• 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!

Why Didn't the Universe Always Exist?

Polymath257

Think & Care
Staff member
Premium Member
What's the difference between nothing, and no existence?

Also if there were no existence prior to the BB, then from where did the BB instantiate? You seem to be saying the universe could have created itself. From what though?
No, I am NOT saying that. As I see it, the universe is a four dimensional construct that includes ALL space and ALL time. Since 'creation' implies causality and that implies that time exists, all 'creation' happens *within* the universe.
Time to me is that which propels events forward, allows motion, and change to happen. How can anyone measure time, and it not be an arbitrary measure? Whether it be atomic clocks, or entropy, those measures seem arbitrarily chosen.
In the four dimensional spacetime universe, the 'changes' are all *within* the universe. Time is simply a coordinate we use to determine where in spacetime something is. Space is similar, although there are differences between timelike and spacelike directions.
The actual measure of time is perhaps not at all capable of being measured.

Also by eternal I think the most common definition is that there was never a time where existence did not exist.
And to that I would agree. But that would be true even if time is finite into the past. There would still not be a time when existence did not exist.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Well, it extends back about 13.7 billion years in our current reference frame. We know a fair amount about the geometry of spacetime and how it interacts with matter and energy.
Are there time-travel telescopes or go back in time video cameras that can record what happened?
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Careful now, your double standards are showing...
I'm sorry, please excuse that you think so -- there are no time travel video cameras to go back billions of years? No?? What's the matter, can't answer the question?? anything goes by the many...time travel, no time travel, speed up time, slow down time --
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Oh, and what happened? The mind, and/or brain did NOT evolve or did it evolve? Anything Goes and anyone guesses...Enjoy --
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
Oh, and what happened? The mind, and/or brain did NOT evolve or did it evolve? Anything Goes and anyone guesses...Enjoy -- the Fourth Dimension -- time slows, time goes faster --
 

McBell

Unbound
I'm sorry, please excuse that you think so
No excuses are required.
I merely pointed out your hypocrisy

-- there are no time travel video cameras to go back billions of years? No?? What's the matter, can't answer the question??
You already know they do not exist.
so no need to "answer" such a ridiculous inquiry.

anything goes by the many...time travel, no time travel, speed up time, slow down time --
Your mantra only reveals your hypocrisy
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
No excuses are required.
I merely pointed out your hypocrisy


You already know they do not exist.
so no need to "answer" such a ridiculous inquiry.


Your mantra only reveals your hypocrisy
Obviously you misinterpret...have a good one!
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
No excuses are required.
I merely pointed out your hypocrisy


You already know they do not exist.
so no need to "answer" such a ridiculous inquiry.


Your mantra only reveals your hypocrisy
Bye again
 

osgart

Nothing my eye, Something for sure
No, I am NOT saying that. As I see it, the universe is a four dimensional construct that includes ALL space and ALL time. Since 'creation' implies causality and that implies that time exists, all 'creation' happens *within* the universe.

In the four dimensional spacetime universe, the 'changes' are all *within* the universe. Time is simply a coordinate we use to determine where in spacetime something is. Space is similar, although there are differences between timelike and spacelike directions.

And to that I would agree. But that would be true even if time is finite into the past. There would still not be a time when existence did not exist.
If it's not within the universe it is not in the purview of science then. If there was an outside, or a beyond of the universe we could never know about it using science. Or do you go so far as to say that it is known that the universe is all there is.
 

YoursTrue

Faith-confidence in what we hope for (Hebrews 11)
So if the basic laws of physics would still exist, then there must be physical existence conforming to these laws, for without existence, there would be no laws existing. I mean it would be a strange state of affairs for there to be physical laws in existence to govern non-physical existence, how would they exist?
If I understand what some here and elsewhere say, the laws (these said 'basic laws') do not need a creator. Some believe they just came about by themselves.
 

wellwisher

Well-Known Member
You appear to base your claim that there was a "before the Big Bang". How did you come to such a conclusion?
One way to infer, that had to a be a before the Big Bang, is the 2nd law of thermodynamics The 2nd law states that the entropy of the universe has to increase. While an increase in entropy above absolute zero, causes a lowering of universal free energy via the equation G=H-TS, where G is Gibbs free energy, H is enthalpy, T is temperature in degrees Kelvin, and S is entropy.

A finite universe, like our own, with -ST (S increasing via the second law), will use up the free energy of a finite universe in a finite time. There is a beginning and end. If the universe was infinite, one would have an infinite time, entropy based, free energy bleed, loophole. Our universe is not known to be infinite if it starts as a singularity.

However, in the realm where space and time are both independent and not tethered as space-time, there is no energy, since you need distance and time or wavelength/frequency, tethered like space-time. In the realm where you have independent time and independent space you will have wavelength without frequency (not tethered) and frequency without wavelength (untethered). This is a place of infinite entropy, where independent space and time, can kiss (for various intervals, but not sticking), except for our finite space-time universe. The other realm is sort of virtual reality within a realm of time potential and distance potential; kisses, at infinite complexity. It will look void from a space-time POV, until one reaches into the quantum state.

That realm appears to be the drive behind the 2nd law in our space-time based universe. The energy from our universe, that constantly goes into increasing entropy, due to the second law, that is bled from the universe (is net gone), goes back to where we came. The energy is untethered and then flows back to the virtual void of endless possibilities. The untether photons also increase entropy.

We can thank Heisenberg for his uncertainty experiments, that show separated space and separated time at the quantum level. I can be thanked for the proper interpretation of his experiments. Physic left the golden age of Physics after that blunder of interpretation. The inverse relationship between space and time (position and speed), observed by Heisenberg, is not random, but a type of rational conservation effect within separated space and time. Being infinitely complex; S=infinity, and not finite, places conservation limits in other ways.

Say we wanted to make a new space-time universe. All we need to do is tether sufficient independent space and time. This will lower the entropy and release energy at the point of tether; Boom! Time potential is like the glue that defines the duration of the kiss.
 
Last edited:

Viker

Your beloved eccentric Auntie Cristal
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?
Existence and the universe are intertwined. There can't be one without the other. In some form or another, the materials that make up the universe have always been. We have this current form and still so much to learn about it.

With this in mind, I think it not possible that any god is outside of time or the universe. The probability that outside is only a complete lack of existence. There could be a multiverse. I don't know.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
One way to infer, that had to a be a before the Big Bang, is the 2nd law of thermodynamics The 2nd law states that the entropy of the universe has to increase. While an increase in entropy above absolute zero, causes a lowering of universal free energy via the equation G=H-TS, where G is Gibbs free energy, H is enthalpy, T is temperature in degrees Kelvin, and S is entropy.

A finite universe, like our own, with -ST (S increasing via the second law), will use up the free energy of a finite universe in a finite time. There is a beginning and end. If the universe was infinite, one would have an infinite time, entropy based, free energy bleed, loophole. Our universe is not known to be infinite if it starts as a singularity.

However, in the realm where space and time are both independent and not tethered as space-time, there is no energy, since you need distance and time or wavelength/frequency, tethered like space-time. In the realm where you have independent time and independent space you will have wavelength without frequency (not tethered) and frequency without wavelength (untethered). This is a place of infinite entropy, where independent space and time, can kiss (for various intervals, but not sticking), except for our finite space-time universe. The other realm is sort of virtual reality within a realm of time potential and distance potential; kisses, at infinite complexity. It will look void from a space-time POV, until one reaches into the quantum state.

That realm appears to be the drive behind the 2nd law in our space-time based universe. The energy from our universe, that constantly goes into increasing entropy, due to the second law, that is bled from the universe (is net gone), goes back to where we came. The energy is untethered and then flows back to the virtual void of endless possibilities. The untether photons also increase entropy.

We can thank Heisenberg for his uncertainty experiments, that show separated space and separated time at the quantum level. I can be thanked for the proper interpretation of his experiments. Physic left the golden age of Physics after that blunder of interpretation. The inverse relationship between space and time (position and speed), observed by Heisenberg, is not random, but a type of rational conservation effect within separated space and time. Being infinitely complex; S=infinity, and not finite, places conservation limits in other ways.

Say we wanted to make a new space-time universe. All we need to do is tether sufficient independent space and time. This will lower the entropy and release energy at the point of tether; Boom! Time potential is like the glue that defines the duration of the kiss.
Sorry, misapplying the laws of Thermodynamics does not help you.
 

Pogo

Well-Known Member
No, I don't have to, because you need to show that you have to assume that the universe is physical, in order for you to do science at all.

You added physical, now show that it is needed.
No, we have been over this before, we do not assume there is not anything else out there, but we only deal with that which we can observe in some way which we define as physical. Your are more than welcome to believe, think, whatever about more, but I will only worry about that which can be demonstrated by one to another. It is called methodological Naturalism and whether it is really metaphysical Naturalism, I don't care until whenever.
 

Ben Dhyan

Veteran Member
No. You make the mistake of assuming that time is infinite into the past. While that may be the case, it is far from proven.

The word 'eternal' has a couple of meanings:

1) for all time.
2) for an infinite amount of time.

For the first definition, the universe is eternal because *time is part of the universe*. Even if time is finite into the past, the universe has existed for all time (and is thereby eternal according to the first definition).

But it seems that you prefer the second definition. That may of may not be the case. In the simplest versions of the BB theory, time is finite into the past. Spacetime did not 'pre-exist' because there simply was no 'pre-'. There simply is no 'before the BB'. This is NOT the existence of a 'nothing'. There simply was no existence prior to the BB (again, in the standard models).

This changes if some sort of multiverse theory is correct.
Reality is on the other side of words/concepts, keep that in mind as we strive to improve our effectiveness to convey a difficult conceptualization with clarity.

The concept of "no 'before the BB' " lacks clarity imho, I would hope we can find an appropriate alternative concept to represent the idea of no "before the BB".

Let me propose a couple and let me know which you prefer, first is "timelessness". We can agree that if we travel back in time far enough, we will get to BB time zero which could be called timelessness. Or we could call it "nonexistence". But my favorite is the combination, "timeless nonexistence".

What do you think?
 

URAVIP2ME

Veteran Member
Reality is on the other side of words/concepts, keep that in mind as we strive to improve our effectiveness to convey a difficult conceptualization with clarity.
The concept of "no 'before the BB' " lacks clarity imho, I would hope we can find an appropriate alternative concept to represent the idea of no "before the BB".
Let me propose a couple and let me know which you prefer, first is "timelessness". We can agree that if we travel back in time far enough, we will get to BB time zero which could be called timelessness. Or we could call it "nonexistence". But my favorite is the combination, "timeless nonexistence".
What do you think?
For each day we can count we can count both forwards and backwards forever and ever
The BB would require energy in order for it to start, who provided that dynamic energy start ____________
Since God is from everlasting then God is the Source of the BB - Psalm 90:2
God sent forth His spirit according to Psalm 104:30 in order to create
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
Are there time-travel telescopes or go back in time video cameras that can record what happened?
They have telescopes that get very very close. Have yo ever heard of the Cosmic Background Radiation? That dates to 379,000 years after the Big Bang. That is the upper limit of where we can see. Any older than that and the universe was dark because it was so hot that it was a sea of ions that was opaque to light.
 

Subduction Zone

Veteran Member
For each day we can count we can count both forwards and backwards forever and ever
The BB would require energy in order for it to start, who provided that dynamic energy start ____________
Since God is from everlasting then God is the Source of the BB - Psalm 90:2
God sent forth His spirit according to Psalm 104:30 in order to create
The math of Relativity disagrees with you.
 
Top