It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Thank you.

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

# Impossibility of the universe

page: 1
9
share:

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 08:47 PM
I was so impressed with the new thread on the size of the universe,
www.abovetopsecret.com...
that a very important thought came to me. The Hubble telescope photo shows stars and galaxies at 13 billion light years away, right? These galaxies have trillions of stars, and the universe is dated to be only 800 million years old in that photo, right? Now, I'm going to ask you a very obvious question: How did the material from all of these galaxies disperse throughout the 13 billion light years of distance in only 800 million years? It is, according to the Theory of Relativity, impossible. All the matter in the universe had to move such great distances, that to cover those distances and be dispersed in only 800 million years means they would have to be traveling at speeds much faster than the speed of light.

The minimum distance to travel would be 13 billion light years in 800 million years, correct? To reach these distances at the speed of light would have taken a minimum of 13 billion light years. If these galaxies dispersed in 800 million years, that means they traveled at (13 billion light years divided by 800 million light years) times the speed of light. The number is 16.5. So, the universe dispersed at 16.5 times the speed of light, then it suddenly slowed to below the speed of light, coalesced, formed living organisms etc. If you take out the last 4.5 billion years when we assume the Earth was in place and beginning to show signs of life, that means the universe would have to be dispersed in only 8.5 billion years. That makes the speed not 16.5 times the speed of light, but now makes it 25.23 times the speed of light. Whew! That is some serious moving... and then it really had to stop fast.... If you really think about it, just the stars and galaxies in the Hubble photo are over 800 million light years apart. That's impossible, right? Because you can't move matter faster than the speed of light.

[edit on 14-4-2009 by Jim Scott]

[edit on 14-4-2009 by Jim Scott]

[edit on 15-4-2009 by Jim Scott]

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:09 PM
I think you misunderstand something.

The universe is between 13.5 and 14 Billion years old, best as we can tell. Lambda-Cold Dark Matter concordance model says that it is 13.75 billion years old, which is what I assumed the picture was using as a rough age of origin.

So if we look out and 'back' 13 billion years, the universe we are looking at is less than a billion years old, and saying that it's 800 million fits right in with the Lambda-CDM concordance model.

We are, in effect, looking back in time. Those objects do not exist right 'now' as we see them. What we see is limited by the speed of light.

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:10 PM
I've always believed in a Genius Of Design aka GOD. Every creation serves a purpose more often beyond human intelligence. Here's GOD's wisdom!

+8 more
posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:11 PM
No offense at all.

I believe saying "God" manufactured this, instead of saying, we just don't know enough right now to realize how it happened, is a cop out, It's stunts our growth, it keeps us from making those thoughts that progress us, instead of saying how did this happen, you say Well God can do anything.

Saying that the Universe broke the sound barrier, wouldn't be that far fetched. When it did, these events took place.
But then again, we just plain out don't know, and I would rather look for the answers then say "I have faith in god, he did it" and learn nothing.

No offense, if you believe in God GREAT, if you don't thats GREAT to.

.....Don't flame me

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:16 PM
Why I don't- I believe in random events and I don't believe in God.

But to each their own.

And I think even if I did believe in God, I would need to understand God more with more physical evidence to believe that He would be capable of creating not the universe itself but the forces within the universe.

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:17 PM
No, the real decision lies behind this: do you care if you gonna survive death or not ?

If surviving your death is the most important thing in your life you will most likely believe in God or some other form of higher being...

That is because of promise of afterlife, your lil' special free gift from God himself

Once you start to believe you will believe anything else which can help you to rationalize it

I do not care about afterlife, therefore I can consider other possibilities of how universe did or did not came to be, because I have nothing to loose or to fear...

Did you know that, for example, Big Bang theory, as one of the currently accepted interpretations of our Universe, has many problems (blue shift is one, for example) and it's not the final word in astrophysics ?

Like any other theory it can be indefinitely modified, refined or even rejected in accordance to the future evidence...

Once you go God did it, despite the future evidence, God still did it, as a matter a fact, one might ask: why even look for evidence at that point ?

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:17 PM
I have a feeling that there is an explanation for this, probably, so...hopefully people won't start flaming.
I believe pseudoscience happens and people making a profession out of bad data, but this seems like something all the theorists out there couldn't miss....
Therefore there is probably something to account for or explain why, how we got here at the speed we're going, considering the speed we should have been going to start with, and all that.
Some reasoning behind orbiting the larger body (sun) changing our 'travel plans' lol or maybe even some crazy quantum physics stuff (eg. relativistic effects - satellites end up 14 seconds ahead of us on their clocks per year or something like that, I think, being farther away from the earth than us and our watches down here...interesting!)
Yeah, just wanted to throw that in, though I don't know the first thing about how it might affect expansion of the universe lol But this stuff in itself is really cool to think about in the context of spiritual beliefs, anyhow...

Anyway, I believe God exists. At the very least, it seems insane that we would be the only ones out here in ...space...time...whatever we live in.

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:20 PM
So it would take 13 billion years for the light to reach our eyes. The light comes from a region of space belived to have been 800 million years old, at the time the light left them to begin the journey to our eyes.

You are saying that the matter/stars/galaxies/etc. would have to travel 13 billion lightyears in 800 million years. These facts aren't related to eachother, the matter didn't orginate here! So to say the matter had to travel 13 billion lightyears if false, as we are not the origin of the universe.

Am I right or not? I may be the one misthinking this, lol.

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:22 PM
No one knows what is beyond the point before the seconds before the big bang so claiming god did it is illogical because you still have to prove what god is to prove he caused it. Otherwise anyone can just say anything they want created the universe without having to prove it.

[edit on 14-4-2009 by andre18]

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:31 PM
Since you cannot get something from nothing, there was a creator.

The first cause argument also leads to a creator, if you believe in causation that is.

Then there's the anthropic principal, also leads to God.

Sacred geometry, again - God.

I see the hand of a wonderfully infinite intelligent design everywhere I look, and it only makes rational sense to think that behind the intelligence, is an intelligent, and therefore self aware being.

Now some would say that WE are an indistinguishable and inextricable part of that self awareness process, but I'm pretty sure that God is still God with or without us, and is not dependant upon human conscious awareness.

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:32 PM
Since you cannot get something from nothing, there was a creator.

The first cause argument also leads to a creator, if you believe in causation that is.

Then there's the anthropic principal, also leads to God.

Sacred geometry, again - God.

I see the hand of a wonderfully infinite intelligent design everywhere I look, and it only makes rational sense to think that behind the intelligence, is an intelligent, and therefore self aware being.

Now some would say that WE are an indistinguishable and inextricable part of that self awareness process, but I'm pretty sure that God is still God with or without us, and is not dependant upon human conscious awareness.

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:33 PM

I think you misunderstand something.

The universe is between 13.5 and 14 Billion years old, best as we can tell. Lambda-Cold Dark Matter concordance model says that it is 13.75 billion years old, which is what I assumed the picture was using as a rough age of origin. So if we look out and 'back' 13 billion years, the universe we are looking at is less than a billion years old, and saying that it's 800 million fits right in with the Lambda-CDM concordance model. We are, in effect, looking back in time. Those objects do not exist right 'now' as we see them. What we see is limited by the speed of light.

From www.newscientist.com...:

The record for the most distant object in the Universe has been broken again. Astronomers have spied a galaxy burning an astonishing 13.6 billion light years away. Because its light has taken billions of years to travel to Earth, astronomers are seeing the galaxy as it looked when the Universe was only about 900 million years old.

As is typical of science, when confronted with broken fundamental laws, they argue that the laws do not apply. However, universally, if matter exceeds the speed of light, according to the Theory of Relativity, it assumes infinite mass. Since matter is exceeding the speed of light in the universe to make the universe, it must violate the Theory of Relativity. Sounds like a problem, expecially when matter is going at it at 25+ times the speed of light.

To answer your reply, if the matter appears to be 13.6 billion light years away, it must have separated from the origin point to a distance of 13.6 billion light years in 800 million years. Right? Ok, that's impossible according to the Theory of Relativity.

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:35 PM
This is a well thought out thread. I'm impressed. However, are you really looking for the answer, or are you just troll baiting?

Originally posted by Jim Scott
Which is easier for you to believe? Do you have enough faith in science to believe that the universe dispersed at 25.3 times the speed of light and then essentially put on the brakes?

Inflation occurred right after the big bang

Nothing can travel faster than the speed of light through space. This does not, however, limit the speed at which space can expand. In the first 1E-35 seconds (that is 0.00..(34 zeroes)..01 seconds after the big bang the universe expanded to a diameter of something like 1 meter carrying all matter with it. So it was expanding something like 3E26 (that is 3 followed by 26 zeroes) times faster than the speed of light! And that includes the matter that was just sitting there at rest in space. Although it is not moving relative to space (whatever that means), a piece of matter can be increasing its distance from another piece of matter at speeds much faster than the speed of light if the space is expanding rapidly enough.

www.newton.dep.anl.gov...

And remember, that's just the current theory, our knowledge of the universe is always increasing. In just one thousand years we've gone from sword swinging morons to landing on the moon. Imagine what the next thousand will bring

Does it take more faith to believe in God?

Yes, and I'll explain why.
Here's the definition I believe we're working with.

Faith - firm belief in something for which there is no proof

You see, even the current big bang theory has plenty of formulas, equations, and evidence to back it up. "God did it" has no evidence, just hearsay.

You decide. It makes a difference in your life.

You're both preaching and troll baiting with this last sentence and you know it. That's fine with me. However, under no circumstance are you allowed to act ignorant and innocent of wrongdoing when this thread is flooded with those who would assault your beliefs.

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:42 PM

Originally posted by OmegaPoint
Since you cannot get something from nothing, there was a creator.

The first cause argument also leads to a creator, if you believe in causation that is.

Then there's the anthropic principal, also leads to God.

So, according to you Universe could not possibly exist forever ?

What is wrong or illogical with the concept of the infinite causality chain ???

Is there a law of physics which prohibits it or you are just making this up in order to "prove" existance of God ?

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:46 PM

What is wrong or illogical with the concept of the infinite causality chain ???

If you agree that everything counts down to the present moment, there is..

2nd line................

[edit on 14-4-2009 by OmegaPoint]

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:50 PM
Oh and if we're in an infinite causation then by extension we're in an "eternal recurrence" of some kind, then I'll be making this post again, in the same configuration at some point in the indefinite infinite future..

On a positive note, in your forever universe, death isn't even possible!

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:50 PM
We have no way of ever proving the existence of God. We also have no way of ever proving the big bang really happened. Either way, it boils down to what you WANT to believe...

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:55 PM
reply to post by Jim Scott

It's 13 Billion light years from US. I didn't realize that we were the center of the universe suddenly. You can't measure the distance to the farthest point from Earth, and then say it's impossible to go that far, because the universe isn't old enough. You would have to measure it from where the universe started at.

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:56 PM
The no first cause argument is interesting though, and contains it's own far reaching implications, and is equally as profound in terms of a non-localized transluminally interconnected oneness of which we can be aware, and aware that we are being aware of it. That has it's own meaningfullness and spirituality, and in that cosmology, I would simply call God the all that is, of which you and I are a part, at once separate, yet sharing the same eternal ground of all being and becoming. In this sense, the deeper meaning implicit in The Parable of the Good Samaritan is equally valid..

posted on Apr, 14 2009 @ 09:58 PM
I am not saying I dont believe in God, but I have heard that one theory is that the fabric of space time itself could possibly expand at or faster than the speed of light.

new topics

top topics

9