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.
It may be possible to glimpse before the supposed beginning of time into the universe prior to the Big Bang, researchers now say.
Unfortunately, any such picture will always be fuzzy at best due to a kind of "cosmic forgetfulness."
The Universe is everything that physically exists: the entirety of space and time, all forms of matter, energy and momentum, and the physical laws and physical constants that govern them.
My add: This definition speaks of our universal reality from the start of the "Big Bang" to its current state. There is no proven or disproven source of the universe. The universe cannot be considered a closed system but rather an individual 'whole' on its own. Just as a solar system is within a galaxy and a galaxy is within a universe. The universe is contained within a larger system.
Originally posted by Aronolac
Answer: Time-space language requires some explanation as to how we have reached the point in the present.
Behind us is history. Ahead of us is potential - undefined destiny.
History relates how time-space began, for it does have a beginning, but the underlying forces of universe building existed simultaneously as actual and potential intentions of the First Source before time-space existed.
Those of us born in time can not conceive of an un-caused cause as described, but that is what the First Source is.
That is not religious fantasy, but cosmic truth, and until you and I are far beyond the shores of our origins on this planet, we will have to contemplate that situation as an unexplained probability.
I have not responded to all of what you have asked, and I doubt what you are really digging for is fully known even to yourself. Thank you for your good questions, and if what I have not answered is still important to address, well, try again.
Thank you.
Ron
Originally posted by wigit
Okay, I expect a body to die and rot, but not ME that's inside THIS body.
Originally posted by TheBandit795
If the "me" was only dependent on the personalization of past physical experiences, then you wouldn't be able to just quiet your mind and focus on the present moment IMO. IMO you are not your memories and not your physical body.
Originally posted by TheBandit795
If the "me" was only dependent on the personalization of past physical experiences, then you wouldn't be able to just quiet your mind and focus on the present moment IMO. IMO you are not your memories and not your physical body.
Originally posted by TheBandit795
Yes the present moment changes all the time, but it is still the present moment.
Originally posted by TheBandit795
The past and future only exist in your mind.
Originally posted by DIRTMASTER
I love science but that just shows that Physics is still flawed. Since things do die. despite everything science has accomplished so far. I still think are egos are to big for our britches. We have a lot to learn and will prove ourselves wrong many more times before we get the real clue..
Originally posted by Paul_Richard
If one goes by the basic principles of physics, then yes, death doesn't make sense.
Originally posted by Schmidt1989
People aren't made of energy. We don't contain energy, we don't produce energy, and we dont use energy to do things. We just call it energy as a lamen term for the public. Drinking a redbull gives you energy right? Nothing can give you energy.
E=MC2
Energy=Mass times the speed of light. Energy isn't around us, Matter is around us. Energy is a force. We con't control or do anything with it.
[edit on 9/15/2007 by Schmidt1989]
If you've got some hard evidence for the existence of consciousness outside a functioning brain, I'm sure everyone would love to hear it.
Originally posted by disgustedbyhumanity
Isn't it possible that we die because we have exhausted the last of our energy?
Or as I believe, when we die our energy gets released into nature as a whole?
EMC2 is flawed in my opinion I beleieve there are ways to get more energy out of something than is put in. Imagine a steep pinnacle. Over time it is eroded away,and eventually you have a huge boulder now only connected by a thread to the formation. A raindrop falls, breaks it loose and it rolls downhill eventually destroying several homes. So a little raindrop releases energy to the equivelant of a bunch of dynamite. Where did all the energy come from? .
Originally posted by mdiinican
Energy is not a force. Energy is the ability to do work. You can have forces that don't consume energy, and energy that is never used to create a force. We can easily control energy through a multitude of different means. Charging a battery puts more chemical potential energy into a battery, for example. throwing a ball puts kinetic energy into it.