I bet nobody on this website can answer this question.
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
09-01-2014, 04:04 PM
RE: I bet nobody on this website can answer this question.
OP, do you live hidden?

[Image: dog-shaking.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-01-2014, 04:06 PM (This post was last modified: 09-01-2014 04:09 PM by TheThirdEye.)
RE: I bet nobody on this website can answer this question.
(09-01-2014 04:00 PM)TwoCultSurvivor Wrote:  Well, if the Big Bang marks the start of space-time, then "in the beginning" seems to be the appropriate terminology to use, no? Wink
.

What is time if it had nothing to age on?
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-01-2014, 04:11 PM
RE: I bet nobody on this website can answer this question.
(09-01-2014 04:04 PM)TheThirdEye Wrote:  
(09-01-2014 03:55 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  It is my personal belief ( meaning that I can't support it with anything ) that everything is cyclic , thus everything that exists always existed just in a different form.
That means that nothing ever came into existence, but always existed. That also means that "nothing" that Krauss talks about in his "universe from nothing" is also a form of everything.

Some new findings fit very nicely into my hypothesis
http://www.sdu.dk/en/om_sdu/fakulteterne...g_universe
, so there you go bitches. Cool

That just makes my head hurt thinking that everything existed forever because where did that stuff come from. I can't wrap my head around that .. I know it's the best we have to explain this argument but I think we are so far away an oblivious to the real answer.
Why do you assume that it had to come from somewhere. You assume creation without any evidence for it or a need for it. That may seem logical to you but actually it makes a lot more sense that it always existed.

. . . ................................ ......................................... . [Image: 2dsmnow.gif] Eat at Joe's
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like Slowminded's post
09-01-2014, 04:22 PM (This post was last modified: 09-01-2014 04:35 PM by Luminon.)
RE: I bet nobody on this website can answer this question.
(09-01-2014 03:55 PM)Slowminded Wrote:  It is my personal belief ( meaning that I can't support it with anything ) that everything is cyclic , thus everything that exists always existed just in a different form.
That means that nothing ever came into existence, but always existed. That also means that "nothing" that Krauss talks about in his "universe from nothing" is also a form of everything.

Some new findings fit very nicely into my hypothesis
http://www.sdu.dk/en/om_sdu/fakulteterne...g_universe
, so there you go bitches. Cool
Yes, my belief (and when I say outright belief, means that I don't insist on it very much) is also that the universe is cyclical. And I believe the universe will.... not exactly collapse, but it will fold back into itself, only through different dimensions than this one. Obviously, in our 3D space it's way too stretched and expanding and accelerating, to take the same way back home. But I think that at some point something will happen again, like some supernova evidence suggests that 5 billion years ago dark energy became apparent as a force that drives the universe apart. But I think there must be other forces acting upon the universe as well - if the universe is truly 11-dimensional, as M-theory says, then who knows, what form these forces or changes gain in these dimensions.

Sometimes I like to imagine the universe as this picture of a torus. Not because the universe is a 3D torus (maybe it's really a 11-dimensional torus), but because everything in the universe has roughly this shape. By everything, I mean a field of these objects, not their material forms. People, moons, planets, stars, galaxies, they all have a toroidal electric and magnetic field...
So you can imagine this picture as a time cycle of a universe, the central light is the singularity, which could really be called eternity. The downward expansion is the Big Bang. The way around is the time/space factor. The bottom is about where are we now, or maybe we're on the way outwards and up already. We are likely at the most downward point, where this 3D material part of the universe is most apparent, most "inhabited" by stars and galaxies still relatively close up to be visible. We live at the special time of a universe, when we still have a night sky full of stars. But even when the universe expands and the sky will be almost empty, in other dimensions of the M-theory the situation might look much better.

Unfortunately, I can't possibly imagine what sense or meaning might this possibly have. Maybe the universe is trying to get a perfect run of a creation without stupidity in it.
[Image: science-torus.jpg]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Luminon's post
09-01-2014, 04:24 PM (This post was last modified: 09-01-2014 11:35 PM by Bucky Ball.)
RE: I bet nobody on this website can answer this question.
(09-01-2014 03:21 PM)TheThirdEye Wrote:  What was the first thing to ever come into existence?.

Before atoms, molecules, and the universe itself .. what exsisted? and what made that exsist? its an endless question of " what " because how can one thing or one person tell me it created every thing if it cant tell me what created it..

. For example if the theory of " God " was true then what would he/she or it tell you if you asked em what created them?.

or if the Big Bang is true, how can you sit here and say things just started popping up magically.. THERE HAS TO BE independent or dependent variables involed correct me if im wrong.. but it sounds wierd to me.

The point is the first thing to exists must have had always existed , if not what made it?.... and thats what i would love to know and why im asking this question to hear other thoughts on this.

The question is meaningless, and is unanswerable.
"The first thing to come into existence" assumes an "order" in place already, (time).
"Existence" (vs non-existence) is (already) a *structure* in Reality.
Your question presumes that Reality is intuitively apprehendable by beings within and familiar with only part of it's structure.
Sorry. Examine your presuppositions.
There ain't no Santa Claus.

Insufferable know-it-all.Einstein
Those who were seen dancing were thought to be insane by those who could not hear the music - Friedrich Nietzsche
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 3 users Like Bucky Ball's post
09-01-2014, 04:26 PM
RE: I bet nobody on this website can answer this question.
[Image: 2011-11-25.jpg]

/thread

[Image: 7oDSbD4.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 9 users Like Vosur's post
09-01-2014, 04:26 PM (This post was last modified: 09-01-2014 04:31 PM by kingschosen.)
RE: I bet nobody on this website can answer this question.
Quote:Why do you assume that it had to come from somewhere. You assume creation without any evidence for it or a need for it. That may seem logical to you but actually it makes a lot more sense that it always existed.

I agree with you that it makes more sense for everything to exist without a beginning but that still doesn't mean that makes sense ether .. "The Principle of sufficient reason for everything".. To our knowledge as humans we understand that for every action there has to be to a reaction. For something to just " exist forever " seems silly to me but I guess there isn't many otheways to look at it as of now.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-01-2014, 04:32 PM
RE: I bet nobody on this website can answer this question.
(09-01-2014 03:36 PM)TheThirdEye Wrote:  instead of posting pictures and trying to be funny just answer me.. your smart enough to attach a photo in a thread so i bet you have the answer then.

[Image: 107210_zps584fadcb.jpg]

-- Max

I came into this world screaming and covered in someone else's blood. I am not afraid to go out of it that way.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes nooneofconsequence's post
09-01-2014, 04:32 PM
RE: I bet nobody on this website can answer this question.
(09-01-2014 04:24 PM)Bucky Ball Wrote:  
(09-01-2014 03:21 PM)TheThirdEye Wrote:  What was the first thing to ever come into existence?.

Before atoms, molecules, and the universe itself .. what exsisted? and what made that exsist? its an endless question of " what " because how can one thing or one person tell me it created every thing if it cant tell me what created it..

. For example if the theory of " God " was true then what would he/she or it tell you if you asked em what created them?.

or if the Big Bang is true, how can you sit here and say things just started popping up magically.. THERE HAS TO BE independent or dependent variables involed correct me if im wrong.. but it sounds wierd to me.

The point is the first thing to exists must have had always existed , if not what made it?.... and thats what i would love to know and why im asking this question to hear other thoughts on this.

The question is meaningless, and is unanswerable.
"The first thing to come into existence" assumes an "order" in place already, (time).
"Existence" (vs non-existence) is (already) a *structure* in Reality.
Your question presumes that Reality is intuitively apprehendable by being with in and familiar with only part of it's structure.
Sorry. Examine your presuppositions.
There ain't no Santa Claus.

And I see what your saying and probably the most intelligent thing said so far in this thread but that's like saying " We exist because we exist " ..
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
09-01-2014, 04:36 PM
Re: RE: I bet nobody on this website can answer this question.
(09-01-2014 04:26 PM)TheThirdEye Wrote:  
Quote:Why do you assume that it had to come from somewhere. You assume creation without any evidence for it or a need for it. That may seem logical to you but actually it makes a lot more sense that it always existed.

I agree with you that it makes more sense for everything to exist without a beginning but that still doesn't mean that makes sense ether .. "The Principle of sufficient reason for everything".. To our knowledge as humans we understand that for every action there has to be to a reaction. For something to just " exist forever " seems silly to me but I guess there isn't many otheways to look at it as of now.

We humans are dealing with uncommon concepts to how we evolved. The common sense view of reality doesn't hold up to how things function in the universe. This pertains to quantum, spacetime, and this topic as well as a sleuth of others. It may not come naturally to our brains and there's no reason it should.

"Allow there to be a spectrum in all that you see" - Neil Degrasse Tyson
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes ClydeLee's post
Post Reply
Forum Jump: