possible universes there may be

 

[SalixIncendium]

Yes, science has no true answer to how everything started they have theories

Not exactly. One this subject, they have hypotheses.

It helps to understand what a scientific theory is. It's not just an educated guess...

A scientific theory is an explanation of an aspect of the natural world and universe that has been repeatedly tested and corroborated in accordance with the scientific method, using accepted protocols of observation, measurement, and evaluation of results. Where possible, theories are tested under controlled conditions in an experiment.[1][2] In circumstances not amenable to experimental testing, theories are evaluated through principles of abductive reasoning. Established scientific theories have withstood rigorous scrutiny and embody scientific knowledge.[3]

Scientific theory - Wikipedia
​

Since there is no means as of yet to test and corroborate how the universe came into existence, there are no sound theories.

 

[Bathos Logos]

That sound like what atheists trying to convince believers in creation that nothing exist

I usually encounter this the other way around. That the theist (or theistic-argument supporter) is the one more prone to start trying to reduce "existence" to a meaningless quantity. It's their way of trying to get to a point at which it doesn't really matter whether something exists or not - so that they can justify anything and everything that may or may not exist as being plausible and therefore warranted to be believed.

Can you give an example of an atheistic (nonbelief) argument made against claiming concrete knowledge of a deity that can be paraphrased as an attempt to state that "nothing exists?" I don't think I have ever come across this, and I am interested to see what you have seen that you feel was framed this way.

 

[Brian2]

Do not assume what an atheist believes. You know what happens when you assume?

I assume incorrectly?

 

[Brian2]

Your misunderstanding of time is irrelevant.

Ask professor Andrei Linde how many possible universes there may be

Infinite would be the wrong answer imo. But my understanding of time and numbers is not that great.

 

[ChristineM]

I assume incorrectly?

Possibly, an atheist is someone who does not believe in god or gods. Nothing more, nothing less, i know atheists who believe very odd things

 

[Polymath257]

We cannot add to an infinite number so we would not be at the infiniteth event yet.

Of course you can add to an infinite set and get a larger infinite set.

And no, you don't get to an infinite set by adding finitely many things to finitely many things.

if there was an infinite regress of causes, then there was *always* an infinite regress of causes.

"Infinity" in Mathematics is no doubt a tool and an unreal number but we are not talking about mathematics, we are talking about reality.

And the math shows there is no inconsistency. It then becomes a question for science, not philosophy.

(I suppose saying Mathematics is not reality is no doubt anathema to some )

Math is a language we use to help us understand reality.

 

[Polymath257]

Infinite would be the wrong answer imo. But my understanding of time and numbers is not that great.

So what leads you to that opinion? How much have you studied about the properties of infinite sets? How much physics have you studied?

 

[ChristineM]

Infinite would be the wrong answer imo. But my understanding of time and numbers is not that great.

I have edited my post to add.

Time can be said to be an ongoing sequence of events.

When time began, whether with the bb (as some hypothesis have it) or it os infinite into the past is hotly debated among cosmologists

 

[viole]

I am probably stuck in the A theory of time and I even think of the B theory in A theory thought.
Eg- all of space time in a box that has been there for eternity. (or something like that)

Yes, but that is normal. As Einstein said, that is a very stubborn view of time. Which is normal, since our brains evolved for survival, and not ultimate truths. And once you have brains that have a very strong, even almost irreversible, intuition for X, it is very painstaking to tell them they might be actually wrong. Another strong case for a naturalistic explanation of our mind, I am afraid.

I also do most of the time, since I cannot possibly change my intuitions. But there is a trick to avoid that. Simply use only tenseless verbs. So, never say, for instance, "I was born", but instead "I am born (at a certain spacetime location)". Depending of course whether you are celebrating birthday with family, or physicists.

And again, if the B theory of time is correct, then nothing begins to exist. Not the Universe, not me, nor you. Nothing. For the very concept of "ontological beginning" would be absurd. Kalam, for instance, would be dead immediately. Together with most equally naive cosmological arguments.

Ciao

- viole

 

[Heyo]

There has to be a state of timelessness before time began. So there has to be a first moment in time.

Is there any reason to not assume that in that first moment the universe started to expand?

 

[Clizby Wampuscat]

Can anyone explain to me what or how this universe come to existence, and i do not accept answers like.

It was the big bang...
It just happend.
It has always been there.
It is a string of universes (tell about the first one then)

What triggered the existence of the universe?

I don't think there is any way to know at this point. It is a fun subject to research and listen to physicists speculate. There are a couple of mathematical solutions to the problem but none that can be actually verified to be true. We do know a lot about the beginnings just not the actual beginning. Do you accept any part of the big bang model?

 

[Spirit of Light]

I don't think there is any way to know at this point. It is a fun subject to research and listen to physicists speculate. There are a couple of mathematical solutions to the problem but none that can be actually verified to be true. We do know a lot about the beginnings just not the actual beginning. Do you accept any part of the big bang model?

I do believe the big bang did happen, but I believe God was behind it