gruveguy

This thread comes as a result of reading the thread on infinity and also deals with evolution and the expansion of the universe. Here's the quote that got me started on it.
I'm assuming that most of the people here are atheists, so how do you all propose that the universe came about? Is time infinite? If the universe is constantly expanding, would it not logically follow that at one point the universe was as compressed as it could be?

It seems illogical to me that the universe could have a random starting point. It also seems illogical that we could have a law that says the universe is expanding, yet we set a finite amount of time for the existence of the universe. If the entire universe was contained in a minute spacial point until a certain time long ago, what action would have caused the infinite expansion of it?

These are just a few of the many questions that I have been tossing around, any replies would be wonderful.

Ben

Francois Tremblay

Well, modern cosmology says that the "beginning" was an open-ended moment, so the universe has not "begun" or "caused" in a strict manner of speaking. That is why I said specifically "has existed for".

Your other questions are meaningnless, since there can be no "coming about" of existence itself (existence is a metaphysical constant, as you know), and time cannot be infinite since infinity is a floating abstraction.

Hope that helps (^_^)

Theophage

quoted material by gruveguy will be in bold:

I'm assuming that most of the people here are atheists,

I am, hello gruveguy

so how do you all propose that the universe came about?

Short answer: I haven't a clue. Is that a problem for atheism? Does saying "goddidit" somehow qualify as an explanation for theism?

Is time infinite?

I don't think so. I've heard people give refutations to the idea of an infinite causal chain, but none of them have ever been very convincing to me. But I'm perfectly happy believing that the universe is only of a finite age.

If the universe is constantly expanding, would it not logically follow that at one point the universe was as compressed as it could be?

That's my reckoning. In fact, I've even got this idea of mine which I like to call the "Big Bang"... Oh wait, that isn't my idea, it's currently accepted cosmology. Silly me

I jest here because you seem to be taking it for granted that atheists don't accept Big Bang cosmology. It's best to make as few assumptions as possible, or so says Mr. Occam.

It seems illogical to me that the universe could have a random starting point.

I'd probably agree if I knew what a "random starting point" was...

It also seems illogical that we could have a law that says the universe is expanding, yet we set a finite amount of time for the existence of the universe.

I don't follow, how is this illogical? You realize that the Big Bang theory is not based simply on the musings of philosophers, but on actual empirical evidence right?

Quantum Mechanics, Special and General Relativity (the latter of which, by the way, the Big Bang theory gew out of) also seem rather counterintuitive (a better word than "illogical") but are also supported by empirical evidence.

If the entire universe was contained in a minute spacial point until a certain time long ago, what action would have caused the infinite expansion of it?

This question belies a certain misunderstanding of the Big Bang. The singularity (that's the minute point) didn't just sit around waiting in time for something to happen to it. Time as well as space was crunched up into that singularity, and it was by the unfolding of the singularity that time (and space) itself began. Remember, according to relativity, time is a physical dimension just like the three dimensions of space.

Since there was no time before the singularity by definition, the singularity didn't have to "wait" any amount of time to begin expanding. It simply did. And also since there was no time before the singularity, there was no cause of the expansion either. Causes must come temporally prior to their effects.

I am certianly not the be-all end-all expert on cosmology in here, but I know enough about the Big Bang to know that it doesn't interfere with atheism in any way. In fact, I started a thread where I claim that such cosmologies actually support (if not prove) atheism here:

<a href="http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=50&t=000048" target="_blank">http://iidb.org/cgi-bin/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=50&t=000048</a>

[ January 30, 2002: Message edited by: Theophage ]

[ January 30, 2002: Message edited by: Theophage ]</p>

Jonsey3333

In fact (and this will show my ignorance, if nothing else), you'd almost have to believe the Big Bang theory to be an athiest, wouldn't you? Empirical evidence supports expansion of the universe, rather than compression or neither. Then again, I've only been an athiest a short while.

-Mike