Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Jubal_DiGriz · 08-28-2007, 08:29 AM

Personally, I've never had a problem with saying "Hey, maybe some kind of cosmic intelligence DID plan the big bang." Who knows? And more importantly, Who cares?

Most people just use this (as said before) as a stepping ground to prove that there's a God who cares about us, creates morality, and likely answers prayers. To me there's a very, very large gap between a vague banger of things to a meddlesome, irate entity who demands things of me, personally.

And, as demonstrated here and in life, saying "Goddit" is really quite unsatisfying, and prevent some really interesting questions from being asked.

RAFH · 08-28-2007, 09:57 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alf

Quote:

Originally Posted by figuer

The Big Bang is the cause of the Big Bang?? - Circularissimo.

How do you know that there was no "before" the Big Bang? That is a metaphysical statement without empirical support. At present there seems to be no method of describing conditions prior to the Big Bang, but that is not equivalent to saying there were none. To affirm so is to state that the Universe came into being out of nothing. The Big Bang cosmology states that the Universe has been expanding into its present state from an earlier condition of extreme density and heat. A condition of extreme density and heat requires 'something' to be dense and hot. What is the origin of this something?

Although I agree with you in part you are mistaken in one important aspect.

If there was no before big bang then it is not true that the universe came into being out of nothing. If there was no time before big bang then there was no time in which this nothing could exist. Put another way - as long as time existed there has always been something and there never was nothing. How then could the big bang come out of nothing when there never was this nothing?

Alf

Alf, what term would you apply to the following: a volume of reality devoid of matter/energy?

Biff the unclean · 08-28-2007, 10:25 AM

At the BB there would have been no volume of reality devoid of matter/energy. Space itself is what expanded from a single point.
And that's why I went into zoology instead of cosmology. That kind of thing makes my head hurt.

Draconis · 08-28-2007, 02:45 PM

I find myself wondering what the story in genesis has to do with Big Bang cosmology(?) It doesn't mention bangs either small or big. It seems to entail a gradual, step by step process, not all at once.

I mean, when in Genesis mentions God creating birds, does that mean he created the atoms necessary and then immediately make them into birds, or did he create a load of atoms of all sorts at the start and then collect some of these to make birds with? It seems to me it is the first option. This doesn't sound like anything going bang.

RAFH · 08-28-2007, 03:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Biff the unclean

At the BB there would have been no volume of reality devoid of matter/energy. Space itself is what expanded from a single point.
And that's why I went into zoology instead of cosmology. That kind of thing makes my head hurt.

Who said I was discussing BB?

I simply asked what the definition is of a volume of reality devoid of matter/energy.

Timetospend · 08-28-2007, 04:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dante Alighieri

Quote:

Originally Posted by Timetospend

But is there any data to show that the Big Bang is an initial event?

Nope. I explicitly acknowledge that we don't know whether or not the singularit was an initial event, let alone whether a singularity even existed (this is the great disagreement between relativistic and quantum cosmology).

Thanks! That explains it. I was confused by "initial" being in italics. Nice post; it certainly resulted in a log of dialogue.

Quote:

Per the Copenhagen interpretation, certain quantum phenomena are uncaused. However, it's pretty obvious (I think) even if the Copenhagen interpretation were false, if there were an initial event, then it would be uncaused.

I would love to spend time picking your brain directly. The Copenhagen interpretation was old even when I was taking physics and nuclear engineering classes decades ago, which makes it (and me) kind of ancient. My guess is that if we can bring greater clarity to an uncaused particle (opposed to event), then evenetually, it would spawn reseach projects of great priority, and now we enter what is science fiction for now, to create "uncaused" stuff. Think of the possibilities! (and the headaches)

Thanks,

Alf · 08-29-2007, 02:45 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by RAFH

Quote:

Originally Posted by Alf

Although I agree with you in part you are mistaken in one important aspect.

If there was no before big bang then it is not true that the universe came into being out of nothing. If there was no time before big bang then there was no time in which this nothing could exist. Put another way - as long as time existed there has always been something and there never was nothing. How then could the big bang come out of nothing when there never was this nothing?

Alf

Alf, what term would you apply to the following: a volume of reality devoid of matter/energy?

If it is truly devoid of matter/energy then it wouldn't be a volume either. Why should I have a term to apply to something which cannot exist?

Alf

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

08-28-2007, 08:29 AM	#41
Jubal_DiGriz Regular Member Join Date: Jul 2007 Location: Portland, Oregon Posts: 115	Personally, I've never had a problem with saying "Hey, maybe some kind of cosmic intelligence DID plan the big bang." Who knows? And more importantly, Who cares? Most people just use this (as said before) as a stepping ground to prove that there's a God who cares about us, creates morality, and likely answers prayers. To me there's a very, very large gap between a vague banger of things to a meddlesome, irate entity who demands things of me, personally. And, as demonstrated here and in life, saying "Goddit" is really quite unsatisfying, and prevent some really interesting questions from being asked.

08-28-2007, 10:25 AM	#43
Biff the unclean Banned Join Date: Oct 2002 Location: an inaccessible island fortress Posts: 10,638	At the BB there would have been no volume of reality devoid of matter/energy. Space itself is what expanded from a single point. And that's why I went into zoology instead of cosmology. That kind of thing makes my head hurt.

08-28-2007, 02:45 PM	#44
Draconis Veteran Member Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: London UK Posts: 3,165	I find myself wondering what the story in genesis has to do with Big Bang cosmology(?) It doesn't mention bangs either small or big. It seems to entail a gradual, step by step process, not all at once. I mean, when in Genesis mentions God creating birds, does that mean he created the atoms necessary and then immediately make them into birds, or did he create a load of atoms of all sorts at the start and then collect some of these to make birds with? It seems to me it is the first option. This doesn't sound like anything going bang.

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.