Eternal Universe

[TheBigDog]

The universe exists because it can. The only alternative to its existence is non-existence which we know is not true. The natural laws that we have proven dictate that the universe exists just as it does. It has no choice in the matter. With infinite possibilities, only those things of sound principle can exist. The universe that we observe around us is of just such sound principle. There was never a time that the universe did not exist, and there will never be a time that it ceases to exist. It simply is because it must be.

Take the Big Bang. The closer you get to the first moment of time, the more problems it presents. You end up ultimately with something created from nothing. That violates the natural laws that we hold to be true. So we begin to speculate on new laws and new realities to justify the notion of the big bang, even when the science we already hold as being irrefutable tells us that it didn’t take place that way.

I am not saying that there was not a Big Bang that happened near to our corner of the universe some 15 billion years ago. I am saying that it was not the beginning. It was another event in the universe that has always been and will always be.

Lets take the BB in terms of a pre-existing universe. Imagine that a hugely massive singularity, Black Hole, reaches a cosmic critical mass. The internal pressure of the hole suddenly exceeds the gravity of the mass. In an instant the billions of years of matter that had been gathering into the hole are released in a massive explosion. A Shockwave is sent out into the universe at near the speed of light followed by the cooling and reconstituting matter from in the hole. As the matter cools and organizes it begins to coalesce into more familiar matter – dust, stars, galaxies – all racing from the point of explosion just behind the massive shockwave. The shockwave itself impacts all the heavenly bodies that existed outside the hole and accelerates them with some force away from the center of the explosion, but does not change entirely the nature of their pre bang motion.

The edge of the shockwave would be denser than normal space, and would have an effect on light that passes through it. It would slow it. So from inside the explosion you would not be able to clearly distinguish light from the outside. It would appear that everything in the universe originated with the big bang. But that would not be true. The big band as the creating force of the universe cannot be true because we would need to throw away good science to allow for it to happen. It is akin to perpetual motion. The only thing perpetual is truth. The universe was created by the truths of natural law. As long as they hold the universe will remain.

Bill

[GAHD]

Hmm, this reads like philosophy.

[Jay-qu]

just a little.. sounds like the anthroptic principle - things are the way they are because if they where any different we wouldnt be here to witness it!

[Harry Costas]

Hello Maybe you should read his link

<spamlink removed>
http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/bang.html
http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles...F/V10N1ANT.pdf
<spamlink removed>

As for the Big Bang

It came about some 80 yrs ago with limited information, and the model built around it for years until most cosmoligists until recenlty were caught in the flow of thought. With recent deep field images and existing galaxies billions of years old and 13 billion light years away has put the Big Bang theory out to die.

[InfiniteNow]

Originally Posted by Harry Costas

Hello Maybe you should read his link

Hello Harry,

Maybe you could, at the VERY least, provide some segment of those links in your post, some tiny piece of information which will assist the person viewing it to discern exactly what part of the page you are referencing. I neither have the time nor the care to open each link you post and read through every sentence in the hopes of ascertaining the point you are trying to make.

It's a bit like you making a statement about chemistry, and me saying "Oh, hold on. Here's a chemistry book, a book on atomic structure, a guide to quantum dynamics, and blah, blah, blah... To answer your question, maybe you should read these."


I do not believe this to be the case, but it certainly sounds as if you do not understand the information well enough to put it into your own words. We cannot (or, perhaps, should not) teach about that which we do not understand.


Cheers.

[CraigD]

Originally Posted by TheBigDog

… There was never a time that the universe did not exist, and there will never be a time that it ceases to exist. It simply is because it must be. …

TBD is articulating, I think, a thought most of us give some credit to in answer to the thorny problem of explaining the “once, there was nothing, then something happened, and there was something” scenario.

Personally, I believe, but can’t make a solid scientific argument supporting, that there has “always” been “something”. However, I also believe that something – the universe – has not always had the same “natural laws”. Just as the distribution and arrangement of matter and energy appears to change over large periods of time, the rules governing their interaction may also change. At present, I find Quantum Graph Theory the most elegant and compelling scheme for explaining such change. (Warning: the linked to page is, as are nearly all “well-developed” QGT of which I’m aware, a work of fiction, describing theory that does not yet, and may never, exist, as if it were historic fact)

If I’m correct in my speculative belief, events such as the big bang may have resulted from abrupt change in the laws of Physics themselves – in the terminology of QGT, phase transitions in QG network, after which the QG network has remained significantly unchanged. In “deep time” (10^37 + years after the big bang, etc.), where current theory predicts various ”end of the universe” scenarios, something very different may occur due to another abrupt transition in th QG network.

[coldcreation]

cool theory bigdog.

[TheBigDog]

Originally Posted by coldcreation

cool theory bigdog.

Thanks CC. I guess cool is close to cold in this case. This actually relates to my other thread about maximum gravitational force. If there is a limit to gravitational attraction then the internal expanding force of a black hole could eventually overcome the collapsing gravity. That would add merit to this theory and support the idea of big bangs being periodic events within a bigger universe.

Bill

[GreekTTC]

Ahh, one of my favorite topics: What is *this* all part of?

I'm of the opinion that our universe is not "everything there is, was or ever will be" (Carl Sagan). Imagine our universe as one of many. Not necessarily an infinity. Like bubbles floating in the water of a bath tub, all connected but independent. How do universes come to be? How did our universe come to be? Do black holes suck matter into their great eye and spit singularities out, exploding them into new universes? Compressed matter big-banging new universes into existence with regularity?

Science continually finds or postulates smaller and smaller building blocks of matter. Are we submicroscopic to a larger being, carbon-based or otherwise? Larger not only in size, but intelligence? As we compare our superior brain power to that of a fruit fly, how would our intelligence stack up to a being comparatively more advanced than we? So advanced that we can't even begin to imagine *reality* on the grand scale?

Was there even a beginning to everything? And if so, what was there before that? How can we expect our feeble minds handle the concepts of infinity and nothingness?

"Everything, ever." That's a mouthful.

Just a little something to chew on.

[HydrogenBond]

There is another way to view our universe. Because it is finite in mass and distance, it is probally also finite in time. If the mass or even the distance were infinite it would make sense that maybe time might be infinite or eternal; 2 out of 3 isn't bad. But 1 out of 3 does not seem quite logical. If it was 3 out of 3 it would be a sure thing.