Why Didn't the Universe Always Exist?

[osgart]

Several hypothesis suggest that time began with the bb.

When I think time I think of that which makes change, motion, and events going forward possible.

Is the sole measure of time based on atomic clocks?


As far as space being created does that have a point of origin?

Yes, finite has ends, that does not imply there is anything outside the finite, to say otherwise is just a guess made assuming the fundamental laws governing this universe exist outside this universe.

Outside the finite would be non existence then, or the unknown. I don't see why I should assume the fundamental laws that govern this universe would apply to anything outside of it.

Or perhaps you are saying there is no outside to the universe.

Anything beyond the universe is definitely a guess as to what that might be.

 

[ChristineM]

Is the sole measure of time based on atomic clocks?

Atomic clocks are simply the human interpretation of time measuring in human derived units. Science sees time as an arrow travelling from past to future. While i see time as a way of measuring entropy, use whatever units you want in any position in space/time.

As far as space being created does that have a point of origin?

Personally i assume at the bb.

Outside the finite would be non existence then, or the unknown. I don't see why I should assume the fundamental laws that govern this universe would apply to anything outside of it.

Agreed

Or perhaps you are saying there is no outside to the universe.

That is a possibility. Though im a believer in the multiverse

Anything beyond the universe is definitely a guess as to what that might be.

Agreed

 

[wellwisher]

Why didn't the universe always exist? Because since God is supposed to be outside of time and is supposed to have always existed, then how could God have used a point in time to start creation? Any thoughts on this?

We live in space-time where time and space are tethered together, like two people in a three legged race. The tether of space-time creates limits for both space and time, since both need to coordinate as a team like they do in a three legged race. This is more awkward and sets limits that are described by the law of Physics.

The age of our universe is based on space and time tethered as space-time. Clocks that we use to measure time are based on changes in time and space like the numbers on a digital display changingin the same space, over time. Or in the case of an analog clock, the second always looks the same, but changing position in space. Our brains sense time as space-time.

Say we could remove the tether of space-time so we could have independent space and independent time, where each are able to act on their own. The laws of physics would completely change, since now they are not stuck together. They can go in opposite directions or one can sit there and the other can be active. In this scenario time and space do not mean the same thing as they do when tethered as space-time. They become independent which enhances their potential but makes them more unusual.

If I could move in space, without time; time stopped; you could be omnipresent, being what appears to be everywhere, at the same time. Our space-time visual is also based on space being tethered to time. The top speed becomes the speed of light and what we would see, should not occur. Speed is d/t or distance/time so moving in space without time is not speed or (d /t=0)=d*=infinity. It is a different principle that can better described as distance potential or the potential to be in many places simultaneously; entangled particles act as one, and maybe even an electron in an atomic orbital; probability function.

Time would be similar and is better described as time potential or the potential to move in time apart from space. This type of time does not need a space-time universe to exist. Eternal is a better way of describing this, with eternal having sub quanta of time potential for a wide range of time expression from fast to long time intervals. You charge the battery, with time potential and things go to the future, based on the time potential.

To make our space-time universe, from nothing, including zero energy, all you need to do is tether some independent space and independent time to form sustainable space-time; gluons make mass and gravity to sustain space-time. There are also quickie tethers like virtual particles. Our universe has quite a bit of time and distance potential, allowing it to expand and exist for a long duration, but not forever. We are headed back to where we came; the realm of independent space and time. We are like a condense space-time state, floating in separated space and time, that is dissolving back, as we use up our time potential.

Time potential has a connection to entropy or rather vice versa, since entropy has increase to the future adding complexity in space; fate. With entropy having to increase and absorbing energy if there is any heat; temperature, the universe is bleeding energy. There is a net loss of energy into entropy increase by the universe. But it is conserved, and appears to be going back to where space and time are both independent; minus the tether.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Except that finite and infinite, like something and nothing, are concepts devised by humans; while space and time are characteristics of our universe. So absent of human awareness, and beyond the observable universe - if there is a beyond - these terms have neither significance nor referent.

But the reality represented by the concept of 'something' includes the reality of the concept of 'space and time', you can't have your cake and eat it too! Besides, time does not exist, it is the fact that existence continues to exist is what humans call 'time'. And by using some proxy method to measure existence continuing to exist, humans create the concept of an entity called time.

And also btw, 'God' is a concept along with the concept 'infinite' devised by humans. Dismiss the reality represented by the concept of 'infinite', and you dismiss the reality represented by the concept of 'God'.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You are ignoring that I have been telling you just focus on the balloon itself - just the balloon surface - as it inflates or deflates, and nothing else. As the balloon expands contracts, so are the space of the balloon.

for instances, if you were to draw some dots on completely deflated balloons, you will note the space between these dots. These dots are meant to represent each galaxies.

inflate the balloon, the space between these dots would seem to move from each others.

So assuming the balloon is the “universe“, and each of these dots are different “galaxies”, then the expansion of the universe (balloon), would cause the galaxies to move away from one another

the problem is you are focusing everything but the balloon, which would defeat the purpose of this analogy.

it is the universe that meant to everything…so in the Big Bang theory, there are “no outside” of the universe…just as there are “no before” the Big Bang.

The only “outside of the universe”, if you are considering the Multiverse model.

And there are “no before the Big Bang“, unless you thinking of (various versions of) the Cyclical Universe model, unofficially known as the Big Bounce.

The problems with these two alternative models of cosmology, they untested, and due to the limitations of our technology, these models are untestable. While both models respectively, theoretical (or mathematically) “possible”, experimentally (or evidently) “improbable”.

I am focused on the surface because that is where the BB theory falls apart! Fine, I understand that as expansion takes place, the space between the dots get larger, but what about the dots on the surface of the sphere, what is on the outside of them. Facing inwards, there is increased space, facing the dots of the same radius, the space get larger on the inside, but nothing exists on their outer side, how does that work?

 

[Brian2]

You tried to assume that a God exists in the post that I responded to. Unless you can show that a god exists you need to be neutral in your responses.

Why?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

And you are not paying attention to what I am saying.

I have never proposed there being “nothing”.

I kept telling you that the universe always have “something”.

In fact, let me rephrase what I said in the above sentence:

​

the Universe is EVERYTHING.​

The Universe cannot have “nothingness”.

There are also “no outside the universe”. The Big Bang theory doesn’t propose there being anything “outside of the universe”.

I believe that @Polymath257 have said this before. The “expansion of the universe” isn’t expanding into nothingness. The Universe itself is expanding, which means that “space” itself is expanding.

The Universe and “space” are one.

So if the universe is everything, and there is no nothing, then the universe is infinite. It follows logically that if the universe is infinite, and since there is no nothing, there was never a beginning because the universe is also eternal because nothing does not exist.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Why Didn't the Universe Always Exist?

Who created that the BB Universe is expanding into? It has no place/space to expand into, right, please?

Regards

The BB universe is derived from the Abrahamic concept of God saying "Let there be light".

 

[Ben Dhyan]

The universe is not expanding into anything. You are the one making the mistake of assuming that it has to do so. Do you understand the error of reasoning using Newtonian physics? The balloon is just an analogy. You cannot take analogies to far. Its purpose was to get you to understand how the universe can expand "faster than the speed of light" without breaking any laws of physics.t

But the BB universe start is no more scientific then the Abrahamic God saying "Let there be light". C'mon, if nothing does not exist, where caused the BB?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

We may not know what the universe is expanding into, whether it is nothing, intrinsic expansion or something else. But that does not mean we disregard the evidence that the universe is indeed expanding.

It may be expanding into something, but it can't expand into nothing because nothing does not exist, that is my point!

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Right, no evidence just guess snd leap of faith.

Science does not prove anything, that is not the remit of science.

Cosmology considers this universe began about 13.8 billion years ago. If it had a beginning at a measurable time in the past it cannot possibly be infinite or eternal.

Where did you find your logic, on a cornflakes packet?

My point is only that if the universe is expanding, it must be expanding into existing space, because nothing does not exist.

 

[Brian2]

Which is how the universe can be "eternal" and still have a beginning. The universe may have existed for all time.

If time is finite and the universe has existed for all time, then the universe also is finite unless you are suggesting that it can exist independant of time, like God.

Meanwhile this is how science is really done. There were all sorts of early reports, mostly from creationist sources, that claim that the James Webb Telescope refutes the Big Bang.

The expanding universe showed that the universe had a beginning.
The expanding universe agrees with the Bible which tells us both that the universe had a beginning and that God spreads it out.
Isa 40:21 Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been declared to you from the beginning? Have you not understood since the foundation of the earth? 22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth; its dwellers are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

I don't know why Biblical creationists would be against the BB theory.

 

[Pogo]

You are being evasive, we know that the surface of the balloon is expanding into air, what is the BB universe expanding into?

It is not expanding into anything, that is an old Newtonian/ pre-relativistic idea, The math works out that there is no inside vs outside, just the universe itself
What is the universe expanding in to?

ChatGPT said:​

The universe is expanding into itself, in a way. It’s not expanding into a pre-existing space or outside of anything; rather, space itself is stretching and growing. Think of it like the surface of a balloon being inflated. As the balloon expands, every point on the surface moves away from every other point. In the same way, as the universe expands, galaxies and other cosmic structures are moving away from each other because the fabric of space itself is stretching.
This expansion is described by the metric expansion of space, which is a key concept in cosmology and general relativity. There isn’t a physical “edge” or boundary to the universe in the conventional sense; instead, space itself is growing.

 

[paarsurrey]

Why Didn't the Universe Always Exist?

But the BB universe start is no more scientific then the Abrahamic God saying "Let there be light". C'mon, if nothing does not exist, where caused the BB?

I like the above post:

2:118
He is the Originator of the heavens and the earth. When He decrees a thing, He does only say to it, ‘Be!’ and it is.

Holy Quran: Read, Listen and Search

In Arabic, Chinese, English, French, German, Italian, Spanish and Urdu.

www.alislam.org

Right?

Regards
__________________
Original Arabic narration/text from Muhammad's time is below:-
2:118
بَدِیۡعُ السَّمٰوٰتِ وَالۡاَرۡضِ ؕ وَاِذَا قَضٰۤی اَمۡرًا فَاِنَّمَا یَقُوۡلُ لَہٗ کُنۡ فَیَکُوۡنُ ﴿۱۱۸

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It is not expanding into anything, that is an old Newtonian/ pre-relativistic idea, The math works out that there is no inside vs outside, just the universe itself
What is the universe expanding in to?

ChatGPT said:​

The universe is expanding into itself, in a way. It’s not expanding into a pre-existing space or outside of anything; rather, space itself is stretching and growing. Think of it like the surface of a balloon being inflated. As the balloon expands, every point on the surface moves away from every other point. In the same way, as the universe expands, galaxies and other cosmic structures are moving away from each other because the fabric of space itself is stretching.
This expansion is described by the metric expansion of space, which is a key concept in cosmology and general relativity. There isn’t a physical “edge” or boundary to the universe in the conventional sense; instead, space itself is growing.

But as I said to gnostic wrt the balloon analogy. It is fine showing how every point on the surface moves away from every other point as it expands, and it would also be true for the inside points assuming a solid expanding ball, but the outside balloon surface points have to be expanding into space, or nothing, which is it?

 

[Brian2]

It is not expanding into anything, that is an old Newtonian/ pre-relativistic idea, The math works out that there is no inside vs outside, just the universe itself
What is the universe expanding in to?

ChatGPT said:​

The universe is expanding into itself, in a way. It’s not expanding into a pre-existing space or outside of anything; rather, space itself is stretching and growing. Think of it like the surface of a balloon being inflated. As the balloon expands, every point on the surface moves away from every other point. In the same way, as the universe expands, galaxies and other cosmic structures are moving away from each other because the fabric of space itself is stretching.
This expansion is described by the metric expansion of space, which is a key concept in cosmology and general relativity. There isn’t a physical “edge” or boundary to the universe in the conventional sense; instead, space itself is growing.

There is a sense in which what you are saying is no more than nonsensical words which are believed because of a pre existing belief in mathematics. IOW how could space expand without something to expand into?
If it is true and the universe is expanding into itself (ChatGpt idea) then the universe might be a lot smaller than is thought. In this world of ideas, distance is only a concept.
My suggesting is that ideas came before the physical and that the basic reality is that of ideas.
This is more of the idea that a spiritual reality came first.

 

[Subduction Zone]

If time is finite and the universe has existed for all time, then the universe also is finite unless you are suggesting that it can exist independant of time, like God.

Here is the problem, you do not even know if a god is possible much less the answer. Right now we do know that the universe exists. A god, not so much.

The expanding universe showed that the universe had a beginning.
The expanding universe agrees with the Bible which tells us both that the universe had a beginning and that God spreads it out.
Isa 40:21 Do you not know? Have you not heard? Has it not been declared to you from the beginning? Have you not understood since the foundation of the earth? 22 He sits enthroned above the circle of the earth; its dwellers are like grasshoppers. He stretches out the heavens like a curtain, and spreads them out like a tent to dwell in.

I don't know why Biblical creationists would be against the BB theory.

No, you are merely reinterpreting after the fact. One can always do that with poetic verses. In fact I could put just as valid of a flat Earth interpretation to those verses and it would seem reasonable if we had massive evidence for a Flat Earth.

 

[gnostic]

So, our friend gnostic has started to "believe", isn't it weird for an Atheist (et al), please,??

@paarsurrey

i am human being, like everyone else. I can have personal opinions, just like everyone else. And what you had quoted from me, you have cherry-picked a single word “believe”, out of several sentences, thereby taking what I said out of context. Here are the full sentences that you left out:

In fact, let me rephrase what I said in the above sentence:

​

the Universe is EVERYTHING.

The Universe cannot have “nothingness”.

There are also “no outside the universe”. The Big Bang theory doesn’t propose there being anything “outside of the universe”.

I believe that @Polymath257 have said this before. The “expansion of the universe” isn’t expanding into nothingness. The Universe itself is expanding, which means that “space” itself is expanding.

The Universe and “space” are one.

As I was basing on memory as to what @Polymath257 wrote, something about the Big Bang theory, but it has been some times ago, so I don’t remember which posts and threads.

so put in context of why I wrote the quoted in bold & red, i recall Polymath257 wrote something similar, that the Universe itself is expanding and that “space” isn’t expand into nothing…which is what you and @Ben Dhyan have been claiming.

I simply don’t remember where Polymath257’s original posts are, nor when he posted his replies. That’s why I used the word “believe”, and it was regards to Polymath257 posting similar concept about the Big Bang model, except I don’t know how to find these posts.

Although I considered myself as engineer, because of my qualifications in civil engineering and in computer science, these are applied science disciplines, not pure science, like physics or astrophysics. I know my limitations in these levels of physics, so I believe Polymath257 have better understanding of physics and in astrophysics in cosmology.


And btw, I am “agnostic”, not “atheist”. And it doesn’t matter if a person is agnostic or atheist, they can have personal opinions on just about anything that are not related to science or to mathematics (logic).

I can only speak for myself, and not for other agnostics or for other atheists…so, I like arts (drawing, painting or sculpture, and architecture), literature, music and cultures of many different communities, particularly food (cuisine), so I have many personal favourites and personal tastes, hence I have my own opinions.

I even like religions, particularly storytelling, such as myths and legends, but the differences between me and believers of respective religions, I don’t try to turn these myths into history or science.

Why would you think I cannot “believe” In anything, because I am an agnostic?

Agnostics can have opinions too. You are being rude.

 

[Pogo]

There is a sense in which what you are saying is no more than nonsensical words which are believed because of a pre existing belief in mathematics. IOW how could space expand without something to expand into?
If it is true and the universe is expanding into itself (ChatGpt idea) then the universe might be a lot smaller than is thought. In this world of ideas, distance is only a concept.
My suggesting is that ideas came before the physical and that the basic reality is that of ideas.
This is more of the idea that a spiritual reality came first.

We only know the part we can see and that goes back to a possibly infinitely small piece, but what we don't know is is that point was part of a potentially infinite source and the piece we call the universe may only be a tiny part of a bigger thing. we do know that the universe extends beyond what we can see.

It is just not a good idea to make up things about that which we don't know and especially poor to assign them qualities without any evidence.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

We only know the part we can see and that goes back to a possibly infinitely small piece, but what we don't know is is that point was part of a potentially infinite source and the piece we call the universe may only be a tiny part of a bigger thing. we do know that the universe extends beyond what we can see.

It is just not a good idea to make up things about that which we don't know and especially poor to assign them qualities without any evidence.

But make it up science has done, eg., there is no before the BB. If there is no before the BB, that is the very definition of non-existence, aka nothing.