It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

We didn't appear from nothing ?

page: 2
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 11:01 PM
link   

originally posted by: TracyC
There is no way to prove any of this.

It is all conjecture and wild imaginings.


Physicists do that too.




posted on Oct, 4 2017 @ 11:15 PM
link   
a reply to: Raggedyman

Keeping in mind that dates are a very human construct and simply a tool we devised to measure time from our very limited perspective aka planet Earth.

Dates are meaningless if space-time is not linear(or completely linear) by nature, as to the mechanics or "HOW" that's the ticket now, eh?

Cant really possibly hope to guess as my limited understanding of the subject is exactly that(limited).


But if pressed i may suggest something along the lines of what if the singularity that spawned our universe begun as a white hole spawning out the matter collected by another super black hole at the center of another universe and they somehow operate in cycles endlessly creating universe one after the other?

I would also, suggest that a further understander of gravity and possibly a relation to electromagnetism may further our cause with regards to us understanding space-time.


edit on 4-10-2017 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 01:10 AM
link   
We have no evidence nothingness ever existed or can possibly ever exist. So based on the evidence, somethingness has always existed. To assert nothingness is possible you have to prove it is possible. Imaginary thoughts are meaningless.


edit on 5-10-2017 by dfnj2015 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 01:21 AM
link   
There's no such thing as the Big Bang Theory - it's simply a catch-all phrase that represents a series of competing hypotheses that attempt to explain the very earliest epochs of a universe that appears to have (at least in its current incarnation) a definite beginning.

Here's what is known:

The universe is expanding, as shown by direct measurement. This implies it will be bigger in the future, and therefore was smaller in the past. A problem cosmologists have to explain is the very even (homogeneous) distribution of matter, which on the surface seems improbable - gravity should have pulled 'stuff' together a very long time ago which wouldn't allow for the formation of stars and galaxies. This can be explained by introducing the notion of inflation, where in the very first moments the universe underwent an extremely rapid expansion forcing all matter to spread out far enough to not clump together. As unlikely as this seems, Einstein needed to introduce a term into his equations called the cosmological constant as a fudge factor to make his theories work - a term he later dubbed his greatest blunder. However, since the discovery that the universe is expanding at an ever increasing rate Einstein's blunder in fact appears to be a real phenomenon.

When I said that there's no such thing as the Big Bang Theory, what most people mean by BBT is a hypothesis known as Lambda CDM, where Lambda represents the cosmological constant (AKA dark energy), and Cold Dark Matter. LCDM is what you get when you apply Occam's razor to the competing hypotheses - it's the simplest known idea which gracefully explains what can actually be observed.

However, what LCMD doesn't try to do is explain what was going on before the initial expansion - that is where scientists HAVE to use 'wild imagination' simply because there is no known way to test these ideas. But no one for a second thinks that everything 'came from nothing' or required some sort of magic. It's just that we don't know what, why or how it happened. It's simply, as of yet, an unanswered question... or it may be unanswerable.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:58 AM
link   
a reply to: MarsIsRed

As you are probably aware Quantum physics explains that there are limits to how precisely one can know the properties of the most basic units of matter.

For instance, one can never absolutely know a particles position and momentum at the same time. A bizarre consequence of this uncertainty is that a vacuum is never completely empty but instead buzzes with so-called virtual particles(photons) packets of light that constantly wink into and out of existence.

When two mirrors are placed facing each other in a vacuum, more virtual photons can exist around the outside of the mirrors than between them, generating a seemingly mysterious force that pushes the mirrors together. This is indeed a form of something from nothing, hence everything could indeed have come from nothing under the correct circumstance.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 07:22 AM
link   
a reply to: skywatcher44

Oh look. It's THIS strawman again... OP, the Big Bang doesn't say that the universe came from nothing...



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 07:40 AM
link   
a reply to: skywatcher44

The ABYSS of Creation?

Sumer


The Abzu or Apsu (Cuneiform: 𒍪 𒀊, ZU.AB; Sumerian: abzu; Akkadian: apsû, ), also called engur (Cuneiform:𒇉, LAGAB×HAL; Sumerian: engur; Akkadian: engurru - lit., ab='water' zu='deep'), was the name for fresh water from underground aquifers which was given a religious fertilising quality in Sumerian and Akkadian mythology. Lakes, springs, rivers, wells, and other sources of fresh water were thought to draw their water from the abzu. In this respect, in Sumerian and Akkadian mythology it referred to the primeval sea below the void space of the underworld (Kur) and the earth (Ma) above.


en.wikipedia.org...


Egypt


Nu (also Nenu, Nunu, Nun), feminine Naunet (also Nunut, Nuit, Nent, Nunet), is the deification of the primordial watery abyss in the Hermopolitan Ogdoad cosmogony of ancient Egyptian religion. The name is paralleled with nen "inactivity" in a play of words in, "I raised them up from out of the watery mass [nu], out of inactivity [nen]". The name has also been compared Coptic noun "abyss; deep".[1]


en.wikipedia.org...(mythology)


Christianity


Genesis 1New International Version (NIV)
The Beginning
1 In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. 2 Now the earth was formless and empty, darkness was over the surface of the deep, and the Spirit of God was hovering over the waters.
3 And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light. 4 God saw that the light was good, and he separated the light from the darkness. 5 God called the light “day,” and the darkness he called “night.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the first day.
6 And God said, “Let there be a vault between the waters to separate water from water.” 7 So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” And there was evening, and there was morning—the second day.
9 And God said, “Let the water under the sky be gathered to one place, and let dry ground appear.” And it was so. 10 God called the dry ground “land,” and the gathered waters he called “seas.” And God saw that it was good.


www.biblegateway.com...


Seems to be a logical representation of the beginning processes here for objects and beings of Light. A point where no Light existed here. Here being described as a fluid like watery void/abyss by various, over time (possibly already inhabited) that then had Light added to it?
It would appear then that the ancient knowledge transmitted up to current time-loops is insinuating that "WE" are contained within something that is consistently flowing. That also has depths of existence? Dimensions?

To 1 subjectively speaking, there was something existing before the big bang or any similar process happened.
A energized medium for Creation to develop within.

Again that energized medium may have already been inhabited by energy forms
(these energy forms would be elder to those created after them and so may be more advanced)? and something (another energized energy) that later generated Light and Light perception was added...
By someone/thing? intelligent, who 1 describes as THE CREATOR to simplify.
Some may consider THE GOD also, to simplify/clarify from a believers perception.

The theory of big bang may just have more components that pre-date it, that over "time" here in Light will maybe become more understood as the "periods" outside of time are more clarified.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 07:40 AM
link   
dblpst
edit on 10/5/17 by Ophiuchus 13 because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 08:40 AM
link   
a reply to: skywatcher44
As Razieh Pourhasan Says in the linked video, "Physics break down there [early Universe]".
How does all the matter and energy in the Universe escape the event horizon of a Universal singularity? I understand this is what is meant by the laws of physics "break down". Gravity doesn't work so it's removed. What then becomes of our Universal singularity without the force of gravity?

edit on 10/5/2017 by Devino because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 09:34 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: mysterioustranger

Unless of course life originated in the future and somehow traveled into the past.

There are a multitude of nonlinear scenarios that could account for existence and that are just as visible as the something from nothing ideology given our district lack of understanding regarding space-time and quantum mechanics.


*Agree with you when you said "Unless of course life originated in the future and somehow traveled into the past." I think thats a distinct possibility.

Given that? I dont think there would/will/could be a total destructive world war-event because we are here now so we technically "fixed" it. It is an amazingly confusing paradox.

Thanks



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 10:32 AM
link   
Its unknown and incomprehensible of how everything came about or whether it has always been here. With the introduction of mankind to observe and contemplate it, it can be either theorized by the science and technology of the time or the simple reason, "its god."
edit on 5-10-2017 by eManym because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 10:42 AM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: MarsIsRed

As you are probably aware Quantum physics explains that there are limits to how precisely one can know the properties of the most basic units of matter.

For instance, one can never absolutely know a particles position and momentum at the same time. A bizarre consequence of this uncertainty is that a vacuum is never completely empty but instead buzzes with so-called virtual particles(photons) packets of light that constantly wink into and out of existence.

When two mirrors are placed facing each other in a vacuum, more virtual photons can exist around the outside of the mirrors than between them, generating a seemingly mysterious force that pushes the mirrors together. This is indeed a form of something from nothing, hence everything could indeed have come from nothing under the correct circumstance.


A quantum vacuum that is never completely empty does not sound like a 'nothing' out of which something can arise. It sounds like a 'something', itself. If there are 'circumstances' that can give rise to the universe, then something already exists to sustain those circumstances, doesn't it?



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 11:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: dfnj2015
We have no evidence nothingness ever existed or can possibly ever exist. So based on the evidence, somethingness has always existed. To assert nothingness is possible you have to prove it is possible. Imaginary thoughts are meaningless.


this would be more of a philosophical question, but WHY and HOW does that "somethingness" exist. Why is there something at all?


As for the Big Bang (allegedly) saying the universe came from nothing, it really doesn't say that. The Big Bang theory does not attempt to describe HOW or WHY the big bang occurred, nor does the standard Bib Bang theory attempt to say what was before the big bang.

All the Big Bang theory does is explain how the universe we see today grew out of the soup of energy that existed in the first fractions of a nanosecond after the big bang. It describes how that energy coalesced into the particles and forces that are the universe today.


edit on 5/10/2017 by Soylent Green Is People because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 12:19 PM
link   
You see yourself in the mirror. The light between you and your reflection is invisible.

How did God created a mirror to perceive his light? By dropping amplitude of the Holy Spirit, increasing frequency to compensate (an illusion begins), spiraling inward at 1:1.618 (octavial) until it can spiral no more. The mirror is formed. An illusion of the spiral is formed, which is a mirrored opposite, spiraling outward, counter to the inward spiraling waveform.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 02:01 PM
link   
a reply to: mysterioustranger

Suppose multiverse theory or even some kind of self-correcting underlying universal machine code could account for paradox correction or creation of multiple timelines.


It's certainly interesting to ponder.

As to a total destructive world war, humanity may have fallen only to rise again a few times since we have been around on our Earth, dont see why that could not happen again taking into account the present socioeconomic climate never mind our penchant for destruction and repetition, and the next Human epoch or possibly even some form AI we create be responsible for our existence.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 02:22 PM
link   
a reply to: Ross 54

So where do you suppose these so-called virtual particles that constantly wink into and out of existence originate or are created if not from nothing?

Until we discover another realm further our understanding of quantum mechanics, are able to measure and observe dark matter and energy, or we are somehow able to measure what came before the singularity that apparently spawned the current iteration of space-time in which we find ourselves, which seems highly "unlightly" given the very unobservable nature of the problem, some questions are going to remain well beyond our grasp an/or ability to even pose or comprehend.

To be honest i don't really have a clue.

edit on 5-10-2017 by andy06shake because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 03:37 PM
link   

originally posted by: Ophiuchus 13


Consider there is an element you do not see, that would be comparable to a Universal medium. This universal medium would be a un-observable universe element. Or a element that cannot be fully perceived by beings related to or from the observable universe. This universal medium would be like or similar to what is understood as dark matter - dark energy or just energy that is not fully understood by many current observers within...
Its not dark matter-energy because of its color or consciousness frequency. Its dark because the minds of the OBSERVERS trying to understand it cannot understand it, so its like a blind or dark spot in the world of hypothesized theories, as far as what it is.

So this universal medium is moving (at what speed pace universally?) not sure, as to scale it requires the complete area-perimeter map data of THIS universe and the overall volume data of the universal medium / dark energy and the complete weight as well as volume of the observable universe materials & inhabitants-growth data...

This mediums movements is basically what is affecting the galaxy spins-rotations and falls and even drifts/gravity & electromagnetism.

Look at it like a swimming pool - tank OR SOME KIND OF ENCLOSED CONTAINMENT DEVICE full of jello like material - transparent jello cold-warm-hot plasma energized like material.
The transparent jello like material would be the un-observable universal medium.

Now add some more DENSE materials into the jello cold-hot plasma like material in various regions of the pool-tank. The more dense material would be Observable universe... As the dense material is added it falls - settles - slides collects in the jello like plasma at different paces, based on the material weight and types that gather and collect together as well as the density of the un-observable universal medium holding them in their particular regions.

These areas of collection would be Galaxies & Nebula and the more dense areas or observable universe interacting with less dense regions of the un-observable universe in the more falling like regions would be Black and hypothesized White hole regions...

The un-observable is moving fast remember its more material overall by volume then the observable universe. This then causes the observable universe to also be moving- spinning - falling - rising within the un-observable medium at various rates of speed...
So now you have dense material/Observable Universe, moving fast within a lesser dense material/Un-Observable Universe that is at more volume and so causes more driving force upon the observable as its moving.

It is like the Observable galaxy are sitting on the transparent jello like plasma but are also moving - sliding - drifting within the jello like Un-observable Universal medium.

As the galaxy clusters collect they push away or attract galaxy clusters with their electromagnetic fields generated from friction like processes going on between the dense / observable universe materials and the less dense un-observable universe medium.

To 1 subjectively this is the cause of galaxy movements, rotations possible gravity and electromagnetism...
Visualize the static going on between all the interactions discussed.





posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 04:26 PM
link   

originally posted by: andy06shake
a reply to: Ross 54

So where do you suppose these so-called virtual particles that constantly wink into and out of existence originate or are created if not from nothing?

Until we discover another realm further our understanding of quantum mechanics, are able to measure and observe dark matter and energy, or we are somehow able to measure what came before the singularity that apparently spawned the current iteration of space-time in which we find ourselves, which seems highly "unlightly" given the very unobservable nature of the problem, some questions are going to remain well beyond our grasp an/or ability to even pose or comprehend.

To be honest i don't really have a clue.


Well, if something appears to be required to sustain the quantum vacuum, we can at least surmise that there is probably something more than the cosmos, as we know it, even if we can't observe or describe what this is. Whatever this is appears to be tied up in the creation of our universe.



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 04:47 PM
link   
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People

The Big Bang theory does not attempt to describe HOW or WHY the big bang occurred, nor does the standard Bib Bang theory attempt to say what was before the big bang.
I believe that this is where the Big Bang theory falls apart.

Following Universal expansion back to a single point creates problems with what we know of physics. For one, how does everything in the Universe escape the event horizon of this supposed Universal singularity?

If I understand it correctly, Gravity is removed as it is said it did not exist in the very early Universe. How then can we have a gravitational singularity without gravity? It is kind of a crucial component I would think.

The Universe is thought to be expanding faster than the speed of light, according to Huddle measurements. This appears to violate Relativity yet there are explanations around this problem that I have yet to fully understand. The explanations seem to get more complicated as more problems arise. Personally I think we have found ourselves in a 'dead-end' which means we need to rethink some of the supposed constants and our theories such as 'H', Universal Expansion and the Big Bang.

It seems to me more likely that the Huddle constant has an intrinsic value and should not be considered a constant rather than the Universe is expanding faster than the speed of light and it all started from some apparently impossible to explain big bang event. I strongly feel more time should be spend on Discordant Redshifts.

edit on 10/5/2017 by Devino because: (no reason given)



posted on Oct, 5 2017 @ 06:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: Devino

The Universe is thought to be expanding faster than the speed of light, according to Huddle measurements. This appears to violate Relativity...


That actually isn't a problem at all - Einstein said that nothing with mass can accelerate to the speed of light within spacetime. Spacetime, however, can do what the heck it wants! It has no such limits imposed upon it.

Also, I'm not sure what a discordant redshift is... and the fact your link has Arp associated with it is ringing alarm bells.



new topics

top topics



 
10
<< 1    3  4 >>

log in

join