Jump to content
Gater

Who said the Universe had a beginning?

Recommended Posts

Its my contention that the Universe has always been here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

That's one possibility. What evidence supports your contention, to elevate it beyond mere guesswork? 

Nobody is interested in discussing your personal beliefs here. Give us something trustworthy, because science.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Gater said:

Its my contention that the Universe has always been here.

That may be true, although it is clear that the universe has not always been in its current state.

There many hypotheses about the early universe, some involve the universe always existing in some form, others where it came into existence. There is, at present, no solid theoretical or evidential support for any of these. 

So it would be interesting to see what evidence you have for your contention. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Phi for All said:

That's one possibility. What evidence supports your contention, to elevate it beyond mere guesswork? 

Nobody is interested in discussing your personal beliefs here. Give us something trustworthy, because science.

I believe time and space are infinite - ive never seen any reason to place limits on time and space - and ive never seen any evidence that the Universe could have had a beginning.

1 hour ago, Strange said:

That may be true, although it is clear that the universe has not always been in its current state.

There many hypotheses about the early universe, some involve the universe always existing in some form, others where it came into existence. There is, at present, no solid theoretical or evidential support for any of these. 

So it would be interesting to see what evidence you have for your contention. 

My belief is time and space are infinite - ive never seen anyone explain how they could end.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Belief isn't science. As mentioned you need to show a scientific reason not based on belief that the universe is infinite and that it has always been here. Current observational data shows that our Observable universe is finite to the limit of our observation. However we know there is more beyond that. It also shows that the Observable portion had a beginning when you extrapolate expansion back into the past. 

As far as the entire universe we have no way of knowing if it's finite or infinite. So what evidence can you present other than belief for an infinite universe over a finite universe? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
49 minutes ago, Gater said:

I believe time and space are infinite - ive never seen any reason to place limits on time and space - and ive never seen any evidence that the Universe could have had a beginning.

If you've "never seen any evidence that the Universe could have had a beginning", and we know there's none that confirm it's infinite, why are you convinced it's as you say? There's no evidence either way, so (in science) who cares what YOU (or I) believe? 

The very nature of the universe as far back as we can calculate, to just a fraction of a second after it started expanding from a really dense, hot state, is such that all evidence of an earlier state is lost. We simply CAN'T KNOW if our universe is finite or infinite, so it doesn't matter how you feel about it, what you believe is true. Science isn't looking for truth. Science looks for the current best supported explanations. Does that make sense? 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
38 minutes ago, Mordred said:

Belief isn't science. As mentioned you need to show a scientific reason not based on belief that the universe is infinite and that it has always been here. Current observational data shows that our Observable universe is finite to the limit of our observation. However we know there is more beyond that. It also shows that the Observable portion had a beginning when you extrapolate expansion back into the past. 

As far as the entire universe we have no way of knowing if it's finite or infinite. So what evidence can you present other than belief for an infinite universe over a finite universe? 

What about Logic - apparently this group doesn't consider Logic a science.

1 minute ago, Phi for All said:

If you've "never seen any evidence that the Universe could have had a beginning", and we know there's none that confirm it's infinite, why are you convinced it's as you say? There's no evidence either way, so (in science) who cares what YOU (or I) believe? 

The very nature of the universe as far back as we can calculate, to just a fraction of a second after it started expanding from a really dense, hot state, is such that all evidence of an earlier state is lost. We simply CAN'T KNOW if our universe is finite or infinite, so it doesn't matter how you feel about it, what you believe is true. Science isn't looking for truth. Science looks for the current best supported explanations. Does that make sense? 

Science isn't looking for the truth? That's sad - Logically space and time have to be infinite.

3 hours ago, Phi for All said:

That's one possibility. What evidence supports your contention, to elevate it beyond mere guesswork? 

Nobody is interested in discussing your personal beliefs here. Give us something trustworthy, because science.

Logically space and time must be infinite.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

One thing you learn is often mere logic can lead you down the wrong garden path to incorrect answers...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, Gater said:

What about Logic - apparently this group doesn't consider Logic a science.

Logic isn't a science, it's a tool used in philosophy and mathematics. You're probably thinking of the Mr Spock kind of logic, which has led many pop-sci enthusiasts to equate it with "this makes sense to me". It's a really poor definition for something that's very well defined (but not really applicable in science - outside maths and philosophy).

13 minutes ago, Gater said:

Logically space and time must be infinite.

You have zero evidence to base that on. If I claimed it was finite, I also would be guessing. There's nothing that says it has to be one way or the other, and plenty of theories that work that don't require such limitations. 

So when you claim they MUST be infinite, I can safely claim you're following no recognized methodology wrt evidence, which is MUCH more important in science than logic or proof.

You should drop "logic". What you mean is critical thinking, or reasoned thought. Which you are NOT doing by making the above claim.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Posted (edited)
3 hours ago, Gater said:

Its my contention that the Universe has always been here.

 

1 hour ago, Gater said:

I believe time and space are infinite - ive never seen any reason to place limits on time and space - and ive never seen any evidence that the Universe could have had a beginning.

My belief is time and space are infinite - ive never seen anyone explain how they could end.

Your beliefs are neither here nor there. Science tells us that at this time, we simply cannot say with any certainty, whether the universe/spacetime is finite or infinite.

You should also note that at one time, space and time were seen as "absolute" and it was counter intuitive [anti logic] to claim otherwise. We know better now.

Edited by beecee

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, beecee said:

 

Your beliefs are neither here nor there. Science tells us that at this time, we simply cannot say with any certainty, whether the universe/spacetime is finite or infinite.

You should also note that at one time, space and time were seen as "absolute" and it was counter intuitive [anti logic] to claim otherwise. We know better now.

Time as "absolute"? - can you explain this?

2 hours ago, Strange said:

That may be true, although it is clear that the universe has not always been in its current state.

There many hypotheses about the early universe, some involve the universe always existing in some form, others where it came into existence. There is, at present, no solid theoretical or evidential support for any of these. 

So it would be interesting to see what evidence you have for your contention. 

Of course not in its current state - its always changing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

20 minutes ago, Gater said:

Time as "absolute"? - can you explain this?

Short background from an article:

"Isaac Newton founded classical mechanics on the view that space is distinct from body and that time passes uniformly without regard to whether anything happens in the world. For this reason he spoke of absolute space and absolute time, so as to distinguish these entities from the various ways by which we measure them (which he called relative spaces and relative times)."

Source https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/newton-stm/ 

 

Absolute time passes equably without relation to anything external, and thus without reference to any change or way of measuring of time (e.g., the hour, day, month, or year). Time also passes equally for all observers regardless of frame of reference.

We now know that time does not pass equably for all observers, time is not absolute.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
14 hours ago, Gater said:

Its my contention that the Universe has always been here.

Kant proved it two ways: logically he proved that the universe is limited in time and space, and he also gives a proof that time and space are unlimited. His conclusion: one cannot apply such concepts in science. It belongs to the domain of metaphysics. (I don't know to which conclusions Kant would come if he would have lived in these days.)

Point: your 'logic' is not as logical as it seems to you.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The big bang had a beginning.  The question is what was before the big bang?  And what is beyond the range of the big bang?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
56 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

The big bang had a beginning.  The question is what was before the big bang?  And what is beyond the range of the big bang?

Did it? I didn't know that was known.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Airbrush said:

And what is beyond the range of the big bang?

Does the big bang have a range? What is that?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, Airbrush said:

The big bang had a beginning.

We don't know anything about that. Our model for it is unpredictable beyond a certain time. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/11/2019 at 4:30 PM, Mordred said:

One thing you learn is often mere logic can lead you down the wrong garden path to incorrect answers...

+1

Perfect logic requires the right assumptions, and we can't be absolutely sure about the ones we have taken on.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2019 at 5:54 AM, Gater said:

Time as "absolute"? - can you explain this?

There is no universal now.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, Ghideon said:

Does the big bang have a range? What is that?

The observable universe has a range.  Beyond that we can only speculate it is not much different than what we see for a good distance.  But very, very far away, like a googol light years away, what does the big bang look like?  Maybe space between big bangs in a multiverse?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think you are conflating "big bang" and "universe". They are not the same thing.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/11/2019 at 8:25 PM, Gater said:

What about Logic - apparently this group doesn't consider Logic a science.

It is not a science. It is a branch of mathematics, and therefore a tool of science. 

It doesn't mean "making stuff up that makes sense to you."

 

On 8/11/2019 at 8:25 PM, Gater said:

Science isn't looking for the truth?

No.We have multiple theories that describe the same thing in different ways (for example, gravity is a force according to Newton, but the effect of geometry according to Einstein). Is one of these true and the other false? Or maybe they are both "true" in the send they both work as useful models.

Quote

Logically space and time have to be infinite.

So you are using "logically" to mean "something that makes sense to you". That is not the meaning of logic.

And there is no reason to think that space must be either finite or infinite. You can probably find the same number of people who insist it "must be finite" (because logic) as are certain that it "must be infinite" (also because logic). They can't both be right, and neither group are actually using logic, so we need some way of deciding. Science uses evidence. In this case, there is no strong evidence either way.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 8/12/2019 at 2:12 PM, Phi for All said:

We don't know anything about that. Our model for it is unpredictable beyond a certain time. 

Scientists don't know the big bang started?   That's interesting.   How can any event happen and not begin?  How can the big bang happen, if it never began?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, Airbrush said:

Scientists don't know the big bang started?   That's interesting.   How can any event happen and not begin?  How can the big bang happen, if it never began?

The Big Bang theory is a description of how the universe evolved from a hot, dense, homogeneous state to what we see now. We don't know how it got to that state. There is no evidence for, and no information about, a hypothetical beginning. There are speculations about a beginning, but just as many which involve no beginning.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.