THE UNIVERSE (Solving the Mistery)

[HellHound]

Well to begin with,i have a question that i bet no one thought about.When i first thought about this,my life took another direction,one that involves science.I felt challenged every time i thought about it,like i stopped breathing.it doesn't matter what religion you are,this question will give you a head ache.


So let us leave this shitty planet aside and go way back to the beginning.The one where there was NOTHING. Let us think for a second.Everything in this current state of the universe evolves from a previous something.there can not be anything without a beginning and to go further with my theory you should agree with this statement.So if there can me nothing from nothing that WTF made it possible for SPACE and TIME to appear and the so called GOD PARTICLE that gives matter the property to have its own weight.You cannot make something from nothing.

Think about it,leave your answer and possibly add something to my answer and lets do the Rambling of the Wise.

[Ryhanna]

I think there's a LOT in this world and universe that we don't understand and may possibly never understand. What was there before the supposed Big Bang? If there was nothing, how did this occur?

I'm sure someone will have a supposed answer to those questions however. It's just a matter of how accurate they are and how many flaws it has.

[INFERNO]

This is not a new question or "theory" you're bringing forward at all, it's not blowing my mind out.

According to you, your theory is based on two premises, only one makes any sense though, and that is that things come from previous things. The second premise that I must agree is the nonsense one because a) that is not a premise and b) that makes your "theory" unfalsifiable, which since you're operating within the realms of science, makes it no longer a theory. It makes it an unverifiable fact (makes no sense). So to carry on with this debate, I'm excluding your second premise.

The "God Particle" is a matter of blind faith that doesn't require having blind faith in previous things.
Time is a theoretical concept, it is not something that physically exists. Both of these do not require having something before them because they are not physical things, they are purely theoretical.

Space can be accounted for by the Big Bang Theory, which can be accounted for by the Big Crunch Theory. Alternatively, it can be accounted for by the String Theory and M-Theory.

[Missing]

I do believe the answer is 42.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/42_%28number%29

[HellHound]

Well the GOD PARTICLE is something that exists.Maybe i did not (BLOW YOUR MIND) with my subject but for me it really is a head ache.The thing is you did not really debate my question as you did not agree to or deny my statement.I do not really belive in one theory but in a mixture of them as i do not fully trust my religion

[Obscene Eyedeas]

As countless generations of schoolchildren are taught to parrot in class, the law of conservation of energy states that it cannot be created or destroyed, but merely transformed from one form to another.

In 1927, Dr Werner Heisenberg showed that the truth is rather more interesting in a paper that addressed a philosophical question: how do we know what reality is like? The answer seems obvious: by making observations. But Dr Heisenberg pointed out that the newly emerging quantum theory implied that the very act of observation affects whatever is being observed. That, in turn, means it is impossible to know with total precision what reality is actually like.

Dr Heisenberg went on to show that his now-celebrated Uncertainty Principle implies there is always some uncertainty about properties of any region of space – specifically, how much energy it contains over a given period. The “law” of energy conservation is thus merely a conceit, and one whose violation leads to some astonishing consequences – including support for the something-for-nothing view of reality.

Heisenberg’s principle implies, for example, that the very space around us is seething with subatomic particles, popping in and out of empty space. During their fleeting existence, these “vacuum particles” interact with each other, and turn the supposedly dull vacuum of space into the quantum vacuum – which astronomers now know is anything but dull. Observations suggest the expansion of the entire cosmos is being propelled by quantum vacuum energy, in the form of enigmatic “dark energy”.

http://www.nanogallery.info/news/?id=8735&slid=news&type=anews

So it may be possible to get something from nothing. To try and understand the universe is not within humanities grasp yet but there are many theories that people can argue. Facts are great and 9 times out of 10 they can be right but at the end of the day with new discoveries we overthrow many of our existing facts for an even greater understanding. Trying to understand the universe as of yet is not quite possible. Just look at quantum physics

[Peace God]

I dont know if we can say there was nothing...

1. Energy cannot be created or destroyed.
2. The big bang was the beginning of space AND time. So i dont really see how there can be anything before time.

[Obscene Eyedeas]

1. Energy cannot be created or destroyed.
See my first post. That is actually being proved to be flawed as far as new studies have determined

[Peace God]

lol ok never mind then. But i still dont see how we can come from nothing because wouldn't the laws of physics and the 4 main forces of physics still have to exist? Thanks for the info btw, i'll look into it.

Edit: Also, what exactly is nothing?

[HellHound]

EXACTLY,what is nothing.For us humans that is what we cannot see or belive it doesent exist.But leaving twisted facts aside.Even if we talk about nothing or something,everything must have a start.And yet here we are talking about the most interesting question that humanity has to face.

[INFERNO]

Well the GOD PARTICLE is something that exists.Maybe i did not (BLOW YOUR MIND) with my subject but for me it really is a head ache.The thing is you did not really debate my question as you did not agree to or deny my statement.I do not really belive in one theory but in a mixture of them as i do not fully trust my religion

I did address the "theory" you put forward and which statement are you referring to because you made several statements so I'm not sure which one I did not address?

For us humans that is what we cannot see or belive it doesent exist.

There are many things that do exist but that we cannot see. Just because we may believe or disbelieve in something, that does not necessarily affect its existence.

[Sage]

everything must have a start.

And all you're proposing is that the Universe was started by something else that doesn't need a start. Whooptie-do. The First Cause argument, which is what you're trying to use, is stupid and has been refuted more times than one can practically count.

[Shortkid]

Suppose the God particle is the maker's way of putting himself in us. Somewhere I read that God made man in his own image. Maybe thats how he did it!

[Obscene Eyedeas]

People must remember that there is a possibility of creating something from nothing. therefore why not the universe

[Sage]

Suppose the God particle is the maker's way of putting himself in us. Somewhere I read that God made man in his own image. Maybe thats how he did it!

Man made God.

[Heretic]

Somewhere I read that God

Stop talking.

[Iron Man]

I don`t believe in god, and science best describes the creation of everything. A rule book that sorts the idiots from the priests isn`t science at all (no offence to believers).

[Sith Lord 13]

Quantum Foam (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_foam)

No god needed for this.

[HillBillyWilly]

The big Bang theory is simply evidence that God clapped his hands together and said:

"Let there be light!"

Other than that, the bible said that God exsisted before everything else, and has no beggining or end, so there WAS something before the universe.


I guess that God wanted a following, so he made everything on Earth and all the stars, but was saddened because what he had created could not praise him, so he made Man.

NOW I AM NOT SAYING THIS IS TRUE, just my interpretation. and plus, if god has no beggining or end, it makes me wonder if he has doen this before, and it is a cycle of praise and dormancy

[Sage]

The big Bang theory is simply evidence that God clapped his hands together and said:

"Let there be light!"
That's not evidence.

Other than that, the bible said that God exsisted before everything else, and has no beggining or end, so there WAS something before the universe.
Yeah, no.

I guess that God wanted a following,
A perfect being needs nothing. Wanting things is a flaw.

so he made everything on Earth and all the stars, but was saddened because what he had created could not praise him, so he made Man.
Sadness is also a flaw. Your god seems pretty weak. I also question what good our praise is. So what if we think this is a neat universe? It's the only universe we know. Any praise we give for it is hollow.

[Obscene Eyedeas]

the closer we get to understanding the universe the more we see that we do not need a "God" for the creation of the universe. things do come from nothing particles which alter existence on the most minuscule of scales. it is best known by the name dark matter. i dislike the "God" particle. it is obscene to mix religion in such a way with science to do so is to admit all religion has flaws and all life is gods children

[INFERNO]

The big Bang theory is simply evidence that God clapped his hands together and said:

"Let there be light!"

If that is so, the Big Bang led to more than simply light, it led to the introduction of matter and particles into the universe. Also, what do you think of the Big Crunch theory?


Other than that, the bible said that God exsisted before everything else, and has no beggining or end, so there WAS something before the universe.

You're assuming that every single thing written in the bible is factual and truthful, however, there's no way to verify that. But I'll ignore this assumption and say that it is truthful. You claim that god's existence is infinite and dictionaries all say time is also infinite. In order for god to have existed before everything else, the concept of time must have come after God. Both are infinite and there is no way to provide a reasonable argument that god came before time. If time lasts longer than god does, then there's no way for god to have made the concept of time because something else made god.

Of course, I can take another argument of saying that many religions claim their god(s) or other higher beings made the universe, not your god. If everyone is tossing around different beings, then there is obviously someone lying. Possibly you, possibly them. You don't know.


I guess that God wanted a following, so he made everything on Earth and all the stars, but was saddened because what he had created could not praise him, so he made Man.

The LORD was grieved that he had made man on the earth, and his heart was filled with pain. (Genesis 6:6)

God apparently is not satisfied by Man being able to praise him and fulfill his desires. This is rather odd though considering that God has the power to make beings into the exact way he wants. I guess he thinks he screwed up (i.e. God is not perfect).


and plus, if god has no beggining or end, it makes me wonder if he has doen this before, and it is a cycle of praise and dormancy

That is a fair point, God may have done this before. But if the other attempts failed and this attempt at Man failed, the God is failing quite a lot during his infinite existence.

[Richi07]

You know, I think you're thinking about "before the universe" but, the new theories say that it is not logical to think of something that exists "before" or "outside" the universe; they say that, at the same time the universe was created, space and time were created too. As it is not logical to think of the universe without space-time, it isn't logical either to think about the space-time without universe. A priest already had thought about this hundreds of years ago and he reached more or less the same conclusion.

Anyway, there are theories that say parallel universes are like parallel blankets on the wind. This blankets are always bending and, sometimes, they touch each other, generating what we call "a big bang". So they say that, maybe, the big bang was just an ordinary thing that happens everyday and not the great event we've always thought it was. Right how they are doing particle experiments on the LHC (you know, that underground lab in Europe) to see if parallel universes do exist.

[HellHound]

Well the sad conclusion,no one knows the answer.