BBC Focus Magazine

[M Paul Lloyd]

Keep it civil please people.

A bit off topic I know but catholic priests aside the big bang is rather too biblical for my liking and then you have all the vexed problem about what came before and what is outside and very soon it all gets very confusing and people can often get upset if it interferes with what they believe.

So what if the universe it literally 'everything' and nothing at all exists beyond it because their is no 'beyond' . It didn't explode into existence but has always been around because time doesn't exist without out it so it effectively occupies all of time and therefore nothing can come before or even after it because concepts such as before and after simply do not apply?

Try to think of it as an infinite sphere the surface of which appears flat........ but in three dimensions, which isn't easy but I bet you can,

The big bang is just a convenient, and I think, overly simplistic way of trying to make sense of something so mind numbing complex that we all struggle to understand it, so maybe we should just try to accept that really, we don't know?

[The Beige Avenger]

... I've never been called "people" before Sorry Merlo, I mean to casue no harm, only to stir up discussion.

back to wafflings...

I'm not a huge fan of big bang theory, although I accept it as the best model we have scientifically speaking... and I'm certainly not going to do the leg work to find a better one!

When I first came across brane theory something about that sounded appealing as you could perhaps think of the universe as a globule of fluid that poured through a 'crack' in the brane from one side to the other which kind of explains expansion and can also help to explain why we keep getting it wrong... maybe we should treat the universe / space - time as a fluid. As for how it got there in the first place... I dunno but the potential cyclic nature could also be contained in this idea, like an hour glass being turned over starts all over again. It has happened before and will happen again. No beginning, only a reset and re-beginning.
So, our universe is on one side of the brane but completely empty until the "Big Splurge"

Granted this is no better a hypothesis than any other mindless rambling but there's something about liquids, foams, bubbles etc that get me thinking in Universal terms.

So, a question to the forum folks: Do you think that what we know as "The Universe" is all there is? Nothing beyond, nothing before?

[My how this thread has evolved from a very different beginning, almost as if it were created on purpose ]

[Ush]

So, a question to the forum folks: Do you think that what we know as "The Universe" is all there is? Nothing beyond, nothing before?

I haven't a damn clue and I don't expect to ever have a clue.

[Shadowwolf]

...the big bang is rather too biblical for my liking...

But that is largely a property that you have applied to it, is this not creating a tendency for bias against the theory based around the religious property you have attached to it? One could as easily suggest that the formation of the first complex amino acids into proteins is too biblical, but would that dispense with evolution?

...then you have all the vexed problem about what came before and what is outside and very soon it all gets very confusing and people can often get upset if it interferes with what they believe.

I think that the question of what came before a point will always exist and speculation can easily get confusing. As for folks getting upset over their beliefs being challenged, well tough I say, knowledge is not going to take a back seat to some peoples fragile sensibilities.

So what if the universe it literally 'everything' and nothing at all exists beyond it because their is no 'beyond' . It didn't explode into existence but has always been around because time doesn't exist without out it so it effectively occupies all of time and therefore nothing can come before or even after it because concepts such as before and after simply do not apply?

But clearly there is change, galaxies form, systems form, stars etc, and they move, there is a progression and it does seem to get simpler the further back you go.

The big bang is just a convenient, and I think, overly simplistic way of trying to make sense of something so mind numbing complex that we all struggle to understand it, so maybe we should just try to accept that really, we don't know?

This brings me back to my earlier point and an opinion you have illustrated elsewhere, "Plus if the universe isn't expanding (and redshift is just an optical illusion) you don't need dark energy either. Simple, but it works," if the bang is overly simplistic then how is a simpler explanation better? As for the latter part of the quote I think that many do appreciate that we really do not know but to accept it is I believe to stop wondering, to stop inquiring. What I mean to say is that, if such a view had been prevalent amongst humans I doubt we would ever have progressed very far.

Your idea of a higher intelligence is no better than creationism...

Yes, civility indeed and no tangents on Mormonism etc, I tend to agree with the Avenger, the label on who is responsible may change but it is all essentially the same, all utterly lacking in evidence, speculation and that can be anything anyone wants it to be. What I am trying to say is that yes, an intelligence creating our universe as an experiment is a possibility, that there is a god is a possibility, that it is the matrix is a possibility, but until any evidence comes along to support a possibility it will occupy the same space as all the other possibilities, that they are possible but highly improbable. Now some claims like YEC stand in opposition to the evidence so that does not look good for them — though an omnipotent power could conceivably fool us all — but that does not make the other unsubstantiated possibilities more likely. I'm not sure I'm being very coherent here

So, a question to the forum folks: Do you think that what we know as "The Universe" is all there is? Nothing beyond, nothing before?

Mr Ush seems to have that covered for me

[My how this thread has evolved from a very different beginning, almost as if it were created on purpose ]

[Merlo]

Sorry for stirring this all up , but i think that possibilities should be accepted as just that, but some being more plausible than others (relatively!). Personally I do not think we were created by anybeing. (although has anyone read "the science of Discworld"? Excellent series which shows an interesting take on it all, along with some proper science).

On the topic of whether this universe is all there is... There IS in fact evidence that this universe is not all there is. Albeit, it's not physical, but it is logical. String Theory and the majority of it's variants all predict that the most stable number of dimensions to have is 11 or 26. However we have only properly observed 4 in our universe. This suggests our universe has a counterpart, created by the same big bang with 7 dimensions. Towards the end of our universe, this model predicts that the two universes will tunnel into each other to form a single more stable universe. Now whilst this is only a theory it does have mathematical backing, and could very well be true.

[M Paul Lloyd]

... I've never been called "people" before S

A first time for everything Mr.A.

[Nails]

Turtles, all the way down.

Funny, that always puts a smile on my face.

Maybe you have to read the book.
Better on the video from the tour though.

Anyhow, big bang isn't really something I can argue with or for, I really know very little about it.

But it does make sense if the universe is a cyclic event, big bang > big crunch > big bang etc - but we still havn't dealt with the start, where all this energy came from etc.

I suppose it is entirely possible that the niverse is created by a god/superior intelligence, but that also doesn't explain anything - like where they came from.

Gotta stop now, my brain is starting to hurt...

[M Paul Lloyd]

That's why I like the 'no frills' universe Nails, so much less to worry about.

[The Beige Avenger]

I watched an inspiring talk by Lawrence Krauss the other day.

I envy the mind of these cosmologists... I'd despair long before I'd progress.

He talked about the origins of the universe and how the majority of our universe is indeed the stuff we don't know anything about (the dark stuff that doesn't interact) and all the matter and light make up about 1% of it These numbers might be familiar to us but still, pretty amazing. How there "probably" exists a number of universes with different rules, the flat universe etc etc.

I recommend it thoroughly.

I wish I had an ounce of the passion, drive and intelligence of guys like him... but if I could pick it would be Feynman or Einstein i'd want an ounce of (not in a sexual way you understand )

[Doonhamer]

In respect of the original question, I usually stick to the maxim "Never argue with an idiot, the best possible outcome is that you win an argument with an idiot".

Similarly, I saw a bumper sticker that said "Never argue with an idiot, they drag you down to their level and beat you with experience"!

[M Paul Lloyd]

I'll have to look that up Mr.A thanks. And yes Doonhamer we have wandered rather haven't we.