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.

 

Need ATS help...simple question: Where did the BIG BANG happen???

page: 3
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 02:57 AM
link   

Originally posted by shaneR
Where did the BIG BANG happen???


Hi shaneR , here are my unscientific thoughts.
I think that a question like that is impossible to answer for us humans; it is the same as asking the question; is the universe infinite or not because it is far beyond our human comprehension?
Then, despite the fact that the Big Bang theory is accepted by most of our scientists today as being absolutely correct, you still cannot rule out the real possibility that because we do not understand all the laws of physics today it did not happened that way and that the universe is in fact infinite, which I believe it is.

Here is for instance an interesting answer on the question “Is there any proof that the Big Bang Theory is true?


The Big Bang is finding more scientists in disagreement because the evidence is turning against it. Like many old paradigms, it still has its zealous adherents. But more scientists (not only creation scientists but secular cosmologists as well) are seeing data which does not fit it well. So, the direction in science is not towards the Big Bang but away from it - or at least, there is an acknowledgment that it doesn't fit some of the latest data. Of course the failure of the Big Bang to explain all the data will not lead to a rush toward creationism or intelligent design. The Big Bang theory itself will be drastically revised or it will be abandoned in favor of another theory which also fits with the long-age evolutionary paradigm.


wiki.answers.com...

This is also interesting.


Stephen Hawking, The Big Bang,
The idea that the universe had a specific time of origin has been philosophically resisted by some very distinguished scientists.
Stephen Hawking has said, in his writings, "the actual point of creation lies outside the scope of presently known laws of physics," and a less well-known but very distinguished cosmologist, Professor Alan Guth from MIT, says the "instant of creation remains unexplained."


www.leaderu.com...

Just thinking also.




posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 03:18 AM
link   
What's a 'big bang'?

Akushla



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 03:38 AM
link   
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


hi Ready,

was just thinking about the statement,
re: not everything has a beginning or an end...

and i wonder about this...

infinity doesnt really exist does it...???

how can something just "BE"...???

everything must have an origin, IMHO...

no?

seeya...



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 03:41 AM
link   
reply to post by BlackStar99
 


hi BlackStar99,
and thanks for the post...

i agree,

and forget " how can nothing create everything..."

i would be happy with..." how can nothing create ANYTHING"...???

(same argument for origin of life on earth,,, something is either alive or not,
what caused that first "transition"???)

seeya



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 03:43 AM
link   
reply to post by FurvusRexCaeli
 


but the BIG BANG didnt happen "everywhere"...

it happened "somewhere..."

no?



seeya



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 03:47 AM
link   
reply to post by rogerstigers
 





My current favorite theory (as I understand it) is that a universes comes into existence
when two other universes collide.... kind of like soap bubbles in a bath tub.



well, thats the the way it happens in this universe...re: galactic interaction...

what about BLACK HOLEs...???

could the "BIG BANG", just be like the exhaust pipe of a BIG black hole...

i mean all that mass and energy in a black hole has to end up somewhere, EVENTUALLY...

no?

seeya



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 03:49 AM
link   
reply to post by Atlantican
 


your right,

the UNIVERSE is a BIG place...




seeya



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 03:49 AM
link   
What's a black hole?

Akushla



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 03:52 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 


how can U say with such confidence...

"there was nothing before the big bang..."

of course there was....

whatever it was that "caused" the big bang, AND the "ingredients", ALL existed BEFORE the "big bang"...

IMHO...

seeya



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 03:56 AM
link   
reply to post by addygrace
 


hi Addygrace,

i agree about time being relative...

of course if "anything" existed BEFORE the big bang, then "time" existed then too,,, IMHO.

seeya



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 03:59 AM
link   
reply to post by akushla99
 


good question... a bit of a mystery for me how something can be so small...(the singularity),
yet produce so much energy ( gravity),
and also be able to "contain" light, yet be black...

awesome, whatever they are...

seeya



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 04:08 AM
link   

Originally posted by shaneR
reply to post by akushla99
 


good question... a bit of a mystery for me how something can be so small...(the singularity),
yet produce so much energy ( gravity),
and also be able to "contain" light, yet be black...

awesome, whatever they are...

seeya


Where is this thing?
Can i see it?

Akushla



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 04:10 AM
link   
reply to post by shaneR
 



it had to start somewhere


Why? Why does it *have too*? By what reasoning do people come up with in their heads that leads them to the conclusion that there *has to be* a beginning?

We can def all agree that existence exists...

Knowing that existence exist, what would be existence if it didn't exist? How can something exist without existing in the first place? If nothing existed to give rise to existence, then existence wouldn't exist, would it? The only logical conclusion is that existence has always existed without any prior causation, no beginning.

The religious all readily assert without evidence that their deity of choice has always existed. If that same blind belief is to be permissible and held as a valid "truth", then by all means, an existence that has always existed should be more true. Deities are personified entities that exist within an existence or realm in every religious doctrine, there is no widely held belief that any deity is existence itself. Could these deities exist if the realm they exist within did not exist? Could God still perform his acts of creation if his realm of heaven had never existed? Can God even exist if there was no heaven in which for him to exist within?

At some point we have to grow and realize, as well as acknowledge that existence is the ultimate answer. It's always been here in one form or another. Existence changes and flows, going through different phases that we can't even understand. There was no big bang, the evidence for it is very circumstantial and the maths used to "prove" it are constantly fudged every time a new observation defies it's predicted model for how existence should behave under it.

Our observable universe is just that, only what we can currently observe. With better telescopes we may peak beyond 20bly. In time, light from 50bly may finally reach our eyes. There is no current way to know the exact extent of existence or it's age, or all that it entails.

There are only two valid questions here:

Why does existence exist rather than does not exist.
Why does existence flow and change.



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 04:19 AM
link   
I assume you are assuming that the Big Bang Hypothesis is correct?

There are several other hypotheses summarized in LINK

or this one LINK


Some problems with the Big Bang hypothesis summarized in LINK

Cosmology is fun!



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 04:23 AM
link   

Originally posted by Elentarri
I assume you are assuming that the Big Bang Hypothesis is correct?

There are several other hypotheses summarized in LINK

or this one LINK


Some problems with the Big Bang hypothesis summarized in LINK

Cosmology is fun!


I'm warming to the idea (that i read alot about here on ATS) that the explosion for some fabled big bang was produced by gases emanating from the fundament of the flying spaghetti monster. Is this true?

Akushla



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 04:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Astyanax
 




I am not interested in playing juvenile word-games. Or Chinese chequers, for that matter.


I was not intending to play juvenile word-games, but it sounds like you may not have the answers ???

So please stop pretending to be intelligent...

When you get to my age you may come to understand...
Well hopefully anyway...



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 06:07 AM
link   
reply to post by shaneR
 


last time i heard it was just outside Melton Mowbery.



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 06:21 AM
link   
reply to post by The Matrix Traveller
 


When you get to my age you may come to understand.

I’m afraid I shall never see sixteen again.



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 07:04 AM
link   
So there seems to be 2 consensus...

A.) Bang happened somewhere...


B) Bang happened nowhere...


Hmmmm.....


Well I am of the mind that theoretically you could observe the other galaxies around us, and determine from their movement relative to us which way they are moving, given enough time to observe this ( idk how many thousands of years that would take.) and then you could plot a reverse course from those observations back to an origin point. Seems simple, but I have a funny feeling science already found that they cannot do this because of the time/observation variable.


Another speculation would be that the Bang just instantly appeared with no apparent start point, which seems hard to imagine, with galaxies and whatnot just flying willy-nilly everywhere...

kinda like saying...where in your mind did that thought originate? It just was there.



posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 07:09 AM
link   

Originally posted by shaneR
reply to post by getreadyalready
 


hi Ready,

was just thinking about the statement,
re: not everything has a beginning or an end...

and i wonder about this...

infinity doesnt really exist does it...???

how can something just "BE"...???

everything must have an origin, IMHO...

no?

seeya...


In the world we can see and touch, everything does have a beginning and an end, so it is very difficult to think any other way, but are we to believe everything that "is" can be be observed by us? I think it is one of our illogical limitations. Why should everything have to fit the mold of what we observe?

There is a good analogy, and I wish I could find the video that I saw once. Here is a quick synopsis:

Imagine a man, living in a 2-dimensional world on a sheet of paper. Everything he knows is contained on that sheet of paper. Now one day, I want to interact with the man, so I push my finger through the paper. The man sees the outline of my finger, a circle. There is no realm of his imagination that could possible comprehend that a mere circle in his world is indicative of a single appendage, on a being such as myself. He sees a circle, there is no way for him to comprehend our 3-dimensional world or even begin to guess what that circle might represent. Suppose I press more fingers through the same page. Now he sees multiple circles, and he doesn't comprehend it as a single being. Now I draw my fingers together, and he sees a large oval. His imagination cannot stretch far enough to ever comprehend what I actually look like. Now I turn the page. The man is gone, but there is another, man in a similar 2-D universe. Maybe I press my fingers through 3 or 4 pages at once. Each man on each page draws his own conclusions, and none of them are aware of the equivalent men on the other pages also drawing their own conclusions, and none of them are guessing anywhere close to what I actually look like, or that I exist in a universe with 7 billion more people just like me, and they are only seeing the outline of 1 of my many fingers. Or that I wrap my fingers around a steering wheel of a car, or an airplane, or that I can take a mere hint of lead dust from a common pencil and affect their world drastically.

Nope, I don't believe that our human paradigm is sufficient to assume anything. We can't even begin to imagine just one additional dimension, but math has shown their may be as many as 10 additional dimensions intersecting ours.

Look up Meno's Arrow. Even the existence of time itself can be called into question using pure logic. Time is only a collection of moments, but other than this very moment, everything else is imaginary. The past only exists in your mind. The future is only a guess. Even a few seconds from now is just a guess at this point, and often times we are surprised, and unexpected things happen in the blink of an eye. If the past and the future are both technically imaginary, then how can time exist?

As for beginning and end, your question has already illustrated the flaw in that thinking. No matter can be destroyed or created, so how can their be a beginning or end? Things only change.


edit on 14-9-2011 by getreadyalready because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join