Atheism is the believe that something came out of nothing and we're all going nowhere

[BreezeWood]

.
the marxists conflation of religion with repressive gov'ts during their inception was historically correct and served their purpose in exposing both to public ridicule.

 

[edthecynic]

None of the "experts" you don't understand say something comes from nothing because there is no such thing as nothing.
I have been saying that same thing since my first post, it is your lack of understanding that is "all over the map."

Let's start with your original assertions.

Space and time had a beginning, but not energy, therefore since energy IS something there always was something and there always will be something. Claiming that space and time had a beginning does not prove energy had a beginning.

The proves FLoT states that energy cannot be creates nor destroyed. That means that since energy cannot be created it always existed and since it cannot be destroyed it will always exist. There is no way around it. Energy exists independent of space and time.

It is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

You can't even be honest about what my first post was, so why should anyone expect you to be honest about quantum mechanics which you don't even understand. In the quantum universe there is no such thing as nothing.

My first post:

Actually, it is the bible that claims that no thing (God) created everything from nothing. Science proved that there never was nothing and there will never be nothing, the First Law of Thermodynamics AKA The Law of Conservation of Energy.

Even better. The inflation model shows it did. Just like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics shows that it is impossible to have a cyclical universe with no beginning.

Already debunked at least a dozen times in this thread.

Be sure to let Guth know about that, lol.

He already knows! Even Vilenkin says you are full of it!

Guth's Grand Guess | DiscoverMagazine.com
Start, Guth says, by imagining nothing, a pure vacuum. Be careful. Don't imagine outer space without matter in it. Imagine no space at all and no matter at all. Good luck.

To the average person it might seem obvious that nothing can happen in nothing. But to a quantum physicist, nothing is, in fact, something.

snip/
INFINITE INFLATING UNIVERSES

So far, what inflation theory predicts, the observable universe has reflected. But cosmologists Andrei Linde, Alexander Vilenkin, and others have run with inflation's premises to step beyond the bounds of what we can see or measure. They speculate that the decay of the false vacuum—which, according to the inflation theory, created the matter of our universe—does not happen all at once. While some regions decay into universes, other regions keep expanding and creating other universes. Residual false vacuum from the creation of those universes creates still others, indefinitely. Linde and Vilenkin call this "the eternally existing, self-reproducing inflationary universe." Guth contends that this scenario is not only possible, it seems like a sure thing. "If a biologist discovered a bacterium that belonged to no known species, she would presumably invent a new species in which to classify it," Guth wrote in his 1997 book, The Inflationary Universe. "However, even though only a single specimen of the new species had been found, she would undoubtedly assume that it was the offspring of a bacterial parent cell." Guth predicts that "any cosmological theory that does not lead to the eternal reproduction of universes will be considered as unimaginable as a species of bacteria that cannot reproduce."
— B. L.

 

[ding]

Let's start with your original assertions.

It is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

You can't even be honest about what my first post was, so why should anyone expect you to be honest about quantum mechanics which you don't even understand. In the quantum universe there is no such thing as nothing.

My first post:

Actually, it is the bible that claims that no thing (God) created everything from nothing. Science proved that there never was nothing and there will never be nothing, the First Law of Thermodynamics AKA The Law of Conservation of Energy.

Even better. The inflation model shows it did. Just like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics shows that it is impossible to have a cyclical universe with no beginning.

Already debunked at least a dozen times in this thread.

Be sure to let Guth know about that, lol.

He already knows! Even Vilenkin says you are full of it!

Guth's Grand Guess | DiscoverMagazine.com
Start, Guth says, by imagining nothing, a pure vacuum. Be careful. Don't imagine outer space without matter in it. Imagine no space at all and no matter at all. Good luck.

To the average person it might seem obvious that nothing can happen in nothing. But to a quantum physicist, nothing is, in fact, something.

snip/
INFINITE INFLATING UNIVERSES

So far, what inflation theory predicts, the observable universe has reflected. But cosmologists Andrei Linde, Alexander Vilenkin, and others have run with inflation's premises to step beyond the bounds of what we can see or measure. They speculate that the decay of the false vacuum—which, according to the inflation theory, created the matter of our universe—does not happen all at once. While some regions decay into universes, other regions keep expanding and creating other universes. Residual false vacuum from the creation of those universes creates still others, indefinitely. Linde and Vilenkin call this "the eternally existing, self-reproducing inflationary universe." Guth contends that this scenario is not only possible, it seems like a sure thing. "If a biologist discovered a bacterium that belonged to no known species, she would presumably invent a new species in which to classify it," Guth wrote in his 1997 book, The Inflationary Universe. "However, even though only a single specimen of the new species had been found, she would undoubtedly assume that it was the offspring of a bacterial parent cell." Guth predicts that "any cosmological theory that does not lead to the eternal reproduction of universes will be considered as unimaginable as a species of bacteria that cannot reproduce."
— B. L.

"Be careful. Don't imagine outer space without matter in it. Imagine no space at all and no matter at all. " Guth

 

[ding]

Let's start with your original assertions.

It is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

You can't even be honest about what my first post was, so why should anyone expect you to be honest about quantum mechanics which you don't even understand. In the quantum universe there is no such thing as nothing.

My first post:

Actually, it is the bible that claims that no thing (God) created everything from nothing. Science proved that there never was nothing and there will never be nothing, the First Law of Thermodynamics AKA The Law of Conservation of Energy.

Even better. The inflation model shows it did. Just like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics shows that it is impossible to have a cyclical universe with no beginning.

Already debunked at least a dozen times in this thread.

Be sure to let Guth know about that, lol.

He already knows! Even Vilenkin says you are full of it!

Guth's Grand Guess | DiscoverMagazine.com
Start, Guth says, by imagining nothing, a pure vacuum. Be careful. Don't imagine outer space without matter in it. Imagine no space at all and no matter at all. Good luck.

To the average person it might seem obvious that nothing can happen in nothing. But to a quantum physicist, nothing is, in fact, something.

snip/
INFINITE INFLATING UNIVERSES

So far, what inflation theory predicts, the observable universe has reflected. But cosmologists Andrei Linde, Alexander Vilenkin, and others have run with inflation's premises to step beyond the bounds of what we can see or measure. They speculate that the decay of the false vacuum—which, according to the inflation theory, created the matter of our universe—does not happen all at once. While some regions decay into universes, other regions keep expanding and creating other universes. Residual false vacuum from the creation of those universes creates still others, indefinitely. Linde and Vilenkin call this "the eternally existing, self-reproducing inflationary universe." Guth contends that this scenario is not only possible, it seems like a sure thing. "If a biologist discovered a bacterium that belonged to no known species, she would presumably invent a new species in which to classify it," Guth wrote in his 1997 book, The Inflationary Universe. "However, even though only a single specimen of the new species had been found, she would undoubtedly assume that it was the offspring of a bacterial parent cell." Guth predicts that "any cosmological theory that does not lead to the eternal reproduction of universes will be considered as unimaginable as a species of bacteria that cannot reproduce."
— B. L.

"To the average person it might seem obvious that nothing can happen in nothing. But to a quantum physicist, nothing is, in fact, something. Quantum theory holds that probability, not absolutes, rules any physical system. It is impossible, even in principle, to predict the behavior of any single atom; all physicists can do is predict the average properties of a large collection of atoms. Quantum theory also holds that a vacuum, like atoms, is subject to quantum uncertainties. This means that things can materialize out of the vacuum, although they tend to vanish back into it quickly. While this phenomenon has never been observed directly, measurements of the electron's magnetic strength strongly imply that it is real and happening in the vacuum of space even now." Guth

 

[ding]

Let's start with your original assertions.

It is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

You can't even be honest about what my first post was, so why should anyone expect you to be honest about quantum mechanics which you don't even understand. In the quantum universe there is no such thing as nothing.

My first post:

Actually, it is the bible that claims that no thing (God) created everything from nothing. Science proved that there never was nothing and there will never be nothing, the First Law of Thermodynamics AKA The Law of Conservation of Energy.

Even better. The inflation model shows it did. Just like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics shows that it is impossible to have a cyclical universe with no beginning.

Already debunked at least a dozen times in this thread.

Be sure to let Guth know about that, lol.

He already knows! Even Vilenkin says you are full of it!

Guth's Grand Guess | DiscoverMagazine.com
Start, Guth says, by imagining nothing, a pure vacuum. Be careful. Don't imagine outer space without matter in it. Imagine no space at all and no matter at all. Good luck.

To the average person it might seem obvious that nothing can happen in nothing. But to a quantum physicist, nothing is, in fact, something.

snip/
INFINITE INFLATING UNIVERSES

So far, what inflation theory predicts, the observable universe has reflected. But cosmologists Andrei Linde, Alexander Vilenkin, and others have run with inflation's premises to step beyond the bounds of what we can see or measure. They speculate that the decay of the false vacuum—which, according to the inflation theory, created the matter of our universe—does not happen all at once. While some regions decay into universes, other regions keep expanding and creating other universes. Residual false vacuum from the creation of those universes creates still others, indefinitely. Linde and Vilenkin call this "the eternally existing, self-reproducing inflationary universe." Guth contends that this scenario is not only possible, it seems like a sure thing. "If a biologist discovered a bacterium that belonged to no known species, she would presumably invent a new species in which to classify it," Guth wrote in his 1997 book, The Inflationary Universe. "However, even though only a single specimen of the new species had been found, she would undoubtedly assume that it was the offspring of a bacterial parent cell." Guth predicts that "any cosmological theory that does not lead to the eternal reproduction of universes will be considered as unimaginable as a species of bacteria that cannot reproduce."
— B. L.

"A false vacuum is characterized by a repulsive gravitational field, one so strong it can explode into a universe. Another peculiarity of the false vacuum is that it does not "thin out" during expansion as, say, a gas does—the density of the energy within it remains constant even as it grows. So the false vacuum's expansion, accelerating exponentially as its repulsive force compounded, actually created vast quantities of ever-doubling energy, which decayed into a seething plasma of particles such as electrons, positrons, and neutrinos. As the early universe went along doubling every microsecond, the stuff in it doubled, too—out of nowhere. The electrons, positrons, and neutrinos became a sort of hot soup, which 300,000 years later neutralized to form simple atoms. The simple atoms, like hydrogen, helium, and lithium, were ripped apart and crushed together to form more complex, heavier atoms inside stars. Exploded into space by supernovas, they became the matter we see—and are—today. " Guth

 

[ding]

Let's start with your original assertions.

It is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

You can't even be honest about what my first post was, so why should anyone expect you to be honest about quantum mechanics which you don't even understand. In the quantum universe there is no such thing as nothing.

My first post:

Actually, it is the bible that claims that no thing (God) created everything from nothing. Science proved that there never was nothing and there will never be nothing, the First Law of Thermodynamics AKA The Law of Conservation of Energy.

Even better. The inflation model shows it did. Just like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics shows that it is impossible to have a cyclical universe with no beginning.

Already debunked at least a dozen times in this thread.

Be sure to let Guth know about that, lol.

He already knows! Even Vilenkin says you are full of it!

Guth's Grand Guess | DiscoverMagazine.com
Start, Guth says, by imagining nothing, a pure vacuum. Be careful. Don't imagine outer space without matter in it. Imagine no space at all and no matter at all. Good luck.

To the average person it might seem obvious that nothing can happen in nothing. But to a quantum physicist, nothing is, in fact, something.

snip/
INFINITE INFLATING UNIVERSES

So far, what inflation theory predicts, the observable universe has reflected. But cosmologists Andrei Linde, Alexander Vilenkin, and others have run with inflation's premises to step beyond the bounds of what we can see or measure. They speculate that the decay of the false vacuum—which, according to the inflation theory, created the matter of our universe—does not happen all at once. While some regions decay into universes, other regions keep expanding and creating other universes. Residual false vacuum from the creation of those universes creates still others, indefinitely. Linde and Vilenkin call this "the eternally existing, self-reproducing inflationary universe." Guth contends that this scenario is not only possible, it seems like a sure thing. "If a biologist discovered a bacterium that belonged to no known species, she would presumably invent a new species in which to classify it," Guth wrote in his 1997 book, The Inflationary Universe. "However, even though only a single specimen of the new species had been found, she would undoubtedly assume that it was the offspring of a bacterial parent cell." Guth predicts that "any cosmological theory that does not lead to the eternal reproduction of universes will be considered as unimaginable as a species of bacteria that cannot reproduce."
— B. L.

"The initial bit of false vacuum required by Guth's calculations turned out to be mind-bendingly small: A patch one-billionth the size of a proton would do. And the required period of exponential growth was very short. In perhaps just 10-34 second, he suggested, the universe expanded by 25 orders of magnitude, to roughly the size of a marble, an increase equivalent to a pea growing to the size of the Milky Way.

The inflationary process, Guth discovered, would push omega toward one with incredible swiftness. The reason is best expressed by analogy. The universe appears to be virtually flat for the same reason that Earth's surface appears to be virtually flat to a person standing on that surface. The very fabric of space becomes relatively "stretched" so that in as few as 100 doublings in size, its curvature is effectively canceled.

And what about the conservation of energy? According to Einstein's theory of relativity, the energy of a gravitational field is negative. The energy of matter, however, is positive. So the entire universe-creation scenario could unfold without breaking conservation-of-energy laws. The positive energy of all matter in the universe could be precisely counterbalanced by the negative energy of all the gravity in the universe. " Guth

 

[ding]

Dude this is saying exactly what I said.

 

[edthecynic]

You can't even be honest about what my first post was, so why should anyone expect you to be honest about quantum mechanics which you don't even understand. In the quantum universe there is no such thing as nothing.

My first post:

Even better. The inflation model shows it did. Just like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics shows that it is impossible to have a cyclical universe with no beginning.

Already debunked at least a dozen times in this thread.

Be sure to let Guth know about that, lol.

He already knows! Even Vilenkin says you are full of it!

Guth's Grand Guess | DiscoverMagazine.com
Start, Guth says, by imagining nothing, a pure vacuum. Be careful. Don't imagine outer space without matter in it. Imagine no space at all and no matter at all. Good luck.

To the average person it might seem obvious that nothing can happen in nothing. But to a quantum physicist, nothing is, in fact, something.

snip/
INFINITE INFLATING UNIVERSES

So far, what inflation theory predicts, the observable universe has reflected. But cosmologists Andrei Linde, Alexander Vilenkin, and others have run with inflation's premises to step beyond the bounds of what we can see or measure. They speculate that the decay of the false vacuum—which, according to the inflation theory, created the matter of our universe—does not happen all at once. While some regions decay into universes, other regions keep expanding and creating other universes. Residual false vacuum from the creation of those universes creates still others, indefinitely. Linde and Vilenkin call this "the eternally existing, self-reproducing inflationary universe." Guth contends that this scenario is not only possible, it seems like a sure thing. "If a biologist discovered a bacterium that belonged to no known species, she would presumably invent a new species in which to classify it," Guth wrote in his 1997 book, The Inflationary Universe. "However, even though only a single specimen of the new species had been found, she would undoubtedly assume that it was the offspring of a bacterial parent cell." Guth predicts that "any cosmological theory that does not lead to the eternal reproduction of universes will be considered as unimaginable as a species of bacteria that cannot reproduce."
— B. L.

"Be careful. Don't imagine outer space without matter in it. Imagine no space at all and no matter at all. " Guth

But not "NOTHING."
Don't forget this part, "But to a quantum physicist, nothing is, in fact, something."

 

[ding]

Let's start with your original assertions.

It is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself.

You can't even be honest about what my first post was, so why should anyone expect you to be honest about quantum mechanics which you don't even understand. In the quantum universe there is no such thing as nothing.

My first post:

Actually, it is the bible that claims that no thing (God) created everything from nothing. Science proved that there never was nothing and there will never be nothing, the First Law of Thermodynamics AKA The Law of Conservation of Energy.

Even better. The inflation model shows it did. Just like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics shows that it is impossible to have a cyclical universe with no beginning.

Already debunked at least a dozen times in this thread.

Be sure to let Guth know about that, lol.

He already knows! Even Vilenkin says you are full of it!

Guth's Grand Guess | DiscoverMagazine.com
Start, Guth says, by imagining nothing, a pure vacuum. Be careful. Don't imagine outer space without matter in it. Imagine no space at all and no matter at all. Good luck.

To the average person it might seem obvious that nothing can happen in nothing. But to a quantum physicist, nothing is, in fact, something.

snip/
INFINITE INFLATING UNIVERSES

So far, what inflation theory predicts, the observable universe has reflected. But cosmologists Andrei Linde, Alexander Vilenkin, and others have run with inflation's premises to step beyond the bounds of what we can see or measure. They speculate that the decay of the false vacuum—which, according to the inflation theory, created the matter of our universe—does not happen all at once. While some regions decay into universes, other regions keep expanding and creating other universes. Residual false vacuum from the creation of those universes creates still others, indefinitely. Linde and Vilenkin call this "the eternally existing, self-reproducing inflationary universe." Guth contends that this scenario is not only possible, it seems like a sure thing. "If a biologist discovered a bacterium that belonged to no known species, she would presumably invent a new species in which to classify it," Guth wrote in his 1997 book, The Inflationary Universe. "However, even though only a single specimen of the new species had been found, she would undoubtedly assume that it was the offspring of a bacterial parent cell." Guth predicts that "any cosmological theory that does not lead to the eternal reproduction of universes will be considered as unimaginable as a species of bacteria that cannot reproduce."
— B. L.

"Linde and Vilenkin call this "the eternally existing, self-reproducing inflationary universe." Guth contends that this scenario is not only possible, it seems like a sure thing. " Guth

Yet again confirming everything I wrote because what I wrote was quoted from Vilenkin, lol. I cannot help it if you do not understand what Guth AND Vilenkin are saying. The error is yours. Sorry, the universe we live in had a beginning.

 

[ding]

Even better. The inflation model shows it did. Just like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics shows that it is impossible to have a cyclical universe with no beginning.

Already debunked at least a dozen times in this thread.

Be sure to let Guth know about that, lol.

He already knows! Even Vilenkin says you are full of it!

Guth's Grand Guess | DiscoverMagazine.com
Start, Guth says, by imagining nothing, a pure vacuum. Be careful. Don't imagine outer space without matter in it. Imagine no space at all and no matter at all. Good luck.

To the average person it might seem obvious that nothing can happen in nothing. But to a quantum physicist, nothing is, in fact, something.

snip/
INFINITE INFLATING UNIVERSES

So far, what inflation theory predicts, the observable universe has reflected. But cosmologists Andrei Linde, Alexander Vilenkin, and others have run with inflation's premises to step beyond the bounds of what we can see or measure. They speculate that the decay of the false vacuum—which, according to the inflation theory, created the matter of our universe—does not happen all at once. While some regions decay into universes, other regions keep expanding and creating other universes. Residual false vacuum from the creation of those universes creates still others, indefinitely. Linde and Vilenkin call this "the eternally existing, self-reproducing inflationary universe." Guth contends that this scenario is not only possible, it seems like a sure thing. "If a biologist discovered a bacterium that belonged to no known species, she would presumably invent a new species in which to classify it," Guth wrote in his 1997 book, The Inflationary Universe. "However, even though only a single specimen of the new species had been found, she would undoubtedly assume that it was the offspring of a bacterial parent cell." Guth predicts that "any cosmological theory that does not lead to the eternal reproduction of universes will be considered as unimaginable as a species of bacteria that cannot reproduce."
— B. L.

"Be careful. Don't imagine outer space without matter in it. Imagine no space at all and no matter at all. " Guth

But not "NOTHING."
Don't forget this part, "But to a quantum physicist, nothing is, in fact, something."

I cannot help it if you cannot understand what they are saying.

 

[edthecynic]

Dude this is saying exactly what I said.

No it isn't. It clearly says that "nothing IS something."

Something you left out:

"Return to that primordial vacuum, a boiling stew from which pairs of positive and negative subatomic particles bubble into being for the briefest of instants. Inflationary theory suggests that what erupted was a "false vacuum," a peculiar form of matter predicted to exist by many particle theorists, although the real article has never been observed.

A false vacuum is characterized by a repulsive gravitational field, one so strong it can explode into a universe."

 

[ding]

Dude this is saying exactly what I said.

No it isn't. It clearly says that "nothing IS something."

Something you left out:

"Return to that primordial vacuum, a boiling stew from which pairs of positive and negative subatomic particles bubble into being for the briefest of instants. Inflationary theory suggests that what erupted was a "false vacuum," a peculiar form of matter predicted to exist by many particle theorists, although the real article has never been observed.

A false vacuum is characterized by a repulsive gravitational field, one so strong it can explode into a universe."

I'm sorry that you cannot understand what they are saying.

 

[edthecynic]

You can't even be honest about what my first post was, so why should anyone expect you to be honest about quantum mechanics which you don't even understand. In the quantum universe there is no such thing as nothing.

My first post:

Even better. The inflation model shows it did. Just like the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics shows that it is impossible to have a cyclical universe with no beginning.

Already debunked at least a dozen times in this thread.

Be sure to let Guth know about that, lol.

He already knows! Even Vilenkin says you are full of it!

Guth's Grand Guess | DiscoverMagazine.com
Start, Guth says, by imagining nothing, a pure vacuum. Be careful. Don't imagine outer space without matter in it. Imagine no space at all and no matter at all. Good luck.

To the average person it might seem obvious that nothing can happen in nothing. But to a quantum physicist, nothing is, in fact, something.

snip/
INFINITE INFLATING UNIVERSES

So far, what inflation theory predicts, the observable universe has reflected. But cosmologists Andrei Linde, Alexander Vilenkin, and others have run with inflation's premises to step beyond the bounds of what we can see or measure. They speculate that the decay of the false vacuum—which, according to the inflation theory, created the matter of our universe—does not happen all at once. While some regions decay into universes, other regions keep expanding and creating other universes. Residual false vacuum from the creation of those universes creates still others, indefinitely. Linde and Vilenkin call this "the eternally existing, self-reproducing inflationary universe." Guth contends that this scenario is not only possible, it seems like a sure thing. "If a biologist discovered a bacterium that belonged to no known species, she would presumably invent a new species in which to classify it," Guth wrote in his 1997 book, The Inflationary Universe. "However, even though only a single specimen of the new species had been found, she would undoubtedly assume that it was the offspring of a bacterial parent cell." Guth predicts that "any cosmological theory that does not lead to the eternal reproduction of universes will be considered as unimaginable as a species of bacteria that cannot reproduce."
— B. L.

"Linde and Vilenkin call this "the eternally existing, self-reproducing inflationary universe." Guth contends that this scenario is not only possible, it seems like a sure thing. " Guth

Yet again confirming everything I wrote because what I wrote was quoted from Vilenkin, lol. I cannot help it if you do not understand what Guth AND Vilenkin are saying. The error is yours. Sorry, the universe we live in had a beginning.

No you perverted Vilenkin into saying an ETERNAL self-reproducing inflationary universe is IMPOSSIBLE.
And again, the argument has never been whether or not the universe had a beginning, except for you needing a Straw Man, it has been your false claim that the universe having a beginning makes an eternal self-reproducing inflationary universe impossible, and both Guth and Vilekin disagree with you.

The problem with a cyclical universe is with the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. If it is a periodic universe then the entropy will increase with each cycle. The 2nd Law of Thermodynamics is a fundamental law of nature which tells us that entropy can only increase or stay the same. Entropy can never decrease. Which means that in a finite amount of time, a finite system will reach a maximum state of disorder which is called thermal equilibrium and then it will stay in that state. A cyclical universe cannot avoid this problem.

 

[edthecynic]

Dude this is saying exactly what I said.

No it isn't. It clearly says that "nothing IS something."

Something you left out:

"Return to that primordial vacuum, a boiling stew from which pairs of positive and negative subatomic particles bubble into being for the briefest of instants. Inflationary theory suggests that what erupted was a "false vacuum," a peculiar form of matter predicted to exist by many particle theorists, although the real article has never been observed.

A false vacuum is characterized by a repulsive gravitational field, one so strong it can explode into a universe."

I'm sorry that you cannot understand what they are saying.

Speak for yourself!

 

[BreezeWood]

I'm sorry that you cannot understand what they are saying.

are they leaving out your 4th century christian god, or are you including that yourself (by inference) the 6K universe.

 

[ding]

Dude this is saying exactly what I said.

No it isn't. It clearly says that "nothing IS something."

Something you left out:

"Return to that primordial vacuum, a boiling stew from which pairs of positive and negative subatomic particles bubble into being for the briefest of instants. Inflationary theory suggests that what erupted was a "false vacuum," a peculiar form of matter predicted to exist by many particle theorists, although the real article has never been observed.

A false vacuum is characterized by a repulsive gravitational field, one so strong it can explode into a universe."

I'm sorry that you cannot understand what they are saying.

Speak for yourself!

Maybe you will believe Alan Guth himself. At the 0:42 minute mark Alan Guth says, "but still there would be a beginning at some place" . At the 3:24 minute Alan Guth says, "it is eternal into the future, but not eternal into the past."

What are you going to say now, dumbass, that Alan Guth was lying? That I twisted his words?

 

[edthecynic]

Dude this is saying exactly what I said.

No it isn't. It clearly says that "nothing IS something."

Something you left out:

"Return to that primordial vacuum, a boiling stew from which pairs of positive and negative subatomic particles bubble into being for the briefest of instants. Inflationary theory suggests that what erupted was a "false vacuum," a peculiar form of matter predicted to exist by many particle theorists, although the real article has never been observed.

A false vacuum is characterized by a repulsive gravitational field, one so strong it can explode into a universe."

I'm sorry that you cannot understand what they are saying.

Speak for yourself!

Maybe you will believe Alan Guth himself. At the 0:42 minute mark Alan Guth says, "but still there would be a beginning at some place" . At the 3:24 minute Alan Guth says, "it is eternal into the future, but not eternal into the past."

What are you going to say now, dumbass, that Alan Guth was lying? That I twisted his words?

Gee, why am I not surprised that your "quote" is not an exact quote and you left out something? The unproven assumption "we do not think it is" you replaced with the definitive "not." He thinks it is a reasonable assumption, but in the beginning of the video he also said there was most likely a prehistory to the big bang and that there was SOMETHING he called "repulsive gravity MATERIAL," not nothing, in that prehistory that had a beginning someplace, but again that is an unproven assumption.

But it does definitively behead your claim that it is impossible for the universe to be eternal. You made that claim many times and in different ways, the SLoT, the heat death, and the cycle keeps taking longer and longer, etc.

 

[ding]

Dude this is saying exactly what I said.

No it isn't. It clearly says that "nothing IS something."

Something you left out:

"Return to that primordial vacuum, a boiling stew from which pairs of positive and negative subatomic particles bubble into being for the briefest of instants. Inflationary theory suggests that what erupted was a "false vacuum," a peculiar form of matter predicted to exist by many particle theorists, although the real article has never been observed.

A false vacuum is characterized by a repulsive gravitational field, one so strong it can explode into a universe."

I'm sorry that you cannot understand what they are saying.

Speak for yourself!

Maybe you will believe Alan Guth himself. At the 0:42 minute mark Alan Guth says, "but still there would be a beginning at some place" . At the 3:24 minute Alan Guth says, "it is eternal into the future, but not eternal into the past."

What are you going to say now, dumbass, that Alan Guth was lying? That I twisted his words?

Gee, why am I not surprised that your "quote" is not an exact quote and you left out something? The unproven assumption "we do not think it is" you replaced with the definitive "not." He thinks it is a reasonable assumption, but in the beginning of the video he also said there was most likely a prehistory to the big bang and that there was SOMETHING he called "repulsive gravity MATERIAL," not nothing, in that prehistory that had a beginning someplace, but again that is an unproven assumption.

But it does definitively behead your claim that it is impossible for the universe to be eternal. You made that claim many times and in different ways, the SLoT, the heat death, and the cycle keeps taking longer and longer, etc.

****. You are kidding me. I just proved that your understanding of what Alan Guth meant by an eternal universe was wrong and this is your response.

Let me be clear here, Alan Guth believes that the universe is not eternal going backwards but is eternal going forwards. He does not believe that the universe is eternal going backwards like your backwards ass said he did. Now do you understand?

And when he says it is eternal going forward he means that the universe will eventually reach thermal equilibrium as required by the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics. Because he said in the article that you provided that he agreed with Vilenkin that the universe is eternal going forward and Vilenkin explicitly states that as time approaches infinity thermal equilibrium will occur as per the SLoT. Christ you are stupid.

The pre-history was the matter popping into space and time through the law of quantum mechanics. You do not understand any of this and are just talking out of your ass. The repulsive force of gravity is what caused the inflation all of this occurred very rapidly. Christ you are stupid.

 

[edthecynic]

No it isn't. It clearly says that "nothing IS something."

Something you left out:

"Return to that primordial vacuum, a boiling stew from which pairs of positive and negative subatomic particles bubble into being for the briefest of instants. Inflationary theory suggests that what erupted was a "false vacuum," a peculiar form of matter predicted to exist by many particle theorists, although the real article has never been observed.

A false vacuum is characterized by a repulsive gravitational field, one so strong it can explode into a universe."

I'm sorry that you cannot understand what they are saying.

Speak for yourself!

Maybe you will believe Alan Guth himself. At the 0:42 minute mark Alan Guth says, "but still there would be a beginning at some place" . At the 3:24 minute Alan Guth says, "it is eternal into the future, but not eternal into the past."

What are you going to say now, dumbass, that Alan Guth was lying? That I twisted his words?

Gee, why am I not surprised that your "quote" is not an exact quote and you left out something? The unproven assumption "we do not think it is" you replaced with the definitive "not." He thinks it is a reasonable assumption, but in the beginning of the video he also said there was most likely a prehistory to the big bang and that there was SOMETHING he called "repulsive gravity MATERIAL," not nothing, in that prehistory that had a beginning someplace, but again that is an unproven assumption.

But it does definitively behead your claim that it is impossible for the universe to be eternal. You made that claim many times and in different ways, the SLoT, the heat death, and the cycle keeps taking longer and longer, etc.

****. You are kidding me. I just proved that your understanding of what Alan Guth meant by an eternal universe was wrong and this is your response.

Let me be clear here, Alan Guth believes that the universe is not eternal going backwards but is eternal going forwards. He does not believe that the universe is eternal going backwards like your backwards ass said he did. Now do you understand?

But he does believe the universe came from SOMETHING, not nothing, and that SOMETHING is eternal. The universe in its present form began as SOMETHING in a different form.
As I pointed out, just saying the universe had a beginning does not mean it came from nothing, so the argument has never been whether the universe had a beginning, except in YOUR Straw Man, but whether it began from something or nothing. You need to defend the "nothing" claim of the title of this thread or STFU.

 

[ding]

I'm sorry that you cannot understand what they are saying.

Speak for yourself!

Maybe you will believe Alan Guth himself. At the 0:42 minute mark Alan Guth says, "but still there would be a beginning at some place" . At the 3:24 minute Alan Guth says, "it is eternal into the future, but not eternal into the past."

What are you going to say now, dumbass, that Alan Guth was lying? That I twisted his words?

Gee, why am I not surprised that your "quote" is not an exact quote and you left out something? The unproven assumption "we do not think it is" you replaced with the definitive "not." He thinks it is a reasonable assumption, but in the beginning of the video he also said there was most likely a prehistory to the big bang and that there was SOMETHING he called "repulsive gravity MATERIAL," not nothing, in that prehistory that had a beginning someplace, but again that is an unproven assumption.

But it does definitively behead your claim that it is impossible for the universe to be eternal. You made that claim many times and in different ways, the SLoT, the heat death, and the cycle keeps taking longer and longer, etc.

****. You are kidding me. I just proved that your understanding of what Alan Guth meant by an eternal universe was wrong and this is your response.

Let me be clear here, Alan Guth believes that the universe is not eternal going backwards but is eternal going forwards. He does not believe that the universe is eternal going backwards like your backwards ass said he did. Now do you understand?

But he does believe the universe came from SOMETHING, not nothing, and that SOMETHING is eternal. The universe in its present form began as SOMETHING in a different form.
As I pointed out, just saying the universe had a beginning does not mean it came from nothing, so the argument has never been whether the universe had a beginning, except in YOUR Straw Man, but whether it began from something or nothing. You need to defend the "nothing" claim of the title of this thread or STFU.

You need to give up. You are just digging a deep hole of stupidity. Yes, Vilenkin already explained this dumbass. It is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero. So nothing prevents this universe from being spontaneously created. Because the net energy is always zero. The positive energy of matter is balanced by the negative energy of the gravity of that matter which is the space time curvature of that matter. There is no conservation law that prevents the formation of such a universe. In quantum mechanics if something is not forbidden by conservation laws, then it necessarily happens with some non-zero probability. So a closed universe can spontaneously appear - through the laws of quantum mechanics - out of nothing. And in fact there is an elegant mathematical description which describes this process and shows that a tiny closed universe having very high energy can spontaneously pop into existence and immediately start to expand and cool. In this description, the same laws that describe the evolution of the universe also describe the appearance of the universe which means that the laws were in place before the universe itself. And Guth explained how all the matter was created exponentially by a quantum fluctuation and the repulsive force of gravity.