The Big Bang....

[rocky_923]

I'm not new to these boards i just don't post very often. I have recently started my own search for truth and was hoping this board could assist. This may have been addressed in another thread, but I was unable to find a match in my search...

While the big bang is just a theory, it is a widely accepted theory. It is a theory with convincing evidence to support it. The big bang implies a beginning of the universe and time-space it's self. If we go past this beginning we have nothingness.

So, in order to create the big bang does this not require some sort of intelligent mind outside of time-space to create something out of nothing?

[Lotan]

So, in order to create the big bang does this not require some sort of intelligent mind outside of time-space to create something out of nothing?

Hey Rocky! Watch me pull a universe out of my hat...
An "intelligent mind outside of time-space" is one possibility. There are plenty of others that don't require a creator god. String theory has shown some promise of providing a few answers.

[QED]

So, in order to create the big bang does this not require some sort of intelligent mind outside of time-space to create something out of nothing?

What does it take to produce an intelligent mind? Assuming that our own minds serve as a reasonable definition (in that we can remember the past and imagine the future) then the only evidence we have ever obtained for 'mind' shows it to be the exclusive possession of sufficiently complex organisms flourishing in material environments.

So why would one attach all this to the agent responsible for the BB? The answer might be because we are familiar with our own creative tendencies and thus project a disembodied version of us into the equation, but given our own complicated provenance this seems like a strange thing to force into the maelstrom of the singularity. If you go by the story of Genesis then this is no problem as god made us too. But if you accept that we are descended from an unbroken line of cellular life spanning billions of years then it just doesn't make sense.

[The Happy Humanist]

I'm not new to these boards i just don't post very often. I have recently started my own search for truth and was hoping this board could assist. This may have been addressed in another thread, but I was unable to find a match in my search...

While the big bang is just a theory, it is a widely accepted theory. It is a theory with convincing evidence to support it. The big bang implies a beginning of the universe and time-space it's self. If we go past this beginning we have nothingness.

So, in order to create the big bang does this not require some sort of intelligent mind outside of time-space to create something out of nothing?

I addressed this point here. Basically, I don't see that universe-creation must be a sentient, willful act. But I'd like to know if someone does have a logical proof that it must be.

[juliod]

A search for truth is a good thing.

I suggest very short steps, and make sure each on is one firm ground. I see two problems with your line of reasoning.

If we go past this beginning we have nothingness.

It's worse than this. Before the beginning was not "nothing". Nothing is what is inside the universe, away deep in intergalactic space. Phrases like "before the universe" or "outside the universe" are nonsensical statements. In essense, under current understanding, they are gibberish. Just exactly the same as saying "Before the universe there was dfjjshfksdfs". There's not nothing there; there's no place there for there to be nothing in.

So, in order to create the big bang does this not require some sort of intelligent mind outside of time-space to create something out of nothing?

Time is another concept fraught with danger. If something is "outside" time, then that thing can not have any activity or change. If there is "no time" then nothing can possibly change from one state to another. Thought is not possible. Action is not possible. If time began at the big bang, then nothing could possibly have created the big bang. If time t=BB, and there was no time before BB, then it is impossible to move forward from time t=BB-1.

DanZ

[The Happy Humanist]

A search for truth is a good thing.

I suggest very short steps, and make sure each on is one firm ground. I see two problems with your line of reasoning.

If we go past this beginning we have nothingness.

It's worse than this. Before the beginning was not "nothing". Nothing is what is inside the universe, away deep in intergalactic space. Phrases like "before the universe" or "outside the universe" are nonsensical statements. In essense, under current understanding, they are gibberish. Just exactly the same as saying "Before the universe there was dfjjshfksdfs". There's not nothing there; there's no place there for there to be nothing in.

So, in order to create the big bang does this not require some sort of intelligent mind outside of time-space to create something out of nothing?

Time is another concept fraught with danger. If something is "outside" time, then that thing can not have any activity or change. If there is "no time" then nothing can possibly change from one state to another. Thought is not possible. Action is not possible. If time began at the big bang, then nothing could possibly have created the big bang. If time t=BB, and there was no time before BB, then it is impossible to move forward from time t=BB-1.

DanZ

JulioD, I have to respectfully question how authoritatively we know these things. I have heard that Science considers anything beyond t=0 to be forever lost to us, information wise. Isn't it therefore a little dangerous to be making statements like "nothing could possibly have created the Big Bang"? We know nothing of that realm; could it not be another space-time continuum that contains ours? Or a realm of a different sort with its own rules regarding cause and effect? I'm certainly not arguing for Heaven or God, but how can we be ruling out anything in such a realm, when we're still trying to figure out what happened at T=BB+n?

[The Happy Humanist]

A search for truth is a good thing.

I suggest very short steps, and make sure each on is one firm ground. I see two problems with your line of reasoning.

If we go past this beginning we have nothingness.

It's worse than this. Before the beginning was not "nothing". Nothing is what is inside the universe, away deep in intergalactic space. Phrases like "before the universe" or "outside the universe" are nonsensical statements. In essense, under current understanding, they are gibberish. Just exactly the same as saying "Before the universe there was dfjjshfksdfs". There's not nothing there; there's no place there for there to be nothing in.

So, in order to create the big bang does this not require some sort of intelligent mind outside of time-space to create something out of nothing?

Time is another concept fraught with danger. If something is "outside" time, then that thing can not have any activity or change. If there is "no time" then nothing can possibly change from one state to another. Thought is not possible. Action is not possible. If time began at the big bang, then nothing could possibly have created the big bang. If time t=BB, and there was no time before BB, then it is impossible to move forward from time t=BB-1.

DanZ

JulioD, I have to respectfully question how authoritatively we know these things. I have heard that Science considers anything beyond t=0 to be forever lost to us, information wise. Isn't it therefore a little dangerous to be making statements like "nothing could possibly have created the Big Bang"? We know nothing of that realm; could it not be another space-time continuum that contains ours? Or a realm of a different sort with its own rules regarding cause and effect? I'm certainly not arguing for Heaven or God, but how can we be ruling out anything in such a realm, when we're still trying to figure out what happened at T=BB+n? I mean, heck, we don't even know who shot Kennedy!!

[Jose]

I'm not new to these boards i just don't post very often. I have recently started my own search for truth and was hoping this board could assist. This may have been addressed in another thread, but I was unable to find a match in my search...

While the big bang is just a theory, it is a widely accepted theory. It is a theory with convincing evidence to support it. The big bang implies a beginning of the universe and time-space it's self. If we go past this beginning we have nothingness.

So, in order to create the big bang does this not require some sort of intelligent mind outside of time-space to create something out of nothing?

No, it doesn't require such a conclusion. The valid conclusion is "we don't know." We can hypothesize about it, and search for ways to test our ideas...but I'm just a molecular biologist, so that stuff is beyond me. Still, I like the idea that black holes swallow stuff, which, extrapolated to t="however long it takes," we might expect on black hole to have swallowed everything, including all of the lesser black holes. Now, what happens when it finally swallows the last bit of the universe? Maybe it goes "pop," and everything flies out again, creating a new expanding universe.

[juliod]

We know nothing of that realm; could it not be another space-time continuum that contains ours?

The current information says "no". That's based on both evidence and theory, and I think it is pretty well established. Someday someone may get evidence or develop a theory that suggests there could be "something" outside or before the universe, but it doesn't look that way.

It really is something not negotiable, outside of science fiction. If time started at the BB, then there could not possibly be a cause. Notice the "if" though.

OTOH, if someone comes up with a theory that holds that there might have been time before the BB, then the BB is just a major event within our ordinary time continuum. Then it would be unnecessary to talk about imaginary super-beings being "outside" time.

It's catch-22 for the supernaturalists. If they place their god "outside time" then he can't do or think anything. If they place him in our ordinary universe then there is no need for super-beings.

DanZ

[The Happy Humanist]

The current information says "no". That's based on both evidence and theory, and I think it is pretty well established.

OK, OK, wait....evidence? How did we come by this evidence? This would contradict what I read recently, that no information from "beyond" the singularity that was the Big Bang can pass into this universe...so how would we come by any evidence? Did I misread?

It really is something not negotiable, outside of science fiction. If time started at the BB, then there could not possibly be a cause. Notice the "if" though.

Sure, I understand that concept. I just don't see how we can rule out a super-realm with it's own timeline, perhaps even an unbounded one, pre-existing and containing ours...or simply giving rise to it. I don't see how we can make any statements concerning "what's outside"...