And guess what: it doesn't f*ing matter.
We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know
141–150 of 610 posts
Re: We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know
#142Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's not impossible for something to arise out of nothing. Well, what I really should say is, it's not impossible for two somethings to arise out of nothing, as long as they have opposite charge and annihilate when they come into contact. I like to imagine there's an anti-universe moving backwards in time from the start of the universe, and that's where all the unexplained missing baryonic antimatter ended up.
If one redefined nothing as something, then the universe can arise.
I think this comment is actually very insightful.
If you assume that 'nothing' is what cannot exist, then everything becomes a matter of scale and instrument sensitivity
Re: We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know
#143the radius of the visible universe is about 14.0 billion parsecs (about 45.7 billion light-years), while the age of the universe is 13.787 ± 0.020 billion years. I must have missed out on some caveats to the speed of light.
You did - space-time can expand with unbounded speed, and that is what happened in the early universe. Remember that the big bang is not some point in space-time which we are moving away from, it is a point in space-time that has expanded to the size of the current universe (and keeps expanding). The speed of light is only a limit on how fast matter/energy can move through space-time.
The speed of causation is also so unintuitive imo, but also a must to make anything make sense logically. After watching many hours of youtube i still cant wrap my head around it.
Say you're accellerating 1g forever you never reach the speed of light for other observers..
Whats cool about gravity is that the spacetime 'train tracks' are tilted slightly into the earth so youre pulled down, but the earth is resisting tou going into it. Just waving your hands around is the same feel as playing with magnets
Re: We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know
#144Earlier quoted context omitted.
That's the thing about time-loops; you don't need to have a start and a beginning. There's a good movie about that concept; Interstellar.
Interstellar is pretty much nonsense even given the premise. Even if you are talking about time travel you can easily make something more plasuible than that. Also Interstellar had information passing from the future to the past which isn't really what's typically sufficent to consider it a time loop.
The time loop is allowed by the current understanding of physics. The math checks out.
Re: We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know
#145We may not know the answer to how the universe began, but a time loop at the beginning of the universe is my favorite explanation. Gott and Li proposed this model and you can see Gott explain it elegantly here: https://youtu.be/raTqAyLikLU
The thing about time loop is that, how and when did it began? I just can't wrap my head around something being here, there and everywhere at all times.
It's something we learn very early in the philosophy of science, is that our vision of the world will always be inherently limited by the capabilities of our perception and the way we process it
Re: We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know
#146And guess what: it doesn't f*ing matter.
It's true. Nothing "matters".
Alternatively, and secularly: It may be the ONLY thing that matters.
Re: We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know
#147We may not know the answer to how the universe began, but a time loop at the beginning of the universe is my favorite explanation. Gott and Li proposed this model and you can see Gott explain it elegantly here: https://youtu.be/raTqAyLikLU
Thanks for the link. I love how Gott started with simple everyday objects.
Re: We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know
#148Earlier quoted context omitted.
In the case of the Bible, it makes it explicitly clear that God is uncreated. Asking the question, "Who created an uncreated God?" doesn't make much sense in that case.
To be clear, it makes a ton of sense to ask such a question. The underlying assumption to the question is why only one thing is allowed to be uncreated .. ? Are there others like them, much like here on Earth where we have many authors writing many books? The Bible doesn't answer those at all, it starts in media res (despite its first three words!) (I have other complaints about such a God but)
The Bible very explicitly teaches that there are no other gods. Here is one passage among many.
Isaiah 44:6-8 ESV
Thus says the LORD, the King of Israel and his Redeemer, the LORD of hosts: "I am the first and I am the last; besides me there is no god. [7] Who is like me? Let him proclaim it. Let him declare and set it before me, since I appointed an ancient people. Let them declare what is to come, and what will happen. [8] Fear not, nor be afraid; have I not told you from of old and declared it? And you are my witnesses! Is there a God besides me? There is no Rock; I know not any."
Re: We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know
#149For decades they told us it was the Big Bang and we believed them.
«they», «us», «we» ? no matter what your beliefs are, I urge you to figure out where it comes from, by who, and how your beliefs are shared.
I don't have a prevailing interest is how the universe was formed. The subject matter doesn't interest me. What does interest me is that the generally accepted position of all scientists who worked in this field said "Big Bang" was the de facto position. Until is suddenly isn't.
That just throws the whole reputation of all those scientists into doubt with the average Joe.
Re: We don't know how the universe began, and we will never know
#150Earlier quoted context omitted.
Take any or all of your examples, and add an extra variable: if (unix_time>>128) % 2 == 1 { explode(); } Easy to code, unfalsifiable. Adds nothing to our understanding.
Who would do that? What does it prove to do that? Describe a metaphysical house that could never exist. One with mc esher stairs and melted clocks everywhere. Who would do that? What would it prove to do that? Yes computers can be a waste of time.. what's your point? You want me to tell you how to improve science with computing to save you from simplicity, or should I just instead do it...
What did you mean by "simplicity" when you wrote:
> She redefines science to require simplicity, when it simply doesn't require it.
The point of my example is to show that you don't add unnecessary complexity if you don't need to. But if you think that weather and plasma physics are examples of "ghastly complex" things, you're not talking about the same category of complexity as the one every scientist will argue against.
It's the difference between saying "go is hard" because it took until AlphaGo to make an AI to play it well vs. "go is easy" because the rules fit on a matchbox in a normal font.