Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
-
- Posts: 1780
- Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
-
- Posts: 1780
- Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus
-
- Posts: 1780
- Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
* This post was drafted before ThinkingCritical's reply.tommarcus wrote: ↑August 14th, 2018, 8:18 pm Greta:
By "existence" I am referring to the dimension in which everything that exists must reside as well as the capacity to exist. So it is both the actual dimension and the law of that dimension.
For example, assume there existed a two dimensional world. That world would have two dimensions say vertical and horizontal. Also any object in that world would also have to be two dimensional and follow all of the rules associated with being two dimensional.
Existince is a dimension which everything that exists must have, otherwise it cannot exist. I believe this because I believe that the universe had a beginning. So when the universe did not exist there had to be pure existence itself. Even the creator, if you believe in one, had to have this dimension as part of his or her being and capacity otherwise, by definition, he or she would not exist either. Could there be other dimensions? Yes. But one way or another the ability to exist cannot just be taken for granted. It had to be somewhere.
Another way to look at it is that in order to write letters with chaulk, you have to have a blackboard to write on. Existence is the blackboard. We are fairly confident that the universe us expanding. But it can't expand into absolute nothingness because there is nothing to expand into. The universe would hit a wall. There must be something there for the universe to expand into. That would be the dimension of existence itself in which the physical world started and is expanding into.
Thanks for your question. It was a good one.
Physicists would tell you that the "blackboard" is the Higgs Boson. Panentheists would say it's their deity. String theorists have the extra dimensions. Then there's the idea of quanta as essentially the "pixels of reality".
I think it must be a philosophy hobby to imagine extra dimensions. I have my own version of another dimension :)
Rather than "existence" I called my extra dimension "eversion", based on how a lifespan - or even a nonliving span of existence - is basically a process of turning inside out (out outside-in works just as well).
1. It starts with a germ - a seed, egg, dust, microbe etc.
2. The germ gathers the environment into it, ie. starts to grow. A fast changing and tempestuous phase.
3. More settled, slower growth - still taking in more of the environment than it is taking back from you..
4. A maximal period. The peak of on'e physical powers.
5. Decline - the environment starts taking back more than the entity can take in.
6. Decrepitude, another rapidly changing and tempestuous phase.
7. Brain death (noting that the body is now a colony of microbes)
One's level of eversion would tell you whether you were on the existential upswing or downswing, how quickly in that direction you were going, and where you were in the cycle of eversion that is a life span.
Ultimately, though, what we are both suspecting and guessing about is that there seems to be some kind of extra dimensionality to reality - more than is explained in physics. Perhaps the issue is as much an inability to marry quantum mechanics with Einsteinian relativity as an inability to marry the hard and soft sciences - being able to formally trace the steps from physics through to evolution through to sociology. There's some critical knowledge gaps in that line so thinkers everywhere wonder what lies in the gaps.
-
- Posts: 95
- Joined: July 25th, 2018, 10:54 am
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
We are talking about dimensions and have different ideas. I believe that part of the reason is because we do not have a precise common definition of "dimension". However, it appears that in these discussions a common thread is that it represents some aspect of existence. My working definition is that a dimension is an aspect of all existence not just the physical universe, each totally independent from the other. If one characteristic of a dimension is a function of another dimension, then it can't be part if a separate dimension. So in my thinking, maybe I have two dimensions, the physical dimensions and the dimension of existence.
So while our physical world can give us insight into the dimension of existence, our physical laws cannot explain it because they don't operate there. We are like the proverbial fish in a fish bowl trying to understand the world outside the bowl while the only experience we have is swimming and water. There is evidence of this dimension. It is our self-awareness of our existence.We can't sense or be aware of something that doesn't exist. It is in this dimension that our lives beyond the control of cause and effect.
This is also the reason that I maintain skepticism about the Big Bang. As I fight summer vacation traffic I slow down to the accident ahead. All other cars leading to this intersection on other roads also slow down. We are decelerating. The closer we get, the faster we decelerate. Now assume someone is taking a moving picture of this scene, where all cars are squeezing to a center. Now take that movie and play it in reverse. It will look like an explosion from the point of the accident.
Why would we play the movie in reverse? Because we see the light of those objects that are closest to us first. Those that are far away we see later and later. Further in reverse, the far away objects in reverse appear to be accelerating at a faster rate. This is exactly what the latest observations show. Hence I believe this is possible evidence for a Big Squeeze.
-
- Posts: 3601
- Joined: February 28th, 2014, 4:50 pm
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
What causes the deceleration?We are decelerating.
If we play the movie of the traffic jam in reverse then everything would appear to be diverging, but this is, by definition, the reverse of what has occurred in the recording.Why would we play the movie in reverse? Because we see the light of those objects that are closest to us first.
If we record an egg rolling off the counter and hitting the floor and then play it in reverse it would appear to be the same if there were no arrow of time. Entropy increases but would appear to decrease if we played it in reverse and the egg went from a mess on the floor to a whole egg on the counter. But that ain’t the way things happen. Playing the movie in reverse merely creates an illusion. You cannot use that illusion to explain the expansion of the universe.
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
-
- Posts: 95
- Joined: July 25th, 2018, 10:54 am
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
So I won't question a scientist about a microbe that he or she has been studying for 20 years. But when he starts talking about the theory of life or metaphysics, we are starting from a different sheet of paper. History is full of break throughs by people who didn't just discovered something new, but discovered a new way of thinking.
-
- Posts: 1780
- Joined: January 27th, 2012, 9:32 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: Hermese Trismegistus
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
I can not make reference to an expanding Universe be because there is no such animal as the Big Bang, followed up by an Expanding Universe.
This State of Nothingness existing without mass.
The State of Nothingness existing as Omniscient Transcendental (Metaphysical) Fully Random quantum State of Singularity, filled with an unspoken of quantity, number, of Infinitely Finite Indivisible Singularities having no relative, numerical Value, having a numerical value of Zero-0.
Time, Space and Motion existing as Singularities having no relative, numerical value, having a numerical value of Zero-0.
Time eternal existing at the Zero-0 Hour, Space Existing as a Great Void.
Motion existing without meaning, having no displacement, no angular momentum, no velocity of speed and direction, nothing being measurable as to location or momentum within the State of Singularity; Motion existing as an insignificant innate inner motion of each Infinitely Finite Indivisible Singularity of Zero-0, as a vibration, an oscillation, each of the omnipresent Singularities of Zero-0 existing as pure unadulterated Heat Energy making a Humming Sound, OHM!
It is this Humming Sound that the Theorists have given the name, defined, mistakenly deemed to be Red Shift, to be left over from the Bing Bang, Red Shift being used as evidence of an Expanding Universe, which was theoretically preceded by a Big Bang.
Existence, that from which the Whole of Reality was born, pure unadulterated Heat Energy.
Existence, in the material sense of the word began with a whimper, a
“Bump in the Night.”
The Universe is not expanding; however, the Universe is growing.
- Thinking critical
- Posts: 1793
- Joined: November 7th, 2011, 7:29 pm
- Favorite Philosopher: A.C Grayling
- Location: Perth, Australia (originally New Zealand)
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
This is very strange reasoning? For one, in order for your logic (big squeeze) to be valid, it means that we are experiencing the Universe in reverse. Squeezing infers everything is getting closer together, why not just call the Big Crunch as predicted by some models.This is also the reason that I maintain skepticism about the Big Bang. As I fight summer vacation traffic I slow down to the accident ahead. All other cars leading to this intersection on other roads also slow down. We are decelerating. The closer we get, the faster we decelerate. Now assume someone is taking a moving picture of this scene, where all cars are squeezing to a center. Now take that movie and play it in reverse. It will look like an explosion from the point of the accident.
Why would we play the movie in reverse? Because we see the light of those objects that are closest to us first. Those that are far away we see later and later. Further in reverse, the far away objects in reverse appear to be accelerating at a faster rate. This is exactly what the latest observations show. Hence I believe this is possible evidence for a Big Squeeze.
Analogies generally tend to be a weak form of argument, for example the reason the Universes expansion appears to be increasing is not the same reason as why the objects in your reverse video are speeding up. The speed at which the Universe is expanding is not technically increasing, it's relative to observation. In other words because expansion occurs via inflation it means the distance between any 2 given points are always moving away from each other at an ever increasing speed relative to the position of the observer of one of the points (draw two dots side by side on a balloon and blow it up to see what I mean) so it only appears the expansion in increasing. It is a common misconception when people hear astronomers say the Universe is expanding faster than the speed light to then infer that something can travel faster that the speed of light ( which us not possible).
So no, I don't see the logic.
-
- Posts: 95
- Joined: July 25th, 2018, 10:54 am
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
I have no idea, at least yet, as to what was actually there. But I know one thing, there was some form of existence. If there was absolutely nothing, including no God, it would hard to imagine how the universe could have gotten started. Even if we want to believe that the universe spontaneously combusted, it would have had to have combusted from something. This tells me that at least one state of something existed not part of the universe and that was existence itself. No matter what was there, it would have had to have had this dimension, otherwise it would not have been able to exist. When we talk about going from absolutely nothing to something, you cannot just simply assume the ability of something to exist. That ability itself must exist.
Now scientists have theoretically calculated the speed of expansion within microseconds of the Big Bang in their model. Based on the position of stars and objects in the universe, that speed had to exceed the speed of light. As we know, nothing exceeds the speed of light in the current universe.
To go from an unlimited existence where speed and positions in space are unlimited and unrestricted to a limited world implies that some limits had to be imposed on the dimension of existence. Without those simple restrictions the physical world could never coalesce. Anything entering an unbounded dimension would immediately fill the entire space because there is nothing to stop it and that is the law of the unbounded existence.
We see evidence of those restrictions in the form of gravity and speed. Speed has a lijmit at the speed of light. Gravity presents the immediate expansion of the matter in the universe, Hence my conclusion is that at the moment of creation, the universe was squeezed from the dimension of existence as limits on speed and space (and therefore time) were imposed. We see it from our vantage point as an explosion. But explosions don't gain more energy and speed up. When you put the brakes on you sliiw doesn. But if the engine wants to going then when you take you foot off the brake it speeds up. To me, the natural form of existence is to be unlimited and restricted unless restricted in some way. What caused those restrictions is another question.
Of course this argument presumes that the universe had a beginning. If it did not have vCard a beginning, then that introduces other problems which we have been discussing. An infinitely expanding and contracting universe does not address those problems, either.
- Sy Borg
- Site Admin
- Posts: 14992
- Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
No no no no no.
You do not need a God of intelligent prime mover at all. The laws of physics allow for universes to inflate from the virtual particles of hyperspace. The moment you introduce God, you have an endless regression problem: Then who made God? Who made the maker? Who made the maker's maker?
- Aragwen
- New Trial Member
- Posts: 6
- Joined: August 23rd, 2018, 3:14 pm
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
I can believe that at the big bang, or the very first big bang if there has been more than one, a consciousness also occurred so God and the universe have to obey the laws of logic and physics. Perhaps God is the caretaker of the universe and all that's in it, who knows, we must remember if there is a God who can know His mind?
-
- Posts: 95
- Joined: July 25th, 2018, 10:54 am
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
Regression of God's existence, if we want to assume he or she existed, is clearly something that must be addressed. But this problem assumes that time and cause and effect operate in the dimensions beyond the physical dimensions and our universe. That is a big, unsupported assumption and not very likely.
-
- Posts: 2466
- Joined: December 8th, 2016, 7:08 am
- Favorite Philosopher: Socrates
Re: Did the universe exist for ever or does it have a beginning?
But it is quite the assumption to make that just because cause and effect isn't the full story that a known God doesn't need to account for itself. True the answer would likely be incomprehensible to you and me but there is no reason to assume that there isn't an answer or that there doesn't need to be an answer.
After all if your known God doesn't need to account for its existence then I have a much simpler solution with less assumptions which is that the universe doesn't need to account for its existence.
2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month
Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023
Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023