Does the creation of space and time qualify as a miracle?

[frigidweirdo]

That was a claim; it did not prove anything. The onus is on you to prove your assertion. Not me.

If you believe the laws are attached / embedded in the physical, that they are one in the same, the burden of proof is on you to prove it.

I have already proven that the laws of nature were in place before space and time existed because space and time was created according to those laws; specifically the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation. That is my proof. Where is yours?

No you didn’t. Repetition lends no weight to the claim. You seem to be trying to avoid your supposition. I made none.

Yes, I did. How else do you think space and time was created? Magic?

Beyond our own universe we know nothing. We literally have no idea what is there, if anything. We don't know how things function, we don't know how things appear. Nothing. No knowledge. We're so ignorant about this we're literally braindead.

So, how else could this have been created? I could throw up a million possibilities and the chances that I'm right will be very limited indeed. There'll be another infinite times two possibilities beyond that.

Why would you expect matter and energy to be any different outside the boundary of the universe?

And no, there are not an infinite number of possibilities for the creation of space and time. In fact there is exactly one explanation that does not violate the law of conservation, inflation theory.

Why would I expect matter and energy to be different outside of the boundary of the universe?

Because I have no idea what is on the outside of the universe.

Imagine you're a fish. Why would you expect there to be anything other than water on the outside of the sea?

The fact is we can make silly assumptions. Remember the old adage that making assumptions makes an ass out of you and me?

You don't know what's on the outside of the universe. You can either A) pretend you do, or B) state that you don't.

Why would you make things up?

Yes, there's one explanation for what exists outside of the universe, but there are an infinite number of possibilities that we could come up with.

Do the laws of conservation and inflation theory function outside of the universe? Do they? Can you tell me, prove to me, etc etc that they exist outside of the universe?

 

[Montrovant]

I'm pretty sure he's including the laws of nature in what you cannot know existed before the Big Bang.

How else do you think it could have happened? Magic?

I was only commenting on Taz's post. However, I have no idea what might have existed before the Big Bang. Unlike you, I don't feel any sort of surety about my knowledge of such things. It's possible that what existed prior to the Big Bang is something beyond human comprehension; it's possible the laws of nature you keep speaking about did exist. I have no problem with accepting my ignorance. I haven't yet figured out why you are so certain that you have the answer.

Because logic requires it and because leading experts believe it.

You have given reasons why you believe as you do. I'm not trying to say there are none. However, you have not shown that the laws of nature existing prior to the Big Bang has been proven. It is your certainty, your description of these ideas as fact, that I have been arguing against.

The creation of space and time did not violate the law of conservation. That is the basis you are looking for.

That is a belief, or an assumption, but not a proven fact. The law of conservation may apply in our universe, but there is no way to know if it applies when our universe did not exist.

 

[Montrovant]

That was a claim; it did not prove anything. The onus is on you to prove your assertion. Not me.

If you believe the laws are attached / embedded in the physical, that they are one in the same, the burden of proof is on you to prove it.

I have already proven that the laws of nature were in place before space and time existed because space and time was created according to those laws; specifically the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation. That is my proof. Where is yours?

No you didn’t. Repetition lends no weight to the claim. You seem to be trying to avoid your supposition. I made none.

Yes, I did. How else do you think space and time was created? Magic?

Beyond our own universe we know nothing. We literally have no idea what is there, if anything. We don't know how things function, we don't know how things appear. Nothing. No knowledge. We're so ignorant about this we're literally braindead.

So, how else could this have been created? I could throw up a million possibilities and the chances that I'm right will be very limited indeed. There'll be another infinite times two possibilities beyond that.

Why would you expect matter and energy to be any different outside the boundary of the universe?

And no, there are not an infinite number of possibilities for the creation of space and time. In fact there is exactly one explanation that does not violate the law of conservation, inflation theory.

There is only one explanation that you know of that makes sense to you. You sure do like to make declarations about what must be where the creation of the universe or of space and time are concerned.

There are still multiple ideas about the beginning of the universe. For example: https://gizmodo.com/what-was-our-universe-like-before-the-big-bang-1791889926

What existed before the big bang?

This one goes into Vilenkin's view: What Came Before the Big Bang? | DiscoverMagazine.com

Here's one in which the universe is cyclical without any singularity: Before Big Bang: Scientists discover what existed BEFORE the beginning of the universe

I'm not pushing any of these forth as being true, I'm just making the point that the beginning of the universe, or what may have existed prior to the universe, is not a subject which is anything close to settled.

 

[ding]

How else do you think it could have happened? Magic?

I was only commenting on Taz's post. However, I have no idea what might have existed before the Big Bang. Unlike you, I don't feel any sort of surety about my knowledge of such things. It's possible that what existed prior to the Big Bang is something beyond human comprehension; it's possible the laws of nature you keep speaking about did exist. I have no problem with accepting my ignorance. I haven't yet figured out why you are so certain that you have the answer.

Because logic requires it and because leading experts believe it.

You have given reasons why you believe as you do. I'm not trying to say there are none. However, you have not shown that the laws of nature existing prior to the Big Bang has been proven. It is your certainty, your description of these ideas as fact, that I have been arguing against.

The creation of space and time did not violate the law of conservation. That is the basis you are looking for.

That is a belief, or an assumption, but not a proven fact. The law of conservation may apply in our universe, but there is no way to know if it applies when our universe did not exist.

The creation of space and time followed the law of conservation. It didn’t violate it.

If there are other multiverses outside of our space and time, there is zero reason to believe that the matter and energy contained in their space and time would be any different than ours or that they were created any differently than ours.

In other words the same laws of nature that created ours out of nothing would have created the other multiverses.

Regardless it would be illogical to assume the creation of any multiverse was not according to some law or rule.

The alternative is magic.

 

[ding]

If you believe the laws are attached / embedded in the physical, that they are one in the same, the burden of proof is on you to prove it.

I have already proven that the laws of nature were in place before space and time existed because space and time was created according to those laws; specifically the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation. That is my proof. Where is yours?

No you didn’t. Repetition lends no weight to the claim. You seem to be trying to avoid your supposition. I made none.

Yes, I did. How else do you think space and time was created? Magic?

Beyond our own universe we know nothing. We literally have no idea what is there, if anything. We don't know how things function, we don't know how things appear. Nothing. No knowledge. We're so ignorant about this we're literally braindead.

So, how else could this have been created? I could throw up a million possibilities and the chances that I'm right will be very limited indeed. There'll be another infinite times two possibilities beyond that.

Why would you expect matter and energy to be any different outside the boundary of the universe?

And no, there are not an infinite number of possibilities for the creation of space and time. In fact there is exactly one explanation that does not violate the law of conservation, inflation theory.

There is only one explanation that you know of that makes sense to you. You sure do like to make declarations about what must be where the creation of the universe or of space and time are concerned.

There are still multiple ideas about the beginning of the universe. For example: https://gizmodo.com/what-was-our-universe-like-before-the-big-bang-1791889926

What existed before the big bang?

This one goes into Vilenkin's view: What Came Before the Big Bang? | DiscoverMagazine.com

Here's one in which the universe is cyclical without any singularity: Before Big Bang: Scientists discover what existed BEFORE the beginning of the universe

I'm not pushing any of these forth as being true, I'm just making the point that the beginning of the universe, or what may have existed prior to the universe, is not a subject which is anything close to settled.

Did you read the Discover interview with Vilenkin?

“...Yet the explanation still leaves a huge mystery unaddressed. Although a universe, in Vilenkin’s scheme, can come from nothing in the sense of there being no space, time or matter, something is in place beforehand — namely the laws of physics....”

 

[ding]

If you believe the laws are attached / embedded in the physical, that they are one in the same, the burden of proof is on you to prove it.

I have already proven that the laws of nature were in place before space and time existed because space and time was created according to those laws; specifically the laws of quantum mechanics and the law of conservation. That is my proof. Where is yours?

No you didn’t. Repetition lends no weight to the claim. You seem to be trying to avoid your supposition. I made none.

Yes, I did. How else do you think space and time was created? Magic?

Beyond our own universe we know nothing. We literally have no idea what is there, if anything. We don't know how things function, we don't know how things appear. Nothing. No knowledge. We're so ignorant about this we're literally braindead.

So, how else could this have been created? I could throw up a million possibilities and the chances that I'm right will be very limited indeed. There'll be another infinite times two possibilities beyond that.

Why would you expect matter and energy to be any different outside the boundary of the universe?

And no, there are not an infinite number of possibilities for the creation of space and time. In fact there is exactly one explanation that does not violate the law of conservation, inflation theory.

There is only one explanation that you know of that makes sense to you. You sure do like to make declarations about what must be where the creation of the universe or of space and time are concerned.

There are still multiple ideas about the beginning of the universe. For example: https://gizmodo.com/what-was-our-universe-like-before-the-big-bang-1791889926

What existed before the big bang?

This one goes into Vilenkin's view: What Came Before the Big Bang? | DiscoverMagazine.com

Here's one in which the universe is cyclical without any singularity: Before Big Bang: Scientists discover what existed BEFORE the beginning of the universe

I'm not pushing any of these forth as being true, I'm just making the point that the beginning of the universe, or what may have existed prior to the universe, is not a subject which is anything close to settled.

Cyclical models - whether branes or not - requires matter and energy to have existed forever. This isn’t possible. The Second Law of Thermodynamics precludes matter and energy from existing forever without reaching thermal equilibrium. This we do not see.

So we are left with matter and energy must have a beginning. Which is confirmed by every piece of information we have.

I think you people are forgetting that no one disputes that ~14 billion years ago all matter and energy in the universe occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom.

That’s a miracle to me.

 

[Taz]

It's a miracle that god made so many stupid people in this thread who haven't yet died from forgetting to breathe.

 

[RoccoR]

RE: Does the creation of space and time qualify as a miracle?
※→ frigidweirdo, et al,

We have to think with clarity here.

The problem here is that if the universe was created, what created it? Whatever created it had to have been created itself.

(COMMENT)

This is a variation (on the theme) of Aristotle's Theory of First Motion; as improved upon by first Kepler and then Newton. And while we now know (or highly suspect) that Newtonian Physics is not quite accurate, → at speeds (d/t) below one-quarter that of light (well below relativistic speeds), Newtonian physics is quite accurate (close enough for government work as they say). We still rely (heavily) on Newton's Laws of Motion. (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia)

✪ First law:

In an inertial frame of reference, an object either remains at rest or continues to move at a constant velocity, unless acted upon by another force (F = ma).​

✪ Second law:

In an inertial reference frame, the vector sum (∑) of the forces F on an object is equal to the mass m of that object multiplied by the acceleration a of the object: F = ma.​

✪ Third law:

When one body exerts a force on a second body, the second body simultaneously exerts a force equal in magnitude and opposite in direction on the first body.​

(SUPPOSITION)

If we call that creator God, then who created God? Anyone that created God had to also have been created, and on and on and on and on until we hit a wall and say "well, then something has to have appeared out of nothing".

There is no one set of universally accepted characteristics (powers) of a Supreme Being. However, almost all science and logic have established laws (limitations) for which (some might believe) would be in direct opposition to the capabilities of a Supreme Being.

Some might argue that the very idea that "man" might understand the capabilities and limitation of an "omnipotent" and "omniscient" deity is → irrational. Man cannot evaluate the Supreme Being.

Logic has "rules." And so any solution derived by "logic" is bounded by the rules of logic. A Supreme Being is not bounded by humanity in any way.

Finally, in a realm where a Supreme Being exists, no Supreme Being is bounded by truth. In that realm, the only reality is based on the will of the Supreme Being.

(SCIENCE)

Science does not concern itself with the capacities of a Supreme Being. Everything in science has "rules." A Supreme Being, by its very definition, nature, and characteristics, is NOT bound by "rules." THUS, science does not have a protocol for the consideration of something that exists outside the realm of the physics of the universe and the logic of humanity.

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Vastator]

No you didn’t. Repetition lends no weight to the claim. You seem to be trying to avoid your supposition. I made none.

Yes, I did. How else do you think space and time was created? Magic?

Beyond our own universe we know nothing. We literally have no idea what is there, if anything. We don't know how things function, we don't know how things appear. Nothing. No knowledge. We're so ignorant about this we're literally braindead.

So, how else could this have been created? I could throw up a million possibilities and the chances that I'm right will be very limited indeed. There'll be another infinite times two possibilities beyond that.

Why would you expect matter and energy to be any different outside the boundary of the universe?

And no, there are not an infinite number of possibilities for the creation of space and time. In fact there is exactly one explanation that does not violate the law of conservation, inflation theory.

There is only one explanation that you know of that makes sense to you. You sure do like to make declarations about what must be where the creation of the universe or of space and time are concerned.

There are still multiple ideas about the beginning of the universe. For example: https://gizmodo.com/what-was-our-universe-like-before-the-big-bang-1791889926

What existed before the big bang?

This one goes into Vilenkin's view: What Came Before the Big Bang? | DiscoverMagazine.com

Here's one in which the universe is cyclical without any singularity: Before Big Bang: Scientists discover what existed BEFORE the beginning of the universe

I'm not pushing any of these forth as being true, I'm just making the point that the beginning of the universe, or what may have existed prior to the universe, is not a subject which is anything close to settled.

Cyclical models - whether branes or not - requires matter and energy to have existed forever. This isn’t possible. The Second Law of Thermodynamics precludes matter and energy from existing forever without reaching thermal equilibrium. This we do not see.

So we are left with matter and energy must have a beginning. Which is confirmed by every piece of information we have.

I think you people are forgetting that no one disputes that ~14 billion years ago all matter and energy in the universe occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom.

That’s a miracle to me.

Translation: “I don’t know; therefore God”.

 

[Montrovant]

I was only commenting on Taz's post. However, I have no idea what might have existed before the Big Bang. Unlike you, I don't feel any sort of surety about my knowledge of such things. It's possible that what existed prior to the Big Bang is something beyond human comprehension; it's possible the laws of nature you keep speaking about did exist. I have no problem with accepting my ignorance. I haven't yet figured out why you are so certain that you have the answer.

Because logic requires it and because leading experts believe it.

You have given reasons why you believe as you do. I'm not trying to say there are none. However, you have not shown that the laws of nature existing prior to the Big Bang has been proven. It is your certainty, your description of these ideas as fact, that I have been arguing against.

The creation of space and time did not violate the law of conservation. That is the basis you are looking for.

That is a belief, or an assumption, but not a proven fact. The law of conservation may apply in our universe, but there is no way to know if it applies when our universe did not exist.

The creation of space and time followed the law of conservation. It didn’t violate it.

If there are other multiverses outside of our space and time, there is zero reason to believe that the matter and energy contained in their space and time would be any different than ours or that they were created any differently than ours.

In other words the same laws of nature that created ours out of nothing would have created the other multiverses.

Regardless it would be illogical to assume the creation of any multiverse was not according to some law or rule.

The alternative is magic.

I suppose it must be comforting to you in some way to assume you know, without question, things about the creation of space and time.

 

[PoliticalChic]

Does the creation of space and time qualify as a miracle?

Approximately 14 billion years ago all of the matter and energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing and occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool.

I came to the idea that there are at least two time and space areas possible. One you could say came from reading the Bible, I should say that I am not a bible thumper. I found a story about a bird who sharpen his beak on a moutain and e.t.c the story indicated that the time involved in doing that incident took only one second in Gods time as I call it. The second at at the time matter first appeared was the the time space quantum. Best I have had so far. Hey, I also think that so called black holes are not holes but massive matter plants that attract matter and gas and the gravity is so high that light can not be reflected. The gravity become so intense that it collapses onto itself. and you know he rest.

" I found a story about a bird who sharpen his beak on a moutain and e.t.c the story indicated that the time involved in doing that incident took only one second in Gods time as I call it. "

I love that story!

I remember it was in the intro to Will Durant's book!

Thanks for reminding me.

 

[ding]

Because logic requires it and because leading experts believe it.

You have given reasons why you believe as you do. I'm not trying to say there are none. However, you have not shown that the laws of nature existing prior to the Big Bang has been proven. It is your certainty, your description of these ideas as fact, that I have been arguing against.

The creation of space and time did not violate the law of conservation. That is the basis you are looking for.

That is a belief, or an assumption, but not a proven fact. The law of conservation may apply in our universe, but there is no way to know if it applies when our universe did not exist.

The creation of space and time followed the law of conservation. It didn’t violate it.

If there are other multiverses outside of our space and time, there is zero reason to believe that the matter and energy contained in their space and time would be any different than ours or that they were created any differently than ours.

In other words the same laws of nature that created ours out of nothing would have created the other multiverses.

Regardless it would be illogical to assume the creation of any multiverse was not according to some law or rule.

The alternative is magic.

I suppose it must be comforting to you in some way to assume you know, without question, things about the creation of space and time.

I’m happy for you to see it that way.

But the logical conclusion is that space and time had a beginning. That beginning was in accordance with the laws of nature.

 

[Rosy]

Does the creation of space and time qualify as a miracle?

Approximately 14 billion years ago all of the matter and energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing and occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool.

There is no definition of what space, time or the universe is, nor when it began. We know nothing, but speculate much

 

[ding]

Does the creation of space and time qualify as a miracle?

Approximately 14 billion years ago all of the matter and energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing and occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool.

There is no definition of what space, time or the universe is, nor when it began. We know nothing, but speculate much

Are you kidding? There’s tons of evidence.

 

[Rosy]

Does the creation of space and time qualify as a miracle?

Approximately 14 billion years ago all of the matter and energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing and occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool.

There is no definition of what space, time or the universe is, nor when it began. We know nothing, but speculate much

Are you kidding? There’s tons of evidence.

All of the evidence when put into an equation makes no sense without dark matter. Thus they look for dark matter, well it may not be there because we are assuming that what we see as evidence is real and as such demand that dark matter be real.

Tell me what the real evidence is? of anything?

 

[ding]

Does the creation of space and time qualify as a miracle?

Approximately 14 billion years ago all of the matter and energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing and occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool.

There is no definition of what space, time or the universe is, nor when it began. We know nothing, but speculate much

Are you kidding? There’s tons of evidence.

All of the evidence when put into an equation makes no sense without dark matter. Thus they look for dark matter, well it may not be there because we are assuming that what we see as evidence is real and as such demand that dark matter be real.

Tell me what the real evidence is? of anything?

What exactly does dark matter have to do with red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann’s solutions to Einstein’s field equations?

 

[ding]

Does the creation of space and time qualify as a miracle?

Approximately 14 billion years ago all of the matter and energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing and occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool.

There is no definition of what space, time or the universe is, nor when it began. We know nothing, but speculate much

Are you kidding? There’s tons of evidence.

All of the evidence when put into an equation makes no sense without dark matter. Thus they look for dark matter, well it may not be there because we are assuming that what we see as evidence is real and as such demand that dark matter be real.

Tell me what the real evidence is? of anything?

Ummm... red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann’s solutions to Einstein’s field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics. There’s your evidence.

 

[Rosy]

Does the creation of space and time qualify as a miracle?

Approximately 14 billion years ago all of the matter and energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing and occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool.

There is no definition of what space, time or the universe is, nor when it began. We know nothing, but speculate much

Are you kidding? There’s tons of evidence.

All of the evidence when put into an equation makes no sense without dark matter. Thus they look for dark matter, well it may not be there because we are assuming that what we see as evidence is real and as such demand that dark matter be real.

Tell me what the real evidence is? of anything?

What exactly does dark matter have to do with red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann’s solutions to Einstein’s field equations?

Without dark matter all mathematical theories of the universe fail. Einstein's work means nothing, nothing means anything. All we know for sure is that we are here, but have no idea what here means

 

[Rosy]

Does the creation of space and time qualify as a miracle?

Approximately 14 billion years ago all of the matter and energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing and occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool.

There is no definition of what space, time or the universe is, nor when it began. We know nothing, but speculate much

Are you kidding? There’s tons of evidence.

All of the evidence when put into an equation makes no sense without dark matter. Thus they look for dark matter, well it may not be there because we are assuming that what we see as evidence is real and as such demand that dark matter be real.

Tell me what the real evidence is? of anything?

Ummm... red shift, cosmic background radiation, Friedmann’s solutions to Einstein’s field equations and the Second Law of Thermodynamics. There’s your evidence.

Wrong, every equation fails until dark matter is found. That said if it can not be found because it does not exist, obviously all the equations that can not be completed without it are senseless

 

[ding]

Does the creation of space and time qualify as a miracle?

Approximately 14 billion years ago all of the matter and energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing and occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom and then began to expand and cool.

There is no definition of what space, time or the universe is, nor when it began. We know nothing, but speculate much

Are you kidding? There’s tons of evidence.

All of the evidence when put into an equation makes no sense without dark matter. Thus they look for dark matter, well it may not be there because we are assuming that what we see as evidence is real and as such demand that dark matter be real.

Tell me what the real evidence is? of anything?

What exactly does dark matter have to do with red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann’s solutions to Einstein’s field equations?

Without dark matter all mathematical theories of the universe fail. Einstein's work means nothing, nothing means anything. All we know for sure is that we are here, but have no idea what here means

Can you show me where dark matter is used in Friedmann’s solutions to Einstein’s field equations?