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.

 

What happened before the big bang?

page: 6
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 08:29 PM
link   
reply to post by interupt42
 

Physisists says something cant come from nothing then expect us to beleive it did in the big bang. Thats why i like my theory better.




posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 08:39 PM
link   

Originally posted by symptomoftheuniverse
reply to post by interupt42
 

Physisists says something cant come from nothing then expect us to beleive it did in the big bang. Thats why i like my theory better.


You have a theory and they have a theory but neither one is a fact. One might be more valid then the other or more accepted but you can't say its a fact.

The BIGGEST question "What was the first of everything" cant be answered by saying that there wasn't a start or and end. Or using the circle analogy to demonstrate that their wasn't a start or an end. Much like a circle the circle didn't just pop up out of thin air and it did have a start and an end you just can't see it.

We can't even comprehend scientifically the answer to how something just popped up including your infinite closed cycle system.

Everything must have a start otherwise it doesn't exist , in our reality anyway. Maybe that is the problem we try to use our reality to explain it or maybe we are in a virtual world and don't really exist. I believe that is one of the new theories going around

edit on 13-6-2013 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 08:42 PM
link   
somebody lit a very big fuse?





posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 08:47 PM
link   

Originally posted by interupt42

Originally posted by symptomoftheuniverse
reply to post by interupt42
 

Physisists says something cant come from nothing then expect us to beleive it did in the big bang. Thats why i like my theory better.


You have a theory and they have a theory but neither one is a fact. One might be more valid then the other or more accepted but you can't say its a fact.

The BIGGEST question "What was the first of everything" cant be answered by saying that there wasn't a start or and end. Or using the circle analogy to demonstrate that their wasn't a start or an end. Much like a circle the circle didn't just pop up out of thin air and it did have a start and an end you just can't see it.

We can't even comprehend scientifically the answer to how something just popped up including your infinite closed cycle system.

Everything must have a start otherwise it doesn't exist , in our reality anyway. Maybe that is the problem we try to use our reality to explain it or maybe we are in a virtual world and don't really exist. I believe that is one of the new theories going around

edit on 13-6-2013 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)
yes but the theory which is more simple and elegant tends to be correct. There was not a beginning,my theory is not a closed circle its more like pi. Neverending and irrational



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 08:59 PM
link   

Originally posted by symptomoftheuniverse
...its more like pi. Neverending and irrational


That's the way I see most 9/11 threads, too. I have a new term. A Pi thread.



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 09:04 PM
link   
reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse

yes but the theory which is more simple and elegant tends to be correct. There was not a beginning,my theory is not a closed circle its more like pi. Neverending and irrational
 


"Tends" is not 100% and even pi has a start the moment the diameter of the circle is completed.

I'm beginning to get intrigue about the notion or theory that perhaps we are truly in a virtual world .
arxiv.org...



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 09:07 PM
link   

Originally posted by Bedlam

Originally posted by symptomoftheuniverse
...its more like pi. Neverending and irrational


That's the way I see most 9/11 threads, too. I have a new term. A Pi thread.
lol i think i will use that term aswell.



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 09:09 PM
link   
reply to post by interupt42
 


I suppose a virtual reality is possible but the programmers must have evolved so we are back to square one.



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 09:15 PM
link   

Originally posted by symptomoftheuniverse
reply to post by interupt42
 


I suppose a virtual reality is possible but the programmers must have evolved so we are back to square one.


LOL, yep that darn what came first question.

Maybe we don't exist. if something doesn't have a start does it exist in our reality? Maybe that is why we aren't able to answer the question or aren't meant to answer the question . We don't exist



edit on 13-6-2013 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 13 2013 @ 09:49 PM
link   
reply to post by UnknownKnower
 


Few things I've considered, because why should we stick with just one way?

- Our universe started from the bottom of a super massive black hole that tore thru the fabric of space time in another universe from which ours was born. The singularity is said to exist at the bottom of a block hole and is also said to be the genesis of our universe... so why not? I imagine it like an hour glass. The contents of one end spilling (exploding) into the other end...

-Our universe began from some sort of super conscious intelligent entity (no, not God perse). Something so grand it defies explanation.

- Our universe started when humans from another life time collided two particles together in a large hadron collider trying to discover how the universe started. Of course they annihilated themselves and their universe in the process. Basically our existence is one endless time loop playing the same 15 billion years over and over.

I have others but I'll leave it at that for now..

I think two things about all of this.

1) That science may very well discover God, which will be the ultimate irony.

2) That we won't find out what the hell this is until we pass from this existence to the next.



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 07:16 AM
link   

Originally posted by interupt42

Originally posted by symptomoftheuniverse
reply to post by interupt42
 


I suppose a virtual reality is possible but the programmers must have evolved so we are back to square one.


LOL, yep that darn what came first question.

Maybe we don't exist. if something doesn't have a start does it exist in our reality? Maybe that is why we aren't able to answer the question or aren't meant to answer the question . We don't exist



edit on 13-6-2013 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)


Yes the virtual reality question still does not answer the who made the virtual reality creators. Mind you, living in a virtual reality world would certainly answer the question as to why the world is working the way it should be, and that we're not acting in a way we should be.
However this is not a thread about virtual reality worlds, rather, where the hell did we come from??



posted on Jun, 14 2013 @ 08:34 AM
link   
Sometime ago I had an experience... I won't delve into it... But here's an excerpt from said experience that helped me understand the nature of our "universe"...


“Are you God?” I finally probe.
He chuckles and his eyes sparkle. Peace descends upon me like never before.
“Is this the only universe? Are we all alone?”
“No, my son, you are not alone – there is a Multiverse. There is highly conscious life living no
further away from your planet than your moon – they are merely cloaked by cosmic dust.”
“How many universe's are there in the Multiverse?” I inquire
“Infinite.” He responds.
“How can there be infinite? It had to have started somewhere at some time?”
“Did it?”
“Well, I mean... It's unfathomable to imagine that time is infinite.”
“Well, it is. Just because this universe is a baby means nothing. Take one sheet of paper. Write as
many numbers as you can on it – as small as you can - covering the entire page. There are
universes that have been around so long that they would fill your entire planet - from the core to
the tip of the ionosphere - with stacks of paper... And the number on all of the pages would still
not represent their age!”
“But it had to start somewhere.”
“What is it?”
“Time.”
“Why?”
“Because it had to!”
“Just because you can't fathom infinity means nothing. There was no start. There always has
been. There will be no end. No start. No end. When your universe collapses it will immediately
form another one.”
“But where did the FIRST universe start?”
“There was no first universe! There is only INFINITY!”



posted on Jun, 15 2013 @ 01:15 AM
link   
Here's a thought... What if we are actually living in a reversed timeline? What if the big bang is the end of the universe and we are yet to discover its beginning? Would anyone or anything in the universe ever know that this is the case?



posted on Jun, 15 2013 @ 01:45 AM
link   
The big bang. Something from nothing. A universe filled with matter which came from where?, Empty space defined only by the matter that exists. Is the universe stable? Is what exists a constant from the big bang on? Matter has to come from some where, so where did it come from? You win ruler of the Universe if you can answer that!



posted on Jun, 15 2013 @ 07:21 AM
link   
reply to post by jvarga390
 




Matter has to come from some where


Why? What is nothing?

Is it empty space? But we know that 'empty space' is anything but empty, and starting from there, the arising of matter is inevitable.

Is it the absence of space-time but the 'laws' of physics as we know them still hold? If that is so, then the rise of space-time is inevitable. From there see the previous paragraph.

Is it absence of space-time but the 'laws' of physics as we know them do not hold? If that is so, then all possible space-time universes, with all possible physics laws, must eventually come into being. Eventually one of those space-time universes will arise with the laws of physics as we know them. From there see the previous paragraph.

The correct question then becomes 'why are the laws of physics as we know them in this space-time universe as we know it'? There are an infinity of possible space-time-physics universes. Why here, Why us? The answer is simply because if they weren't we would not be here to observe them. This is called the "anthropic principle".

There is really nothing in all of existence more astounding than the idea that a collection of chemicals in a random insignificant corner of the space-time universe can develop consciousness and learn about the universe it inhabits. Utterly, wonderfully, astounding.



posted on Jun, 15 2013 @ 07:31 AM
link   
reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse
 




Physisists says something cant come from nothing then expect us to beleive it did in the big bang. Thats why i like my theory better.


Except that Physists DO NOT say something can't come from nothing.

Here is a starting point for understanding: Something from nothing

and here Lawrence Krauss interview



posted on Jun, 15 2013 @ 10:03 AM
link   

Originally posted by interupt42

Originally posted by symptomoftheuniverse
reply to post by interupt42
 

Physisists says something cant come from nothing then expect us to beleive it did in the big bang. Thats why i like my theory better.


You have a theory and they have a theory but neither one is a fact. One might be more valid then the other or more accepted but you can't say its a fact.

The BIGGEST question "What was the first of everything" cant be answered by saying that there wasn't a start or and end. Or using the circle analogy to demonstrate that their wasn't a start or an end. Much like a circle the circle didn't just pop up out of thin air and it did have a start and an end you just can't see it.

We can't even comprehend scientifically the answer to how something just popped up including your infinite closed cycle system.

Everything must have a start otherwise it doesn't exist , in our reality anyway. Maybe that is the problem we try to use our reality to explain it or maybe we are in a virtual world and don't really exist. I believe that is one of the new theories going around

edit on 13-6-2013 by interupt42 because: (no reason given)



Hold on to your hat its going to be a bumpy ride. The universe doesn't exist sounds crazy i know but Einstein showed that mass = energy or energy = mass.The universe can trade time energy or mass to create something but this trade off inn actuality is nothing you still 0 out.The universe is off balance its traded energy for mass because you cant have 0 energy but this is exactly what the universe is attempting to do have 0 energy.But to make things even more confusing atoms which make up this universe dont exist. Ill attempt to explain. Atoms are made of probability clouds so If we ask, whether the position of the electron remains the same, we have to say no. If we ask, whether the position of an electron changes with the course of time, we have to say no. If we ask, whether the electron is in a state of rest, we have to say no. If we ask, whether the electron is in motion, we have to say no."

So whats this say about the universe it says that what we observe isnt there its created through contradictions so the whole of the universe we observe is here because its not supposed to be, but the laws were set up that contradicts creating something but when looked at really isnt there.This is the greatest magic trick ever!

Ps this is the problem with probability anything can happen and does somewhere. Douglas adams likes to take probability to the extreme in his books such as the Hitchhikers guide but truth is hes not far off the mark.

edit on 6/15/13 by dragonridr because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 16 2013 @ 01:46 PM
link   
reply to post by rnaa
 


That guys wrong



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 05:31 AM
link   
reply to post by ImaFungi
 




That guys wrong


I appreciate that it may 'offend' your personal need for a 'first cause', but in fact he is not wrong, and here is why:

(from the link I posted above

CSM: But how can we possibly know that? Virtual particles exist in such a short time frame, we can't measure them. So, how do we know they're there?

LK: We can’t measure those particles directly, but we can measure their effects indirectly, because they affect the properties of atoms for example. And when we include them, and we can include them in the calculations and predictions we make, if we don’t include them we get the wrong answer. If we do include them, we get the right answer to nine decimal places, the best predictions in all of physics. The only place where you can predict final numbers from first principles to nine decimal places is there. So we know those effects are happening because we can measure them indirectly, and that’s why we’re so confident.


Nine decimals of accuracy! We cannot measure the height from the top of your head to the bottom of your toes to nine decimals of accuracy. Quantum Physics works. If it didn't you wouldn't be reading this on your computer monitor because your computer monitor could not work.

So those virtual particles are real (in the sense that anything in quantum physics is 'real', that it) and if they are real, then there is no doubt what-so-ever that the universe most certainly CAN come from nothing.

That guy is not wrong.

edit on 17/6/2013 by rnaa because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 17 2013 @ 01:06 PM
link   

Originally posted by rnaa
reply to post by symptomoftheuniverse
 




Physisists says something cant come from nothing then expect us to beleive it did in the big bang. Thats why i like my theory better.


Except that Physists DO NOT say something can't come from nothing.

Here is a starting point for understanding: Something from nothing

and here Lawrence Krauss interview

what i meant was ,energy cant be created from nothing. Or destroyed for that matter.




top topics



 
10
<< 3  4  5    7  8  9 >>

log in

join