Give your best answer... Did the universe have a beginning or not

[magnifier661]

There are countless models, all of which are have the Cosmological community agree don't work, but what opinion do you have in this regard?

Do you think the universe had an absolute beginning, or do you believe the universe is eternal (theories of multiverses, or models like that)?

Please describe why you think or feel the way you do, and why.

I believe the universe had an absolute beginning. I think if the universe is eternal, then we would have already observed the total expansion of a lifeless universe "cold universe" from the natural expansion. Because of this concept, I believe the universe had an absolute beginning.

Now there are arguments that the universe will expand, then contract back to singularity. Personally, I struggle with this theory, since the mathematic models that try to explain this have been refuted. So most of my opinions on this matter are a result that the universe is "ever expanding", and will eventually expand to a "cold universe" state.

 

[BLAZER PROPHET]

It's a great question.

There has to be a beginning.

But what was there before that?

 

[magnifier661]

It's a great question.

There has to be a beginning.

But what was there before that?

Well... I think that beginning is more theistic, but I won't get into that. I'm just curious what others think.

 

[Cryptkeeper]

Good question.

Personally, I feel like we don't really know enough yet to make a suitable assumption. There are literally hundreds of thousands of theories, and more than a few sound realistic. I get a headache just thinking about it.

 

[magnifier661]

Good question.

Personally, I feel like we don't really know enough yet to make a suitable assumption. There are literally hundreds of thousands of theories, and more than a few sound realistic. I get a headache just thinking about it.

So true. I believe the concept is outstanding. I mean a microbe sees the pool of water it lives in as its universe, while we see our current solar system as our just a few hundreds of years ago. As the science evolves, so does the size of the universe, IMO.

 

[jlprk]

Our 3-Dimensional physical universe is immersed in its own 4-D time, so our 4-D time began when our universe began, so there is no 4-D "before."

But we may also be passing through Ds higher than 4, so there are more time levels, which existed "before" our 4-D time sprang into existence.

Our universe exploded into existence at the beginning of its 4-D time, but the multiverse (=existence itself) includes, and exists above, all levels of time.

 

[crowTrobot]

There are countless models, all of which are have the Cosmological community agree don't work

not sure what you mean here, but there are models that as far as we know "work" just fine in principal. cosmologists just have no current way to test them.

this is a subject, like QM, where human intuition and philosophical reasoning can be objectively shown to be almost completely unreliable. so however someone intuitively feels or whatever someone philosophically deduces about whether the universe began to exist or not means squat.

In fact we don't have the information necessary to even say if "absolute beginning" is a meaningful concept.

 

[crowTrobot]

recent debate between WLC and cosmologist Sean Carroll on this and related subjects (that WLC decidedly lost) -



[video=youtube;X0qKZqPy9T8]

 

[3RA1N1AC]

Where did god come from? Has he always been?

 

[magnifier661]

recent debate between WLC and cosmologist Sean Carroll on this and related subjects (that WLC decidedly lost) -



[video=youtube;X0qKZqPy9T8]

Above u said there are models that work, yet the youtube link you provided, Carroll openly admitted none work. Then u said Carroll easily won this debate. So what is it? There are working models or not?

Shit even carol admits his model doesn't work.

 

[magnifier661]

Where did god come from? Has he always been?

Depends on what theist point of view you believe.

If you believe in a God that created the universe, then you would at least need to believe he's been around before the universe began.

 

[magnifier661]

not sure what you mean here, but there are models that as far as we know "work" just fine in principal. cosmologists just have no current way to test them.

this is a subject, like QM, where human intuition and philosophical reasoning can be objectively shown to be almost completely unreliable. so however someone intuitively feels or whatever someone philosophically deduces about whether the universe began to exist or not means squat.

In fact we don't have the information necessary to even say if "absolute beginning" is a meaningful concept.

So you are basically saying you have no opinion or clue on this matter

 

[magnifier661]

Our 3-Dimensional physical universe is immersed in its own 4-D time, so our 4-D time began when our universe began, so there is no 4-D "before."

But we may also be passing through Ds higher than 4, so there are more time levels, which existed "before" our 4-D time sprang into existence.

Our universe exploded into existence at the beginning of its 4-D time, but the multiverse (=existence itself) includes, and exists above, all levels of time.

Don't know why I don't understand what you are saying. Can you explain your concept so I can understand it?

I mean what is "4D"? Like space, time, matter and dark matter?

 

[3RA1N1AC]

What is your take on God mags? Always was? Did someone/thing create him?

 

[3RA1N1AC]

As far as universe goes, this one had a beginning

 

[MarAzul]

Of Course there was a beginning. Some may call it "The Big Bang", some The Singularity.
This Universe is continuously expanding has Hubble observed, therefore tracing back to to the origin of the expansion you must arrive at the Singularity.

Then of course there is nothing in this finding that proves the ancient Hebrew that first recorded the events in Genesis as incorrect.

Genesis|1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.

Genesis|1:2 And the earth was without form, and void; and darkness [was] upon the face

of the deep. And the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters.

Genesis|1:3 And God said, Let there be light: and there was light.
...

This fella was much sooner to bloviate on the subject than Hubble, Hawkins and gang

 

[3RA1N1AC]

What fella?

 

[MarAzul]

What fella?

Read "Who Wrote the Bible" for the answer you seek.

 

[3RA1N1AC]

Come on man, I'm miles from a library

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

This is like asking fish to speculate not only what's beyond the shore, but up and over the adjacent mountain range.

Not enough info, man.

 

[MarAzul]

Come on man, I'm miles from a library

Well as I recall, the original text is in Hebrew. So I believe the author of Who wrote the Bible, took that as a clue, the original author of Genesis was a Hebrew.
Then I believe he speculated the author was probably member of the Cohen-Levi tribe, a Rabbi.

 

[PapaG]

Did the universe have a beginning or not

I don't know, and neither does anybody else.

 

[crowTrobot]

Above u said there are models that work, yet the youtube link you provided, Carroll openly admitted none work.

been weeks since I watched this, but IIRC what he was saying is the BGV theorem indicates classical models (specifically) break down. all that means is an understanding of quantum gravity (which we don't have) is needed to explain or progress "beyond" the big bang, which isn't news.

Then u said Carroll easily won this debate.

he exposed Craig's misunderstanding/rhetorical misrepresentation of modern cosmology far better than anyone ever has. I am the first to admit that Craig rarely loses debates even though his positions are silly, but in this one he wasn't close.

There are working models or not?

there are broad models that work in principal with no meaningful way to test, yes.

 

[magnifier661]

been weeks since I watched this, but IIRC what he was saying is the BGV theorem indicates classical models (specifically) break down. all that means is an understanding of quantum gravity (which we don't have) is needed to explain or progress "beyond" the big bang, which isn't news.



he exposed Craig's misunderstanding/rhetorical misrepresentation of modern cosmology far better than anyone ever has. I am the first to admit that Craig rarely loses debates even though his positions are silly, but in this one he wasn't close.



there are broad models that work in principal with no meaningful way to test, yes.

Ah I get it now... You don't have a mind if your own, and just like breaking down other's beliefs. Safe...

I will ask you again to give your input, or you don't have a mind if your own?

 

[magnifier661]

What is your take on God mags? Always was? Did someone/thing create him?

My personal belief is God always was.

 

[magnifier661]

This is like asking fish to speculate not only what's beyond the shore, but up and over the adjacent mountain range.

Not enough info, man.

As I pointed out, there is no working model. Instead, use your logic to give ur own opinion. There is no wrong answer here.

 

[TradeNurkicNow]

As I pointed out, there is no working model. Instead, use your logic to give ur own opinion. There is no wrong answer here.

Okay, here's what would surprise me the least: it's a cycle, just like everything else in nature.

Also, thinking in terms of "before" the big bang seems wrong to me. Time is a pretty arbitrary construction, and is just another dimension in which the universe moves. Our vantage point is what changes as we move through it, so things appear to change. But I think you a second ago is no less real than you right now. So in that sense, I feel that the universe is infinite, and we are as but microbes immersed in it

 

[magnifier661]

Okay, here's what would surprise me the least: it's a cycle, just like everything else in nature.

Also, thinking in terms of "before" the big bang seems wrong to me. Time is a pretty arbitrary construction, and is just another dimension in which the universe moves. Our vantage point is what changes as we move through it, so things appear to change. But I think you a second ago is no less real than you right now. So in that sense, I feel that the universe is infinite, and we are as but microbes immersed in it

I actually like that a lot. I'm a big believer of "cycles", sense I deal with it so much in my professional. Seems the most "real" to me.

Thanks bro

 

[barfo]

There is no wrong answer here.

Actually, every answer here is very likely wrong.

barfo

 

[PapaG]

Actually, every answer here is very likely wrong.

barfo

How is "I don't know" wrong?