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.
originally posted by: Whatsthisthen
Um,
Why does the universe have to have a beginning?
The standard Big Bang Theory is only intended to describe the universe from its birth onward. Most physicists would tell you that the standard Big Bang Theory does not attempt explain WHY the Big Bang occurred, where it came from, or what (if anything) came before it (i.e., what banged?).
Mainstream Physics would tell you that there might have been "something" before our universe, or even there might be a bigger "something" in which the Big Bang happened and in which our universe exists. That "something" might be eternal, or not. Or they'll tell you that there might have been nothing.
But either way, the current universe in which we live seems to have had a beginning. It is not static and eternal.
originally posted by: Whatsthisthen
I just wonder why everyone seems to assume beginnings and endings.
originally posted by: Whatsthisthen
a reply to: Soylent Green Is People
The standard Big Bang Theory is only intended to describe the universe from its birth onward. Most physicists would tell you that the standard Big Bang Theory does not attempt explain WHY the Big Bang occurred, where it came from, or what (if anything) came before it (i.e., what banged?).
Mainstream Physics would tell you that there might have been "something" before our universe, or even there might be a bigger "something" in which the Big Bang happened and in which our universe exists. That "something" might be eternal, or not. Or they'll tell you that there might have been nothing.
But either way, the current universe in which we live seems to have had a beginning. It is not static and eternal.
I just wonder why everyone seems to assume beginnings and endings. Just to use the word "birth" implies beginning.
Beginnings and endings are linear thinking. What if it is not a linear process?
My research suggests different!
originally posted by: humanoidlord
god IS the universe
that is what i came up after some research
Do you not do the same?
I'm yet to see anyone remember "beginning", and I'm yet to see someone that didn't assume they began.
I agree that it's stupid to assume beginnings and endings.
I'm not sure I'm capable of anything else tho.
Then what's the "Big Bang"? Even if the universe undergoes a series of "big bangs" and "big contractions" (I don't know if that's the word for it), each "big bang" would still undoubtedly be the beginning of a new cycle and each "big contraction" would be the ending of that cycle.
Everything that comes into existence after each bang would still have measurable beginnings, and all of those things would definitely have measurable endings before or during the next contraction.
Universe
1580s, "the whole world, cosmos, the totality of existing things," from Old French univers (12c.), from Latin universum "all things, everybody, all people, the whole world,"
(From the online dictionary of etymology)
Then again, If something does exist outside of our universe, or if our universe came from something else, those "somethings" may be such an utterly foreign concept to us (that is to say, the physivcal laws of those things might be completely unlike the physical laws of ur universe), and we may never have any possibility of traveling to those places or eben imagingining what those places are like.
originally posted by: Whatsthisthen
a reply to: Krahzeef_Ukhar
Do you not do the same?
I try not to assume things.
originally posted by: Whatsthisthen
But to me; the idea of "nothing going bang and here we are" sounds, well; stupid.
That some things have always been; makes much more sense.
originally posted by: dfnj2015
a reply to: Phage
Yes, I am sure. It's okay for you not to think so. Based on the current evidence sets, there are many interpretations and conclusions one can draw. But until you are actually there when it happens everything we say is just conjecture. And choosing which conjecture best represents the evidence is purely subjective.