The beginning of our universe

According to the law of conservation of matter and energy, matter cannot be created nor destroyed but only converted into energy and vice versa. With that in mind how could the universe have been created?

We can look at the big bang theory to see how the universe came to be. However, how did the big bang come to be? There are theories like the M-theory or the string theory but both of those require energy to already be in the universe. Now there's the problem, where did the energy come from? If the universe began with that energy, that would imply that the universe is not eternal and therefore would have had to have a beginning; if the universe has to have a beginning that implies that it has been created.

The only other thing I can think of is that the energy and our universe have always existed but to me this doesn't make sense because our universe is restricted by time. Furthermore, the recent extension to the equation for general relativitysays that the universe is indeed not eternal(see Stephen Hawking'sThe Beginning of Time). Then we have the idea of a multiverse which spews out universes which has no scientific backup AFAIK which basically serves the same purpose as God.

So the only explanation to me is that God created the universe and He exists in multiple dimensions inside and ouside of time (which would make sense because He's omnipresent). Which then would prove that God never needed to be created for He is eternal.

Scriptural backup:

No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glorybefore time began. (1 Corinthians 2:7)

Thoughts?

Laws of physics are only defined after T-zero. You cannot apply a law (be it thermodynamic or whatever) where it is not applicable.

Why can you not assign this mystical quality of not needing a creator to the universe, but you can for God? You mention the multiverse theory, and then ignore it. Why? Just because we don't know the structure of existence, doesn't mean we can't continue to study and create better models for what nature really is.

Saying God did it isn't suitable for a lot of people, myself included, because our experimentation is constantly teaching us new things about reality.

In the beginning there was nothing, not even time

no planets, no stars, no hip-hop, no rhyme.

But then there was a BANG like the sound of my gat.

The Universe was born and that s*** was phat!

According to the law of conservation of matter and energy, matter cannot be created nor destroyed but only converted into energy and vice versa.

ChampionoChumps

Our laws don't neccesarily apply to everywhere in the universe and especially to how it was created.

The beginning of the universe is difficult to model, as it is (so far as we know) a one of a kind event, cannot be replicated and we have only ancillary evidence as to what it was like. Further, since it preceded spacetime as we know it, physical laws (such as conservation) may or may not be relevant to it. However, I will point out that mass-energy conservation is only absolute at the macro scale and is constantly violated at the quantum scale. Vacuum fluctuations mean that something can literally come from nothing, though only for very brief periods in general. I've read at least some models (and it's purely theoretical, with no way to test it so far) that the universe itself is actually a vacuum fluctuation, a bubble of spacetime that spontaneously has arisen from nothing. All in all, we are a long way from having any solid answers on cosmogenesis, but there are some pretty exciting theories that have emerged over the last couple of decades on it. Edit: Didn't see that this was a theodicy. :| Appeal to God as the only "rational" origin for the universe is so vacuous and filled with special pleading that I honestly don't know where to respond.xaos

Edit: the scriptural backup was just to prove that God fit into those parameters.

I just feel that God should not be the answer to everything that we do not understand yet. Wolls

Sure, you can postulate a God - just don't give him any personal, physical, or moral qualities. If you go even further than that, like many, and decide to worship this God - well, we call that delusion. A person that assigns qualities to a being that he couldn't begin to comprehend. That's if such a thing exists. For me, I don't believe the God hypothesis is needed - if God simply existed forever, then why couldn't the universe simply have existed forever? I was born an atheist and I'll remain one until there's a good reason not to be.

So yeah, envisioning some God at the core of all of what we know isn't absurd. It however is absurd to assign that thing human like emotions and needs.

I think it doesn't matter how the universe started, you are all living in the past

I think it doesn't matter how the universe started, you are all living in the past

M4Ntan

I think it doesn't matter how the universe started, you are all living in the past

M4Ntan

How so? We very much live in our present. Well, our brains do have a sensory delay - so technically our reality, what we perceive is of the past.

[QUOTE="M4Ntan"]

I think it doesn't matter how the universe started, you are all living in the past

Primevil702

How so? We very much live in our present. Well, our brains do have a sensory delay - so technically our reality, what we perceive is of the past.

Is your name Cobb? bummm

Simply put, all of our knowledge of physics is based on what existed after the creation of the universe. stanleycup98

[QUOTE="stanleycup98"]Simply put, all of our knowledge of physics is based on what existed after the creation of the universe. ChampionoChumps

According to the law of conservation of matter and energy, matter cannot be created nor destroyed but only converted into energy and vice versa. With that in mind how could the universe have been created?

We can look at the big bang theory to see how the universe came to be. However, how did the big bang come to be? There are theories like the M-theory or the string theory but both of those require energy to already be in the universe. Now there's the problem, where did the energy come from? If the universe began with that energy, that would imply that the universe is not eternal and therefore would have had to have a beginning; if the universe has to have a beginning that implies that it has been created.

The only other thing I can think of is that the energy and our universe have always existed but to me this doesn't make sense because our universe is restricted by time. Furthermore, the recent extension to the equation for general relativitysays that the universe is indeed not eternal(see Stephen Hawking'sThe Beginning of Time). Then we have the idea of a multiverse which spews out universes which has no scientific backup AFAIK which basically serves the same purpose as God.

So the only explanation to me is that God created the universe and He exists in multiple dimensions inside and ouside of time (which would make sense because He's omnipresent). Which then would prove that God never needed to be created for He is eternal.

Scriptural backup:

No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glorybefore time began. (1 Corinthians 2:7)

Thoughts?

ChampionoChumps

Maybe another universe developed a tear and withdrew within itself in a singular point and that tear led into our universe and that's why we think it was just a singularity. However, in this instance it was sucked from another universe like things sucked out of a single hole in a plane. That also kind of goes with the older theory that the universe would either keep expanding or contract eventually back in on itself. What if that universe contracted on itself and ours developed after it was sucked through a hole in the fabric of their universe, thus forming ours? Imaginative. . . What if all matter in all universes was already there? My friend cannot stand thinking that the universe was always just there, rather than a singular mass pre-big bang. But then I ask how everything could just be a single point in space. He doesn't know that either, so I posited the one that I began with here and it's better to me than both everything was always there infinitely back or a ball sized or planet sized, super dense mass that created everything.

[QUOTE="ChampionoChumps"][QUOTE="stanleycup98"]Simply put, all of our knowledge of physics is based on what existed after the creation of the universe. Ace6301

Not according to Tokei Kosh...(can't remember their exact avatar name). He/she once argued in a thread that man would one day know everything about everything that ever existed, that exists, and that would ever exist. Every bit of data and knowledge possible past, present, and future. That was a classic argument.

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="ChampionoChumps"] Incorrect, the Big Bang is dependent on all physical laws which includes conservation laws and relativity laws. Sorry if I've posted this several times, for some reason gamespot isn't loading for meSunfyre7896

Not according to Tokei Kosh...(can't remember their exact avatar name). He/she once argued in a thread that man would one day know everything about everything that ever existed, that exists, and that would ever exist. Every bit of data and knowledge possible past, present, and future. That was a classic argument.

[QUOTE="Sunfyre7896"]

[QUOTE="Ace6301"] That's impossible to know. Ace6301

Not according to Tokei Kosh...(can't remember their exact avatar name). He/she once argued in a thread that man would one day know everything about everything that ever existed, that exists, and that would ever exist. Every bit of data and knowledge possible past, present, and future. That was a classic argument.

Tokei isn't the TC. Just someone else that argued with myself and about ten others about how we'd know everything one day because we'd be able to travel to every part of the universe for sure.

[QUOTE="Ace6301"][QUOTE="Sunfyre7896"]

Not according to Tokei Kosh...(can't remember their exact avatar name). He/she once argued in a thread that man would one day know everything about everything that ever existed, that exists, and that would ever exist. Every bit of data and knowledge possible past, present, and future. That was a classic argument.

Sunfyre7896

Tokei isn't the TC. Just someone else that argued with myself and about ten others about how we'd know everything one day because we'd be able to travel to every part of the universe for sure.

According to the law of conservation of matter and energy, matter cannot be created nor destroyed but only converted into energy and vice versa. With that in mind how could the universe have been created?

ChampionoChumps

I think that all the discussions get off on the wrong foot because we always think that all scientific principles have stayed the same since the beginning of time.

We have such a small segment of information on the universe that it's impossible to know what happened.

the law of conservation of matter and energy is wrong

if it were true nothing would exist

im not sure where i heard this but i think i remember some theory that matter simply just pops into existence all the time

Aw yes the god of gaps, true you can't create energy out of nowhere but the first law says nothing about mass, it talks about how energy is turned into work and vice versa. BUT the second law tells us that all processes are irreversible in some way; so not all energy can be turned into work, BUT all work can be turned into energy.

About mass...it's a principle of conservation of mass. Inside a closed system the amount of mass is going to remain the same. The thing is we don't know for SURE if the Universe it's a closed system. But it would make things easier if we agreed on something regarding that. It's complicated, but I have an idea; maybe we aren't meant to know where all of the matter and energy of this universe come from. Because let's say that for a moment, there WAS something; but in some point whatever laws ruled there, pointed to an outcome where that state of mass and energy could not be sustained any longer and an abrupt and massive rearrangement of energy, mass and force took place, so massive that it's the single most energetic phenomena this universe has seen.

Let's say there was something before, nothing that lies in this universe is meant to exist or have access to what lied before it, because it's separeted by the massive arrangement of energy we call big bang. If we are ever meant to know what lies before, we'd have to find a way to harness enough energy to see through the big bang, or simply see things from a different point view. Like a step higher on the "ladder", and we'd go "Aw that was soooo obvious".

I for once do not worry more about that, the way we have been able to try to understand the universe, is based on a very limited energetic perspective. Who knows maybe the laws of thermodynamics we have now work, but sometime in the "future" we may have an entropy based universe, or the spent energy goes full circle I honestly don't know but the god you carry around in your pocket it's not the answer to it.

And there goes a finely written wall of text that one will read. Because it's longer than a twitter post.

the big bang does not explain the creation of the universe, it doesnt even try to. it merely suggests a model theory for a period of rapid expansion at the early life of our universe. from our point of view this universe does have a start point (what ever event preceded the big bang) however physics can only speculate as to what happened before this our how long is was happening. our laws do not work at any point of singularity. the notion of time doesnt not exist within a singularity and laws of thermodynamics will not describe what happens at or before this point.

BUT TEH BIBLES AND THE GODS AND SCRIPTURE. why is this still an excuse? how in the hell(sorry for the ironic word choice) can people accept the formation of our knowable universe by the "hands" of an infinitley complex sentient being of somesort that would no doubt require the same sense of a creator for its own existence.

klf;hdsauifhdsifhndskjhafkjdshafljksdhal please stay in school.

(ive been at work all day and im tired, please correct any mistakes to my post that dont involve breaking the laws of common sense)

I am going to agree with xaos because he just sounds very smart.

Genesis 1:1 says that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. That's where our universe began.

Your logic falls flat on its face seeing as you base around the premise that everything must have a creator.. Yet you contradict your self in saying that god has no creator that the being has always existed... Then its far more logical to suggest that the universe has always existed in one form or another eternally.. This isn't suggesting your right or wrong, the fact of the matter is we don't know. But don't try to come here and say that god is the most logical answer.. Because it isn't for the reason I just stated.. Your entire point is a contradiction..

Your logic falls flat on its face seeing as you base around the premise that everything must have a creator.. Yet you contradict your self in saying that god has no creator that the being has always existed... Then its far more logical to suggest that the universe has always existed in one form or another eternally.. This isn't suggesting your right or wrong, the fact of the matter is we don't know. But don't try to come here and say that god is the most logical answer.. Because it isn't for the reason I just stated.. Your entire point is a contradiction..

sSubZerOo

[QUOTE="sSubZerOo"]

Your logic falls flat on its face seeing as you base around the premise that everything must have a creator.. Yet you contradict your self in saying that god has no creator that the being has always existed... Then its far more logical to suggest that the universe has always existed in one form or another eternally.. This isn't suggesting your right or wrong, the fact of the matter is we don't know. But don't try to come here and say that god is the most logical answer.. Because it isn't for the reason I just stated.. Your entire point is a contradiction..

ChampionoChumps

Because God did this same exact thing. BOOM.. there goes existence.

lol its all theory ,one man's ideia! give that man the patent right's!!!!! its all in the air when you or science does work on it becuase there will be no way to create a small big bang theory in the lab so ill stick with god is awsome theory and we are the ant's on his lawn theory..

Here's a theroy,

what if were in a new cycle of the universe where the Big Bang has happen before, possibility billion or trillions of times before, and the withdraw and expansive of the universe is its way to recycle everything and created anew again?

just my two cents

According to the law of conservation of matter and energy, matter cannot be created nor destroyed but only converted into energy and vice versa. With that in mind how could the universe have been created?

We can look at the big bang theory to see how the universe came to be. However, how did the big bang come to be? There are theories like the M-theory or the string theory but both of those require energy to already be in the universe. Now there's the problem, where did the energy come from? If the universe began with that energy, that would imply that the universe is not eternal and therefore would have had to have a beginning; if the universe has to have a beginning that implies that it has been created.

The only other thing I can think of is that the energy and our universe have always existed but to me this doesn't make sense because our universe is restricted by time. Furthermore, the recent extension to the equation for general relativitysays that the universe is indeed not eternal(see Stephen Hawking'sThe Beginning of Time). Then we have the idea of a multiverse which spews out universes which has no scientific backup AFAIK which basically serves the same purpose as God.

So the only explanation to me is that God created the universe and He exists in multiple dimensions inside and ouside of time (which would make sense because He's omnipresent). Which then would prove that God never needed to be created for He is eternal.

Scriptural backup:

No, we speak of God's secret wisdom, a wisdom that has been hidden and that God destined for our glorybefore time began. (1 Corinthians 2:7)

Thoughts?

ChampionoChumps

The religious argument 'Something from nothing' argument applies to god also.

But your probably right so I suggest we stop all scientific research at the very moment and anything we do not yet understand we just say 'goddidit'

The main problem with the OP argument is that he uses scripture as his "backup."

Thats like using a comic book to back up your point regarding the economy.

Scripture, the bible are fables designed to teach people how to properly treat one another in a time when there human rights didn't exist, slavery, rape & pillage were common.

Thats it.

There was no xerox machines or printers. How did they reproduce these so called scriptures exactly from the day they were first imagined. You cannot argue otherwise especially if you were raised to believe it was the truth. If you were raised to believe the sun was your God and created everything you'd be trying to argue that point.

Genesis 1:1 says that in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth. That's where our universe began.

MathMattS