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: 7
6
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Sep, 14 2011 @ 11:46 PM
link   

Originally posted by sirnex
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......
Why does existence exist rather than does not exist.
Why does existence flow and change.


Um, how much wood could a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood??


It really all comes down to perspective... How can we know what we don't know if no one knows all of everything from the Big Bang beginning or pre-beginning before the Big Bang or after the coming Armegeddon ?

... No one knows, but everyone has a belief usually with little to no proof just theories ... So what then?




posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:13 AM
link   
The big bang theory, while effectively tying together several observations, and wrapping them in a theoretical scenario; suffers from the same dilemma as the simplified and limited creation theory.

What was there, before these two events?...(assuming either is put together properly)
The big bang seems to point to a scenario where, there was tight and hot stuff, that exploded, and has been expanding ever since.

With regards the question, that tight and hot stuff, WAS somewhere...a location...if the universe we know of is expanding from a point, that point, must be where it started (unless, of course, it moves about)

Creation, pushes a more metaphysical explanation.

Effectively though, timelines aside, the concept is essentially, exactly the same.

The question of where this point is, can be looked at another way.
Maybe, there was/is no point.

Other cosmologies have thier own interpretation.
The inbreath and outbreath of Brahma describe a recurring expansion and contraction of creation.
Lo and behold, what do we notice? It has been observed (if we are to believe science) that, indeed, the universe is expanding outward.
The creation story, and the big bang story, represent that period when the contraction was at its greatest...
reached a crisis point, and exploded outwards. Same story.

The question of where, is kinda pointless (excuse the pun)...to all intents and purposes, expansion and contraction can be inferred from anecdotal and theoretical 'evidence'...problem is...being that, information (anecdotal or otherwise) cannot be gleaned from any time before this contracted crisis point...what happens before it could very well be the previous ages or yugas...the inbreaths and outbreaths of Brahma?

Akushla



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:35 AM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 


hi Colin42,
and thanks for participating in the thread...

one universe is enough for my brain, sorry..

but i agree, multi verse/s is/are possible when U really look at quantum chaos...

seeya



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:40 AM
link   
reply to post by flyingfish
 


hi fish,
and thanks to U too, for helping me with this thread...

i just love the way Michio Kaku explains things...

and agree the multi verse is a possibility...

we used to think the earth was flat, and at the centre of everything...

then we spent a while believing the milky way was everything...

why not have multiple universes and extra dimensions...

they are all possible, if not probably... IMHO

seeya



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 02:45 AM
link   
reply to post by purplemer
 


hi purplemer,
and U make a good point...

it seems to me that the only thing bigger than the human mind is the universe itself,

(and possibly other entities, outside our space/time "reality")


but talk about deep, "dark" places.... (universe/ human mind)...yes...
imho...

seeya



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 03:09 AM
link   
reply to post by rschmfem
 



Um, how much wood could a wood chuck chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood??


Simple really...

A wood chuck would chuck as much wood as a wood chuck could chuck if a wood chuck could chuck wood.


It really all comes down to perspective... How can we know what we don't know if no one knows all of everything from the Big Bang beginning or pre-beginning before the Big Bang or after the coming Armegeddon ?

... No one knows, but everyone has a belief usually with little to no proof just theories ... So what then?


Again, another simple one...

Let's surmise that there was indeed a 'big bang'. The big bang model proposes that our universe arose from the expansion of a singularity. This singularity comprised all of existence, it's totality compressed into a very dense one dimensional point of total energy. Energy can neither be created nor destroyed, so in essence, existence has always existed even under this model. Either as a singularity for an indeterminate amount of time or as an oscillating cycle of expansion and compression. The point is, even under this model, existence has always existed and existence still undergoes changes.

reply to post by shaneR
 



u said this...



What I find difficult to understand is how can a believer of an eternal deity be unable to comprehend the infinite.




so, how many "non-believers" do u know that TRULY understand INFINITY?????
your point is moot...


The point is not moot at all. If you believe in an infinite always existing creator of the universe, then it should be no harder to accept an always existing existence. I fail to see the issue here.


u said:


you are comfortable with the blind belief answer of a deity concieved of a mere 2000 years ago by an offshoot religious sect that is known to have incorporated various stories from surrounding religions and violent conquest to become todays most popular belief.



how do know know what i think / believe... ?
i wasnt the one who first mentioned GOD,,,


You're correct, you weren't the first to bring up God in this discussion, but let's remind you of you response towards the person who had done so:


i wasnt trying to invoke GOD, although i do believe...


So you see, I do know you believe in God, you've admitted to this. I did ask for clearification as to *how* you believe, which you've dodged. I'll repost the question one more time in hopes that you can provide more specificity in your exact beliefs in regards to your belief in God.

I am assuming this is the eternally existing Judaic-christian god. Or do you believe i a god that has had a beginning/creation of itself?

You see, part of this exercise is to show that you don't really give a rats fecal infested rear end as to the answer to your question posed in the OP. The answer has already been given at least three times by my count correctly. There is no central point of where the big bang occurred under the big bang model. There is no 'outside' the universe under this model. There is no central explosion point either. There was no violent explosion that created the universe. You already stated that no one has given you the answer you were looking for after this correct and valid answer has been given a few times.

The other point to this exercise is to attempt to expand your closed mind and help illuminate a possible bigger aspect of reality that you are obviously oblivious towards. We can rightfully assume your obliviousness/naivety due to your rejection of a correct answer posed at least three times as well as your dodging of my queries. You only respond to things that require a simple response rather than a deep thought out discussion as well.

You honestly could care less as to what the answer really is.

You believe in God and as you so put it:


but i am happier there, than with " we came from a big bang, and then MUD that came to life..."



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 03:34 AM
link   
reply to post by The Baby Seal Club
 


hi TBSC, and thanks again for helping out,
especially appreciate the singularity pointer...

from there i went on to event horizons, which everyone has heard of, but
i never realised how many types there were...

even our universe may have its own EVENT HORIZON...
eg:


The particle horizon of the observable universe is the boundary that represents
the maximum distance at which events can currently be observed.

For events beyond that distance, light has not had time to reach our location,
even if it were emitted at the time the universe began.

How the particle horizon changes with time depends on
the nature of the expansion of the universe.

If the expansion has certain characteristics, there are parts of the universe
that will never be observable, no matter how long the observer waits for light
from those regions to arrive.

The boundary past which events cannot ever be observed is an event horizon,
and it represents the maximum extent of the particle horizon.

.


see: en.wikipedia.org...


and talking about singularities, what about NAKED ones...


In general relativity, a naked singularity is a gravitational singularity, without an event horizon.

In a black hole, there is a region around the singularity, the event horizon,
where the gravitational force of the singularity is strong enough so that light cannot escape.

Hence, the singularity cannot be directly observed.

A naked singularity, by contrast, is observable from the outside.

The theoretical existence of naked singularities is important because their existence
would mean that it would be possible to observe the collapse of an object to infinite density.

It would also cause foundational problems for general relativity, because in the presence of a naked singularity, general relativity cannot make predictions about the future evolution of spacetime.

Some research has suggested that if loop quantum gravity is correct, then naked singularities
could exist in nature, implying that the cosmic censorship hypothesis does not hold.

Numerical calculations and some other arguments have also hinted at this possibility.

To this date, no naked singularities (and no event horizons) have been observed.


see: en.wikipedia.org...

"curvature" and "conical" singularities are also theorized...

...seeya

+ thanks again



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:20 AM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


gee thanks for the happy input...

u do realise what forum u are trolling in...?

" ORIGINs and CREATIONISM..."

i asked a question to start, and things are going along well, thanks, except u have to bring your hate here...

start a rant thread of your own...

and YES i understand the big bang theory,
i asked a question about it , thats all...'

and as for GOD, my "belief" is irrelevant to the question,
and if u read my replies u would concede i have been trying to learn from this, not sell anything....

for the record i believe in the possibility that there is a "higher power",
either " in" the universe, or outside of it...
but not necessarily timeless nor self created... i didnt claim to know...

is the existence of GOD impossible?

+ u still have to explain how u get so much into such a small spot, ( singularity),
extra dimensions, maybe....

and where was the singularity... ??? (original question)
was EVERYTHING, contained in one small spot, always in existence? as in ALWAYS,?
always is a long time to stay the same, and then to change,
something else must have been a trigger, maybe?

a fluctuation from somewhere?
maybe...

anyway, enough time wasted on this reply, because i know u will be back with more hate,
saying "question answered 3 times"...

NO, big bang standard model theory quoted ad nauseum...

+ other interesting input from OTHERs... which is appreciated...



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 06:37 AM
link   
it seems obvious to me that this singularity from which our universe expanded out of, must be the same singularity within a black hole. a black hole that existed in another universe or dimension. these black holes must only be able to contain so much matter and then they burst forth their contents in the form of white holes spewing out matter and creating another universe or dimension...

once again we can use a balloon for an analogy. fill a balloon with air. the air in the balloon is the matter being pulled into a black hole. they both can only hold so much air and matter before they burst. think about how fast and suddenly the balloon bursts and explodes outward the air within, a virtual big bang...

and about god, lets do some simple math... god + auschwitz = god does'nt exist...
edit on 15-9-2011 by blocula because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 07:39 AM
link   
reply to post by blocula
 


doesnt that leave us with the same problem,
what came before, or caused the previous black hole...?

but i agree, and have wondered the same myself...

call it the " exhaust pipe" theory...



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 07:58 AM
link   
and when i think about what came before the big bang? and then what came before that? and before that? and before that? and before that? and before that?.....when i think about where the universe ends? and then whats after the ending? and after that? and after that? and after that? and after that?.....its very plain for me to see, that all this starts to very quickly and clearly make no sense whatsoever.....all that i seem to be left with here is the "advanced computer simulation theory" and "outer space is a holographic illusion theory" as the only things that even begin to make any sense at all.....but then an even greater mystery arises!.....who or what made the illusion? who or what made the simulation? and where are they? this is totally and completely mind blowing and is perhaps "beyond our comprehension" to fully understand...
edit on 15-9-2011 by blocula because: (no reason given)



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 10:12 AM
link   
reply to post by shaneR
 



gee thanks for the happy input...


I'm truly sorry if you feel I am trolling you're thread or being hateful. Neither is the case, I am trying to have a two sided discussion, but you simply refuse to participate and instead reply to thing's that require a simple reply without much true thought and substance put into the very topic of this thread.


u do realise what forum u are trolling in...?

" ORIGINs and CREATIONISM..."


Your point is what? Feel free to invoke upon the powers of the Mods to check the veracity of my posts within this thread if you feel they are not on the topic of origins and creationism. Perhaps they can explain to you the true definition of trolling which seems to allude you at this moment.


i asked a question to start, and things are going along well, thanks, except u have to bring your hate here...


What hate? Are you referring to my comment about how you don't really give a rats fecal infested rear end as to what the answer to your question is? Please, that wasn't hate, that was an obvious observation of your character and conduct in light of the answer haven been given three times prior to your dismissal of the answer.


start a rant thread of your own...


The only closeness to ranting I have done is in regards to your very character and conduct towards the correct provided answers to your original question.


and YES i understand the big bang theory,
i asked a question about it , thats all...'


You obviously do not understand the big bang at all, which if memory serves correctly, you mentioned this before and an other member pointed out that you obviously did not and also provided the correct answer to your question.


and as for GOD, my "belief" is irrelevant to the question,


The question was answered rather quickly and early on. I felt no need to re post the same correct answer myself. I personally do not subscribe to the big bang theory, but I felt your curiosity and the nature of your beliefs in God would be a wonderful starting point to have an intelligent discussion about origins of existence.

Obviously I misjudged you, I apologize!


and if u read my replies u would concede i have been trying to learn from this, not sell anything....


I never claimed you were trying to 'sell' anything. I am also puzzled as to how you can sit there and claim to be trying to learn from this when you've clearly dismissed the correct answer and are only replying to certain answers and comments that require simplistic thought to answer back towards.


for the record i believe in the possibility that there is a "higher power",
either " in" the universe, or outside of it...
but not necessarily timeless nor self created... i didnt claim to know...


Now I find that very interesting! What do you mean by not necessarily timeless nor self created? You see, while I am not a religious person myself, I find religion to be a very interesting topic and I love to learn as much as I can about it. You are the first person I've come across in discussion to make such a statement in regards to a creator entity. I would like to hear more about this aspect.


is the existence of GOD impossible?


I hope this isn't a rhetorical question...

In my opinion, it is impossible. We're talking about a personified intelligent entity with human behaviors and emotions here. What truly is the likelihood that such an entity would exist and create an entire universe full of beings created in it's likeness? With an seemingly infinite amount of probabilities, it just boggles the mind that this entity would exist and then only be discussed about a scant two thousand years ago.


+ u still have to explain how u get so much into such a small spot, ( singularity),
extra dimensions, maybe....


I'm sorry, I assumed the mention of a singularity was self explanatory. Gravitational forces is what keeps the singularity intact. The forces are so great that the very laws of physics actually break down inside of them. We have no idea how the actual singularity point behaves, the forms of energy it contains, or what exactly it is other than a really really dense one dimensional point of energy.


and where was the singularity... ??? (original question)


As was already answered. There is no "place" that the singularity existed. The singularity was the totality of existence itself according to the big bang model. If you truly did understand the big bang model you would have already have known this as it's the very basic fundamental foundation of this model. It's the very beginning of everything!


was EVERYTHING, contained in one small spot, always in existence? as in ALWAYS,?


As far as the model itself is concerned, yes, always.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 10:16 AM
link   
reply to post by blocula
 


agree that most of the stuff on this thread is truly beyond, what most people think about, IMHO....

no matter whether it was created or not, it is big, and still not fully understood...

+ i also have trouble with that question of what came before, or "caused" the beginning...
and so on backwards...

seeya



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 10:21 AM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 





We're talking about a personified intelligent entity with human behaviors and emotions here.


no, u seem to be the one stuck on the human like GOD...

im going to bed now, 1.20 am, here...

but i do appreciate your input too,
and i havent dodged any "unfriendly" posts, have i???

anyway, i will address the rest of your rather confrontational post tomoro... if thats ok...

seeya



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 10:27 AM
link   
reply to post by sirnex
 


one more quick question...

u say...




I'm sorry, I assumed the mention of a singularity was self explanatory.

Gravitational forces is what keeps the singularity intact.

The forces are so great that the very laws of physics actually break down inside of them.

We have no idea how the actual singularity point behaves, the forms of energy it contains, or what exactly it is other than a really really dense one dimensional point of energy.


u arrogantly say it is so obious, " self- explanitory'...

and then admit that we know nothing about them ...( singularities )...

who was a good boy at school, then,,,?

did u sit in the front row?

...

edit on 15/9/2011 by shaneR because: typo



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 10:37 AM
link   
reply to post by shaneR
 



u arrogantly say it is so obious, " self- explanitory'...

and then admit that we know nothing abot them ...( singularities )...


Clearly you do not understand much at all. Or perhaps just misinterpreted what I was trying to say.


the initial state of the universe, at the beginning of the Big Bang, was a singularity. Both General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics break down in describing the Big Bang, but in general QM does not permit particles to inhabit a space smaller than their wavelengths.
Wiki


who was a good boy at school, then,,,?

did u sit in the front row?


Really? Excuse me, I have already explained the answer to your question has been answered numerous times now. I have even gone into a little more detail about the answer itself. I have tried my hardest to initiate an intelligent conversation with you about the very nature of existence itself and what it means.

Don't even bother replying to my previous post. Everything I have been saying has been for naught.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 12:40 PM
link   
reply to post by shaneR
 





i just love the way Michio Kaku explains things... and agree the multi verse is a possibility... we used to think the earth was flat, and at the centre of everything... then we spent a while believing the milky way was everything... why not have multiple universes and extra dimensions... they are all possible, if not probably... IMHO seeya


Hi shaneR,
Thanks for the reply.
Michio Kaku has been called the next Einstein, his ideas on M-theory have opened my mind to what the univers could be.
The M-theory is being hotly debated especially in the dimensional area, but I believe it could eventually answer the mysterys of the universe.
Science does not have all the answers but I believe we are on the right track.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 03:27 PM
link   
reply to post by shaneR
 


The Big Bang is still going on.
Everything in the Universe (as we can tell) is flying away from everthing else, expanding, with no central point of expansion.

Use the surface of a balloon as an example. When deflated , paint little dots all over the outside of the balloon.

Now, when you inflate it, every dot moves away from every other dot, but there is no central point of expansion.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 03:48 PM
link   
Where I struggle with any of this is with the concept of time.

The big bang or whatever created time so is it the universe that is expanding or time?

To add more confusion, for me anyhow. It appears the closer you travel to the speed of light you alter time relative to those not traveling so time it would seem is not a constant even if you percieve it so.

One day someone will give me an explanation that will open the curtain, hopefully before I run out of time.



posted on Sep, 15 2011 @ 04:06 PM
link   
reply to post by colin42
 


Think of the edge of the expanding universe being the event horizon for time. Time as we know it, or the relative speed at which it is perceived to pass, is a function of mass and gravity.

So, indeed the universe as it expands into the zero-point space of nothingness.... creates it's own existence and "steps into it" it as it expands.



new topics

top topics



 
6
<< 4  5  6    8 >>

log in

join