[bleuh111]

Originally Posted by Jamesthethird

Not that I understood that but I have a question.

If a pink unicorn that shits rainbows doesn't exist why doesn't it polarisversely* exist?

Or does it exist, just in my head?

*You may have guessed, but this word is made up.

I'd view "a pink unicorn that shits rainbows" as a metaphysically impossible being (because of what rainbows actually are), so no, it just plain doesn't exist. A pink unicorn may exist in any number of worlds, but not one that excretes an optical phenomenon caused by the sun shining on atmospheric water.

[Jamesthethird]

Originally Posted by bleuh111

I'd view "a pink unicorn that shits rainbows" as a metaphysically impossible being (because of what rainbows actually are), so no, it just plain doesn't exist. A pink unicorn may exist in any number of worlds, but not one that excretes an optical phenomenon caused by the sun shining on atmospheric water.

What if it could produce both sunlight and atmospheric water from its rear?

[Neda_Turk]

This particular universe may have not existed al, so therefore nothing, and then something popped through from another universe so creating something in this one.

But it's only a theory!

[MrQuike]

Absolute nothingness turning into somethingness sounds most improbable. Something turned into something else (or got a tad more excited) in some localised event that led to us. The idea of nothing in terms of the Universe(s) seems meaningless.

[MrQuike]

Originally Posted by Jamesthethird

What if it could produce both sunlight and atmospheric water from its rear?

And somewhere in the infinite Universe of all possibilities such a pink unicorn springs into being....

[kulmar]

I reckon in the centre of our universe is a black hole (fountain)spewing OUT our universe.. Once it has emptied out all the matter the other universe had it will change into a black hole proper and our universe will empty out into the other universe.. Does that make sense??

[Nard Dog]

The evidence to support the big bang is now overwhelming. Perhaps to ask your question is wrong as it is like asking - what time is blue?

I would say that if you do not understand the basics of the big bang to seek further back would be folly.

[Lathamite]

The Big Bang was caused by The Big Crunch, which will occur in several million years when the universe retracts in on itself and time runs backwards. The whole of existence is just this process repeating itself.

[bleuh111]

Originally Posted by Nard Dog

The evidence to support the big bang is now overwhelming. Perhaps to ask your question is wrong as it is like asking - what time is blue?

I would say that if you do not understand the basics of the big bang to seek further back would be folly.

I don't think the OP is questioning whether the big bang phase occurred, which as you point out, is not really disputed. Rather i think they're asking about your view on a cause or reason for the big bang phase. Also important to note is the difference between the big bang phase and big bang singularity - the singularity of infinite values is not an established "thing" that existed (or is claimed by scientific theory to have existed), but where general relativity breaks down and the maths of classical physics becomes nonsense.

[DaleRDS]

Why are we here at all?

[Nard Dog]

Originally Posted by DaleRDS

Why are we here at all?

Quantum Fluctuations of essentially nothing.

[DaleRDS]

Originally Posted by Nard Dog

Quantum Fluctuations of essentially nothing.

That's what I thought it was - thanks!

[Justmadeit]

i dont follow any religious beliefs but personally i dont believe in the big bang theory, it is just that to me... a theory

[Nard Dog]

Originally Posted by Justmadeit

i dont follow any religious beliefs but personally i dont believe in the big bang theory, it is just that to me... a theory

Just like gravity is a theory....

[Justmadeit]

Originally Posted by Nard Dog

Just like gravity is a theory....

nope, its different

It makes me laugh when these so called 'experts' speak with absolute certainty like they really know how the universe came into existence. They add 2 and 2 and get 5. Its just pure arrogance of anyone to say they really know

[potatolegs]

Originally Posted by bleuh111

I don't think the OP is questioning whether the big bang phase occurred, which as you point out, is not really disputed. Rather i think they're asking about your view on a cause or reason for the big bang phase. Also important to note is the difference between the big bang phase and big bang singularity - the singularity of infinite values is not an established "thing" that existed (or is claimed by scientific theory to have existed), but where general relativity breaks down and the maths of classical physics becomes nonsense.

Exactly that. I wasn't disputing the fact there most probably was some kind of "big bang". I was wondering what people's ideas were as to what made it happen, if nothingness was around "before" the big bang what made it turn into something.

*I know there was no before the big bang as there was no time but what manifested in the nothingness.

---

Regarding a universe colliding into another one, that would still mean those universes had to come from nothing???

[Moony]

Originally Posted by Justmadeit

nope, its different

It makes me laugh when these so called 'experts' speak with absolute certainty like they really know how the universe came into existence. They add 2 and 2 and get 5. Its just pure arrogance of anyone to say they really know

It makes me laugh when forum "experts" talk about a theory they clearly have no concept of.

The big bang theory doesnt address the question of how the universe came into existence. It only deals with how the universe evolved from a very hot dense object that existed around the plank epoch (10^-43 seconds after the universe came into existence) to give the universe in its current state. Anything beyong the plank epoch is speculation at the moment - and I doubt you will find many scientists who claim otherwise.

[Justmadeit]

Originally Posted by Moony

It makes me laugh when forum "experts" talk about a theory they clearly have no concept of.

The big bang theory doesnt address the question of how the universe came into existence. It only deals with how the universe evolved from a very hot dense object that existed around the plank epoch (10^-43 seconds after the universe came into existence) to give the universe in its current state. Anything beyong the plank epoch is speculation at the moment.

i think that says it all

[Moony]

Originally Posted by Justmadeit

i think that says it all

Says what exactly? Perhaps you can give some links to these scientists who claim to know "with absolute certainty" how the universe came into existence...

[DaleRDS]

Originally Posted by potatolegs

Regarding a universe colliding into another one, that would still mean those universes had to come from nothing???

No, they came from something.

[spiney2]

question as asked has no possible answer!

In any "causal chain", either there is an infinite regress, or it must end somewhere, which you might as well call "God". Or "Nature", if you're happier with that!

This very problem was one of Kant's famous antinomies ! in fact, the very first ......

" .....The "solution" to Antinomies is that we cannot know how to resolve them. We must suspend judgment in the matter ......."

http://www.friesian.com/antinom.htm

[potatolegs]

Originally Posted by spiney2

question as asked has no possible answer!

In any "causal chain", either there is an infinite regress, or it must end somewhere, which you might as well call "God". Or "Nature", if you're happier with that!

This very problem was one of Kant's famous antinomies ! in fact, the very first ......

" .....The "solution" to Antinomies is that we cannot know how to resolve them. We must suspend judgment in the matter ......."

http://www.friesian.com/antinom.htm

That is my idea of God. God is the thing can could come from nothing. The ultimate powerful force as you will.. Some people call it nature, some being, others the universe. You get my drift.

[Biffo the Bear]

Before expansion, the most credible theory is that the Universe existed in a superunified state where the four fundamental interactions that give us such concepts as time existed as one.

Therefore, to ask from whence it came or what came before is somewhat illogical, because at that period, the Universe would not have been subject to the physical laws by which we measure it, so there was no time and there was no structure that we recognise.

In some ways it's like a flock of seagulls trying to rebuild a nuclear reactor based on their knowledge of scavenging chips from the promenade - there's literally no way that they can perceive its workings, because its outside of their frame of reality.

[lordOfTime]

God did it. But he didn't do it in 7 days.Or even 6.

Of course this is just my opinion but for what it's worth to the unbelievers of DS I believe the Universe is a creation of God.

[potatolegs]

Originally Posted by Biffo the Bear

Before expansion, the most credible theory is that the Universe existed in a superunified state where the four fundamental interactions that give us such concepts as time existed as one.

Therefore, to ask from whence it came or what came before is somewhat illogical, because at that period, the Universe would not have been subject to the physical laws by which we measure it, so there was no time and there was no structure that we recognise.

n some ways it's like a flock of seagulls trying to rebuild a nuclear reactor based on their knowledge of scavenging chips from the promenade - there's literally no way that they can perceive its workings, because its outside of their frame of reality.

I really like that analogy.. It is like we cannot comprehend the workings as it's beyond our mind and of a higher intelligence if you like.