A big bang from a previous universe compacted into one big mass makes more sense than out of nothing....

by EndofMysteries 17 Replies latest jw friends

• 

  EndofMysteries

  I've been learning a lot more about the universe, galaxies, planet formations, etc.

  It's amazing how stars are constantly recycled, they form from gathering all the dust/gas/mass around them, the heat and pressure as the mass gets larger, producing stronger gravity, and depending on it's makeup creates fusion, turning into a star, then when it dies, it turns into a supernova, explodes, and sends it's matter out there for other stars to form,etc.

  Now galaxies do the same thing, and supposedly in many billons of years many galaxies will have eaten others, and if blackholes or something pulling in all the stars and mass is at the centers of these galaxies, then eventually everything would turn into one huge mass. If this followed the same pattern of stars, then this huge mass would eventually explode big bang style.

  None of this would explain the origin of life, but if something like this has been a cycle, then the origin of life would have been prior to our universe and somehow life survived when it last happened.
• 

  Simon

  It's not an explanation though ... where did *that* universe come from?!

  The explantion for the universe rely on understanding of the link between time and gravity. There was no 'before' the universe without the universe because there was no time.

  Oooh, dizzy ...
• 

  Apognophos

  Last I heard, the prevailing scientific opinion is that the universe is going to continue expanding, not compact back together. And how would life survive a Big Crunch anyway?

  More importantly, as Simon indicated, you've just pushed back the origin of things to a previous universe, which doesn't make anything more plausible, just more remote.

  I think the real question is whether you've read anything about abiogenesis. The abiogenesis theories out there now make life's formation sound pretty plausible, within our own universe, on this very planet, with no need to pawn off the problem on another place and time.

  That being said, it would be foolish for any of us to act as if we can really explain how This all came about. The universe is ultimately unexplainable and probably will continue to be for quite some time. Keep in mind that we just invented the light bulb a little over a century ago. Science has a long way to go before we can expect to know all the answers.
• 

  OneEyedJoe

  Interestingly enough, because gravity exists, it is entirely possible for our observable universe to spring from exactly nothing. Cosmology is a fun (maybe I have a weird definition of fun) field to study. The more you research, the more you'll find that our universe springing from nothing (or, depending on the theory, a larger 'sea' of universes) is just as, if not more, likely than the existence of some sort of eternal sentience.
• 

  Simon

  It's like people claiming that learning how to start fire is difficult so it must have been taught by someone from anothert planet. Noe, instead of someone figuring it out you still need someone to have figured it out but also cross the universe to tell us.

  Same with life originating - while we shouldn't discount the possibility of it arriving on a comet or asteroid I think it's less likely as it just adds to the chain of incredible events and doesn't answer the origin question - how did life get on the comet?

  There was a good article recently out about the universe being the ultimate free lunch - should be googleable. There are lots of theories that potentially provide an explanation and also fit in with known physics. The concept of infinite space having an 'edge' as well as time having a beginning are counter intuitive because we live in a different range of experience.
• 

  Finkelstein

  Here's a interesting lecture by Pro. Lawrence Krauss on the beginning of the universe.

  Lends something to think about at least.

  https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z0HqZxXZK7c
• 

  Simon

  Here's an interesting read:

  Why is there something rather than nothing?
• 

  EndofMysteries

  where did 'that' universe come from.

  The best way to explain what I'm saying is imagine the universe is a nebulae. It eventually turns into a solid mass planet, then with enough mass fusion happens and it becomes a star, eventually it dies, becomes super nova, explodes, and all its mass and particles eventually combine again to form a star(s).

  So if our Universe is in the phase after an exploding super nova, all the mass is combining, forming stars, galaxies, galaxies eating galaxies, etc, eventually will combine into one big mass and 'big bang' again.

  As if the universe is like a giant beating heart. Expand, contract, expand, contract.

  No idea if that's an actual theory or not and doesn't explain when or how it all started, but would explain how our current phase started.
• 

  prologos

  EoM, your theory is an expanded version of what we kids wondered about in the 1930s. was our solarsystem just like a bigger atom, with people living on the electron planets and scaled up, and scaled down. yours and these ols ideas are interesting starting points for discussion.

  The beginning of life is not difficult to grasp, inanimate matter obviously takes on life's properties when incorporating into a living entity. so with right conditions it should be able to start from scratch. but

  The beginning of the universe in the cosmos is deep.

  Time could be not just a sequencing of events {god's way of assuring that everything does not happen at once} but a 4st dimension. My picture, model:

  the universe a two dimensional balloon, that starts beeng inflated, start to expand, becomes greater as it moves away from the beginning. (One spacial dimension removed and replaced by the time dimension) Time is the radius in that model, always at right angles to space, as in the time vs distance graphs.

  The time dimension is eternal, so is the void, but full of virtual energy fluctuations.

  we are small and trapped in space MOVING through time.

  You can escape moving through time by accelerating to light speed or gaining max weight, or getting near it.

  A creator with limitless time, energy possible to exist there? you have reached the limit of our comprehension, so why push it?
• 

  Oubliette

  What "makes sense" is actually irrelevant. We should all learn to accept what the evidence says and try to avoid being prejudiced by our own pre-conceptions and biases.

  I am actually listening to a talk by Carl Sagan on this very point. It was in his acceptance speech when he was was named the AHA’s Humanist of the Year in 1981, AHA Conference in San Diego, California.

  • "It's probably much better to keep an open mind and then--when the data is in, right?--then it's easy to decide [from] what the evidence shows."

  http://americanhumanist.org/HNN/details/2012-05-from-the-aha-archives-carl-sagans-1981-humanist-of-t