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.

 

Does The Universe Exist? (Not Asking Philosophically)

page: 1
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 06:24 PM
link   
A couple days ago, I got stuck in a cycle of odd thoughts (I started thinking about one topic, which lead me thinking about another topic, etc. etc) and had a "Hmmm..." moment. So I figure I would throw it on here.

But first, some ground rules (my game, my rules!):
- Try to keep religion out of it. I don't say this because of religion being right or wrong, but if you bring religion into this topic, it changes the whole dynamic of what I'm talking about.
- Assume that the Universe started with the Big Bang.
- Don't hide behind Schrödinger's cat and say that it's irrelevant because we just don't have proof either way.
- Understand that some comments are meant in very general terms. This is actually just my way of saying "I know that technically speaking, there was something before the big bang, but I'm not factoring that in."
- This question is really more of an opinion question, so while math and science is a good thing to bring to the discussion, no reason to get on someones case for disagreeing with you.

So, having said that, here is my question: At this exact moment, does the Universe exist?

Current beliefs are that the Big Bang was ~14 billion years ago, and recently we have gotten to take pictures very close to that far back. This is light that was existing 14 billion years ago and we're now seeing it. But if what we are seeing now is from long ago, what is the current status of the Universe, in real time? It seems quite plausible that a bit of a reverse big bang has happened, destroying the universe, but the proof just hasn't gotten to us yet. And we won't know until the Universe has been dead until 14 billion years after it's death.

As another bit of clarification, and the reason I mentioned Schrödinger's cat earlier, take this situation: You are in your house, your neighbor is in their house. They have a heart attack and die, but you don't know about it until gossip starts spreading around 3 days later. Just because you didn't know he was dead and, at the time couldn't prove it, he's still been dead 3 days. That doesn't change, regardless of when you personally find out.

So, is our Universe still around, or has it reverse-big banged and the proof just hasn't reached us yet? Did our Universe die 3 days ago, but we don't know yet?

Oh, and to put your minds at ease, my neighbor didn't have a heart attack 3 days ago. I don't think. So, don't worry about his health.
edit on 19-8-2011 by cuthbert because: Typos;clarification.




posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 06:36 PM
link   
since everything was copied from "outside" to "our brain", perhaps everything is actually inside our brain?



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 06:37 PM
link   
It only exists in the sense that you are aware to it.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 06:37 PM
link   
reply to post by cuthbert
 


I can experience, so "yes", the universe does exist! It may exist not in the way you think, but nevertheless, I'm still here.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 06:39 PM
link   
Cognito ergo sum. "I think, therefore, I am."
And if I exist, I must exist in something, and for lack of a better term, I call it "the universe."

Of course, when I die, then I will no longer think, or exist, so that likely means the end of the universe.
That's as far as I'm concerned, anyway. And that's the only thing that matters, really.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 06:50 PM
link   
reply to post by cuthbert
 


i always found the idea of a "holographic universe" very intriguing. the idea is that the universe only exists as information on the edge of a black holes eventhorizon.

another aspect one has to keep in mind when thinking about reality is time. the past does not exist, the future doesnt exist and since you can break down the present into past and future infinetly, the present doesnt exist either. in short: time doesnt exist. relativistic quantum theory and the most promising theories, which try to unify physics got rid of the time variable.

also i had some thoughts about the end of the universe. it is accelerating far above the speed of light and eventually will cool off totally. doesnt this imply that the whole universe will enter a state similar to a bose einstein condensate? and wouldnt this imply that any partical loses its position? and wouldnt the universe become supercondactiv? in such an environment wouldnt a simple spark be enough to create a new big bang and the old universe be lost past its event horizon?

edit: wtf the guy was explicit: not asking philosophically and yet you guys come up with ccogito ergo sum stuff
edit on 19-8-2011 by CriticalCK because: (no reason given)

edit on 19-8-2011 by CriticalCK because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 06:59 PM
link   
reply to post by requireduser
 


Damn beat me to it.

Ive always pondered the thought that this is all really just in our .s, we have no proof any of this actually exist as its all stimuli that our brain interprets, whose to say our brains telling us the truth about reality.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 07:00 PM
link   
reply to post by cuthbert
 


I've always disliked the analogy that was used by Schrödinger to describe indeterminism. The fact that there was something (the cat) inside the box with the ability to perceive the experiment, already caused the wave to collapse and a determinate answer to the experiment before the box was opened.
That being said, one can't help but "hide behind" the basic premise of what Schrödinger was talking about. Perception causes reality to be "real". "Without perception, would the universe exist?" might be a better question for you to ponder.
Personally, all of my senses have been fooled by the ritualistic ingestion of sacred plants, so I don't even take my own direct perception without a philosophical a grain of salt. That is TRUE Agnosticism.

Edit to add: On a less philosophical basis, I think that the destruction of the Universe will come from heat-death due to the nature of the second law of Thermodynamics. If there is indeed something that is destructive enough to emerge from the center of the universe and destroy it inside out, instead of the other way around, I still think it would be irrelevant as there is very good evidence that our universe is bordered by another universe from a separate "big bang". Who is to say that those universes are not infinite in number? There is no end to infinity, therefore any beginning and end, on the grandest scale, is illusory.
edit on 19-8-2011 by Q:1984A:1776 because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 07:08 PM
link   

Originally posted by cuthbert
It seems quite plausible that a bit of a reverse big bang has happened, destroying the universe, but the proof just hasn't gotten to us yet. And we won't know until the Universe has been dead until 14 billion years after it's death.


We have to start with one obvious fact. We're still here. (I think, therefore I am.) So, at least our corner of the Universe is still here. That begs the question of all those objects emitting light from far away, but we'd never know it. That's 14 billion year old light we're seeing right now. But it's mixed with four year old light from places like Alpha Proxima and Alpha Centauri and 8 minute old light from our Sun, right? But to our retinas it all looks the same. So if the Universe disappeared, we wouldn't know it until it winked out.

I had first thought it would be like a rolling blackout, where the 14 billion year old light would wink out first, followed a billion years later by the 13 billion old light, and so on until there were far fewer lights in the sky, and then there were none. But that's not how it would appear to us. It all evens out at the point of reception, and none of that matters.

It would just go "Poof!" from our perspective. It hasn't, therefore the universe exists.


Originally posted by CriticalCK
reply to post by cuthbert
 

edit: wtf the guy was explicit: not asking philosophically and yet you guys come up with ccogito ergo sum stuff


I don't see that as philosophical at all. It's cold, hard reality. That's what Decartes meant. He wasn't trying to be ethereal. He was a "back to basics" kind of guy.


Originally posted by benrl
reply to post by schuyler
 

Yes but are we all here? Or are each of us in our own little quantum reality, Actors in our own little world sharing all the same delusion in some way.


Now that IS getting too metaphysical and philosophical. If what you say is true (and it might be) I have no way of knowing. That information is not available to me. I'm sticking to what I can see and feel (for this exercise) and I therefore proclaim that the universe still exists, but I have no way of knowing how much longer.
edit on 8/19/2011 by schuyler because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 07:11 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


Yes but are we all here? Or are each of us in our own little quantum reality, Actors in our own little world sharing all the same delusion in some way.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 07:19 PM
link   
Since most of the answers have little to do with what you were actually talking about, I will throw my hat into the ring. I have always been intrigued by questions like these, but have never been able to really come to a significant or acceptable conclusion.

It could very well be that the universe is dying, and it stands to reason that the speed of light is also the speed of space as well. Because of this, as you said, we wouldn't know about it for a long time. It is the same as saying that a star could have exploded by now millions of lightyears away, but there is no way for us to know that for sure, until the amount of time that has passed is equal to the distance of the star in question.

So if the star were 10m lightyears away, we would not ever be able to see it in real-time, but would always see it as it was 10my ago. It is quite fascinating if you really sit down and think about it. So on one hand, we don't know what is "really" going on out there in space...but on the other hand, the universe must still exist, if only in part, since at least our vicinity is still here.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 07:52 PM
link   
reply to post by schuyler
 


oh it is. its called constructivism.
edit on 19-8-2011 by CriticalCK because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 07:57 PM
link   
That which exists and has never been observed by any animate consciousness is real. These things exist because we are always discovering new things then trying to dissect them to better understand them.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 08:13 PM
link   

Originally posted by requireduser
since everything was copied from "outside" to "our brain", perhaps everything is actually inside our brain?

‌link



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 08:25 PM
link   
We're still here, we're existing, the fact you're putting a lot of thought into the existence of us is proof of that



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 08:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by CriticalCK
reply to post by schuyler
 


oh it is. its called constructivism.
edit on 19-8-2011 by CriticalCK because: (no reason given)


Philosophy always puts labels on stuff and then claims it invented it.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 09:27 PM
link   

Originally posted by cuthbert
A couple days ago, I got stuck in a cycle of odd thoughts (I started thinking about one topic, which lead me thinking about another topic, etc. etc) and had a "Hmmm..." moment. So I figure I would throw it on here.

But first, some ground rules (my game, my rules!):
- Try to keep religion out of it. I don't say this because of religion being right or wrong, but if you bring religion into this topic, it changes the whole dynamic of what I'm talking about.
- Assume that the Universe started with the Big Bang.
- Don't hide behind Schrödinger's cat and say that it's irrelevant because we just don't have proof either way.
- Understand that some comments are meant in very general terms. This is actually just my way of saying "I know that technically speaking, there was something before the big bang, but I'm not factoring that in."
- This question is really more of an opinion question, so while math and science is a good thing to bring to the discussion, no reason to get on someones case for disagreeing with you.

So, having said that, here is my question: At this exact moment, does the Universe exist?

Current beliefs are that the Big Bang was ~14 billion years ago, and recently we have gotten to take pictures very close to that far back. This is light that was existing 14 billion years ago and we're now seeing it. But if what we are seeing now is from long ago, what is the current status of the Universe, in real time? It seems quite plausible that a bit of a reverse big bang has happened, destroying the universe, but the proof just hasn't gotten to us yet. And we won't know until the Universe has been dead until 14 billion years after it's death.

As another bit of clarification, and the reason I mentioned Schrödinger's cat earlier, take this situation: You are in your house, your neighbor is in their house. They have a heart attack and die, but you don't know about it until gossip starts spreading around 3 days later. Just because you didn't know he was dead and, at the time couldn't prove it, he's still been dead 3 days. That doesn't change, regardless of when you personally find out.

So, is our Universe still around, or has it reverse-big banged and the proof just hasn't reached us yet? Did our Universe die 3 days ago, but we don't know yet?

Oh, and to put your minds at ease, my neighbor didn't have a heart attack 3 days ago. I don't think. So, don't worry about his health.
edit on 19-8-2011 by cuthbert because: Typos;clarification.


I have never really thought of something like this before now...but wow...yeah...you have my mind going in all directions now. It does seem to have a simple truth to it. As long as Earth doesn't go with the Universe...we really wouldn't know until like you said billions of years later. Makes me want to go sit outside and appreciate those 14 billion year old stars...lol.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 09:31 PM
link   

Originally posted by benrl
reply to post by requireduser
 


Damn beat me to it.

Ive always pondered the thought that this is all really just in our .s, we have no proof any of this actually exist as its all stimuli that our brain interprets, whose to say our brains telling us the truth about reality.


It does make you wonder. What if none of you exist and I just have one heck of an imagination? What if I have imagined the entire Universe, Earth, Humans, plants, animals, etc? History, present, and the future? YIKES. Would make for a good movie actually.



posted on Aug, 19 2011 @ 11:20 PM
link   
reply to post by cuthbert
 

As baryonic matter decreases in density, in a sense, that's an indicator of where we're at in time. When mass eventually starts radiating away so there's nothing left but massless particles. That's when you can say the universe no longer exists. Perhaps there may be some form of novel geometric cutoff, but if that happens it'll likely be instantaneous and uniform across the Higgs field.
edit on 19-8-2011 by Xtraeme because: (no reason given)



posted on Aug, 20 2011 @ 12:07 AM
link   
Our mind is capable of great things. If we, as a collective consciousness, decide that the universe most likely developed from a "big bang" than that makes it a "real" possibility.'' My opinion is that we could have it COMPLETELY wrong. Life could in fact be an illusion.

As of late, I question my own existence/life. Do you?

Nothing is real. Everything is real.




top topics



 
3
<<   2 >>

log in

join