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

[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.

A "miracle" only within a race of animals who cry when a movie star drops dead. To a real society of intelligent beings, simpy a project of sorts. Your great grandma would have called tap-a-talk a "miracle".

If you could cram all of the matter in the universe into a space that is a fraction of a single atom, that would qualify as a miracle to me.

But there is zero evidence that this ever existed, and no human has ever shown a scintilla of evidence that it happened this way

Again... red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations say otherwise.

 

[Rosy]

We already discussed that. Depending on how you define the Big Bang, inflation happened just prior to or just after the BB.

In either case, inflation is about the rapid expansion of the universe, but not the creation of the energy of the universe, from everything I've seen. Think of it as similar to evolution: you can have evolutionary theory without explaining how life was created, because evolution only deals with how life acts once it already exists. Inflation deals with how the universe rapidly expanded after the energy which began the universe already existed.

No, you have that totally wrong. Inflation is how matter and energy got into the universe. Can you show me where anyone says otherwise than you?

Here's the interview where Vilenkin said we started with the laws of physics. Starting at 4:57 they begin that part of the discussion.

It's already been brought up, but sure.

"The discovery, if confirmed, will also lend support to the inflation model in cosmology – the hypothesis that the universe underwent a brief period of exponential expansion immediately after the big bang"
What is cosmic inflation?| Explore | physics.org

"According to the theory of inflation, the early Universe expanded exponentially fast for a fraction of a second after the Big Bang."
Centre for Theoretical Cosmology: The Origins of the Universe: Inflation Introduction

"Cosmic inflation is the idea that the very early universe went through a period of accelerated, exponential expansion during the first 10-35 of a second before settling down to the more sedate rate of expansion we are still experiencing, so that all of the observable universe originated in a small (indeed, microscopic) causally-connected region."
Cosmic Inflation - The Big Bang and the Big Crunch - The Physics of the Universe

"Inflation is a general term for models of the very early Universe which involve a short period of extremely rapid (exponential) expansion"
Inflation for Beginners

"Inflation is the mysterious force that blew up the scale of the infant universe from sub-microscopic to gargantuan in a fraction of a second."
Cosmic Inflation: How It Gave the Universe the Ultimate Kickstart (Infographic)

Note that in every definition, inflation is about the rapid expansion of the universe after the energy which expanded already existed.

Note further that in a couple of the definitions it describes it as happening after the Big Bang. Apparently the Big Bang is defined slightly different by different people, as I mentioned earlier.

I am reposting this.

I think the problem is that you are confusing the big bang singularity with the beginning of space and time. The big bang singularity is where Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations yield infinities. That's just a mathematical thing. Inflation theory explains how matter and energy were created from nothing. So logically that occurred before the so called big bang singularity.

I think of the big bang as the beginning of the expansion and cooling. Inflation is the build up of energy and matter before the expansion and cooling of the universe.

Well, I just gave you definitions of inflation from multiple sources indicating that you are incorrect about what it entails. I'm not sure what else to say. It's just a matter of mislabeling.

Just consider the name inflation. To inflate is not to create, it is to expand. A balloon can only be inflated after the balloon exists.

Inflation theory explains how matter and energy were created from nothing through a quantum tunneling event without violating the law of conservation. It has absolutely nothing to do with the expansion and cooling of the universe.

The big bang singularity is where Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations yield infinities. That is the point where all matter and energy occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom. At this point in the timeline all of the matter is in place and then it began to expand and cool.

But if you want to characterize it that the big bang came first and then inflation occurred, please do so. That makes no sense to me. If people are characterizing it that way, I believe they are characterizing it wrong. Inflation theory was discovered after Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's equations so I can see how confusion occurred, but Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's equations never explained how matter and energy were created. Inflation does.

You are displaying signs of delusions of grandeur

Delusion of Grandeur
By John M. Grohol, Psy.D.

A delusion of grandeur is the fixed, false belief that one possesses superior qualities such as genius, fame, omnipotence, or wealth. It is most often a symptom of schizophrenia, but can also be a symptom found in psychotic or bipolar disorders, as well as dementia (such as Alzheimer’s).

People with a delusion of grandeur often have the conviction of having some great but unrecognized talent or insight. They may also believe they have made some important discovery that others don’t understand or appreciate.

Less commonly, the individual may have the delusion of having a special relationship with a prominent person (such as being an adviser to the President). Or the person may believe that actually are a very prominent and important person, in which case the actual person may be regarded as an imposter.

Grandiose delusions may have religious content, such as the person believes he or she has received a special message from God or another deity.

Sometimes, in popular language, this disorder may be known as “megalomania,” but is more accurately referred to as narcissistic personality disorder if it is a core component of a person’s personality and identity. In such disorders, the person has a greatly out-of-proportion sense of their own worth and value in the world. People with this issue can also sometimes have a taste for the finer, more extravagant things in life.

Sometimes drug use or abuse can intensify or bring on episodes of delusion of grandeur. People who take phencyclidine (PCP) or amphetamines are especially at risk. People who are high and experience a delusion of grandeur may be at increased risk for physically harmful behavior. For instance, if you believe you are capable of flying after taking PCP, and try to jump off a 10-story building based upon that false belief, you may be at serious risk of death.

 

[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.

A "miracle" only within a race of animals who cry when a movie star drops dead. To a real society of intelligent beings, simpy a project of sorts. Your great grandma would have called tap-a-talk a "miracle".

If you could cram all of the matter in the universe into a space that is a fraction of a single atom, that would qualify as a miracle to me.

But there is zero evidence that this ever existed, and no human has ever shown a scintilla of evidence that it happened this way

Again... red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations say otherwise.

Again kid none of the observations you mentioned were the cause of the big bang, they are the result...…………..

Delusion of Grandeur
By John M. Grohol, Psy.D.

A delusion of grandeur is the fixed, false belief that one possesses superior qualities such as genius, fame, omnipotence, or wealth. It is most often a symptom of schizophrenia, but can also be a symptom found in psychotic or bipolar disorders, as well as dementia (such as Alzheimer’s).

People with a delusion of grandeur often have the conviction of having some great but unrecognized talent or insight. They may also believe they have made some important discovery that others don’t understand or appreciate.

Less commonly, the individual may have the delusion of having a special relationship with a prominent person (such as being an adviser to the President). Or the person may believe that actually are a very prominent and important person, in which case the actual person may be regarded as an imposter.

Grandiose delusions may have religious content, such as the person believes he or she has received a special message from God or another deity.

Sometimes, in popular language, this disorder may be known as “megalomania,” but is more accurately referred to as narcissistic personality disorder if it is a core component of a person’s personality and identity. In such disorders, the person has a greatly out-of-proportion sense of their own worth and value in the world. People with this issue can also sometimes have a taste for the finer, more extravagant things in life.

Sometimes drug use or abuse can intensify or bring on episodes of delusion of grandeur. People who take phencyclidine (PCP) or amphetamines are especially at risk. People who are high and experience a delusion of grandeur may be at increased risk for physically harmful behavior. For instance, if you believe you are capable of flying after taking PCP, and try to jump off a 10-story building based upon that false belief, you may be at serious risk of death.

 

[ding]

No, you have that totally wrong. Inflation is how matter and energy got into the universe. Can you show me where anyone says otherwise than you?

Here's the interview where Vilenkin said we started with the laws of physics. Starting at 4:57 they begin that part of the discussion.

It's already been brought up, but sure.

"The discovery, if confirmed, will also lend support to the inflation model in cosmology – the hypothesis that the universe underwent a brief period of exponential expansion immediately after the big bang"
What is cosmic inflation?| Explore | physics.org

"According to the theory of inflation, the early Universe expanded exponentially fast for a fraction of a second after the Big Bang."
Centre for Theoretical Cosmology: The Origins of the Universe: Inflation Introduction

"Cosmic inflation is the idea that the very early universe went through a period of accelerated, exponential expansion during the first 10-35 of a second before settling down to the more sedate rate of expansion we are still experiencing, so that all of the observable universe originated in a small (indeed, microscopic) causally-connected region."
Cosmic Inflation - The Big Bang and the Big Crunch - The Physics of the Universe

"Inflation is a general term for models of the very early Universe which involve a short period of extremely rapid (exponential) expansion"
Inflation for Beginners

"Inflation is the mysterious force that blew up the scale of the infant universe from sub-microscopic to gargantuan in a fraction of a second."
Cosmic Inflation: How It Gave the Universe the Ultimate Kickstart (Infographic)

Note that in every definition, inflation is about the rapid expansion of the universe after the energy which expanded already existed.

Note further that in a couple of the definitions it describes it as happening after the Big Bang. Apparently the Big Bang is defined slightly different by different people, as I mentioned earlier.

I am reposting this.

I think the problem is that you are confusing the big bang singularity with the beginning of space and time. The big bang singularity is where Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations yield infinities. That's just a mathematical thing. Inflation theory explains how matter and energy were created from nothing. So logically that occurred before the so called big bang singularity.

I think of the big bang as the beginning of the expansion and cooling. Inflation is the build up of energy and matter before the expansion and cooling of the universe.

Well, I just gave you definitions of inflation from multiple sources indicating that you are incorrect about what it entails. I'm not sure what else to say. It's just a matter of mislabeling.

Just consider the name inflation. To inflate is not to create, it is to expand. A balloon can only be inflated after the balloon exists.

Inflation theory explains how matter and energy were created from nothing through a quantum tunneling event without violating the law of conservation. It has absolutely nothing to do with the expansion and cooling of the universe.

The big bang singularity is where Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations yield infinities. That is the point where all matter and energy occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom. At this point in the timeline all of the matter is in place and then it began to expand and cool.

But if you want to characterize it that the big bang came first and then inflation occurred, please do so. That makes no sense to me. If people are characterizing it that way, I believe they are characterizing it wrong. Inflation theory was discovered after Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's equations so I can see how confusion occurred, but Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's equations never explained how matter and energy were created. Inflation does.

You are displaying signs of delusions of grandeur

Delusion of Grandeur
By John M. Grohol, Psy.D.

A delusion of grandeur is the fixed, false belief that one possesses superior qualities such as genius, fame, omnipotence, or wealth. It is most often a symptom of schizophrenia, but can also be a symptom found in psychotic or bipolar disorders, as well as dementia (such as Alzheimer’s).

People with a delusion of grandeur often have the conviction of having some great but unrecognized talent or insight. They may also believe they have made some important discovery that others don’t understand or appreciate.

Less commonly, the individual may have the delusion of having a special relationship with a prominent person (such as being an adviser to the President). Or the person may believe that actually are a very prominent and important person, in which case the actual person may be regarded as an imposter.

Grandiose delusions may have religious content, such as the person believes he or she has received a special message from God or another deity.

Sometimes, in popular language, this disorder may be known as “megalomania,” but is more accurately referred to as narcissistic personality disorder if it is a core component of a person’s personality and identity. In such disorders, the person has a greatly out-of-proportion sense of their own worth and value in the world. People with this issue can also sometimes have a taste for the finer, more extravagant things in life.

Sometimes drug use or abuse can intensify or bring on episodes of delusion of grandeur. People who take phencyclidine (PCP) or amphetamines are especially at risk. People who are high and experience a delusion of grandeur may be at increased risk for physically harmful behavior. For instance, if you believe you are capable of flying after taking PCP, and try to jump off a 10-story building based upon that false belief, you may be at serious risk of death.

 

[Rosy]

It's already been brought up, but sure.

"The discovery, if confirmed, will also lend support to the inflation model in cosmology – the hypothesis that the universe underwent a brief period of exponential expansion immediately after the big bang"
What is cosmic inflation?| Explore | physics.org

"According to the theory of inflation, the early Universe expanded exponentially fast for a fraction of a second after the Big Bang."
Centre for Theoretical Cosmology: The Origins of the Universe: Inflation Introduction

"Cosmic inflation is the idea that the very early universe went through a period of accelerated, exponential expansion during the first 10-35 of a second before settling down to the more sedate rate of expansion we are still experiencing, so that all of the observable universe originated in a small (indeed, microscopic) causally-connected region."
Cosmic Inflation - The Big Bang and the Big Crunch - The Physics of the Universe

"Inflation is a general term for models of the very early Universe which involve a short period of extremely rapid (exponential) expansion"
Inflation for Beginners

"Inflation is the mysterious force that blew up the scale of the infant universe from sub-microscopic to gargantuan in a fraction of a second."
Cosmic Inflation: How It Gave the Universe the Ultimate Kickstart (Infographic)

Note that in every definition, inflation is about the rapid expansion of the universe after the energy which expanded already existed.

Note further that in a couple of the definitions it describes it as happening after the Big Bang. Apparently the Big Bang is defined slightly different by different people, as I mentioned earlier.

I am reposting this.

I think the problem is that you are confusing the big bang singularity with the beginning of space and time. The big bang singularity is where Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations yield infinities. That's just a mathematical thing. Inflation theory explains how matter and energy were created from nothing. So logically that occurred before the so called big bang singularity.

I think of the big bang as the beginning of the expansion and cooling. Inflation is the build up of energy and matter before the expansion and cooling of the universe.

Well, I just gave you definitions of inflation from multiple sources indicating that you are incorrect about what it entails. I'm not sure what else to say. It's just a matter of mislabeling.

Just consider the name inflation. To inflate is not to create, it is to expand. A balloon can only be inflated after the balloon exists.

Inflation theory explains how matter and energy were created from nothing through a quantum tunneling event without violating the law of conservation. It has absolutely nothing to do with the expansion and cooling of the universe.

The big bang singularity is where Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations yield infinities. That is the point where all matter and energy occupied the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom. At this point in the timeline all of the matter is in place and then it began to expand and cool.

But if you want to characterize it that the big bang came first and then inflation occurred, please do so. That makes no sense to me. If people are characterizing it that way, I believe they are characterizing it wrong. Inflation theory was discovered after Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's equations so I can see how confusion occurred, but Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's equations never explained how matter and energy were created. Inflation does.

You are displaying signs of delusions of grandeur

Delusion of Grandeur
By John M. Grohol, Psy.D.

A delusion of grandeur is the fixed, false belief that one possesses superior qualities such as genius, fame, omnipotence, or wealth. It is most often a symptom of schizophrenia, but can also be a symptom found in psychotic or bipolar disorders, as well as dementia (such as Alzheimer’s).

People with a delusion of grandeur often have the conviction of having some great but unrecognized talent or insight. They may also believe they have made some important discovery that others don’t understand or appreciate.

Less commonly, the individual may have the delusion of having a special relationship with a prominent person (such as being an adviser to the President). Or the person may believe that actually are a very prominent and important person, in which case the actual person may be regarded as an imposter.

Grandiose delusions may have religious content, such as the person believes he or she has received a special message from God or another deity.

Sometimes, in popular language, this disorder may be known as “megalomania,” but is more accurately referred to as narcissistic personality disorder if it is a core component of a person’s personality and identity. In such disorders, the person has a greatly out-of-proportion sense of their own worth and value in the world. People with this issue can also sometimes have a taste for the finer, more extravagant things in life.

Sometimes drug use or abuse can intensify or bring on episodes of delusion of grandeur. People who take phencyclidine (PCP) or amphetamines are especially at risk. People who are high and experience a delusion of grandeur may be at increased risk for physically harmful behavior. For instance, if you believe you are capable of flying after taking PCP, and try to jump off a 10-story building based upon that false belief, you may be at serious risk of death.

His opinion is not fact. He is the ahole professor that has to have something to say. If any student says that this is not fact, they fail, so they all stay silent. Nothing is made better by this foolery

 

[frigidweirdo]

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.

A "miracle" only within a race of animals who cry when a movie star drops dead. To a real society of intelligent beings, simpy a project of sorts. Your great grandma would have called tap-a-talk a "miracle".

If you could cram all of the matter in the universe into a space that is a fraction of a single atom, that would qualify as a miracle to me.

But there is zero evidence that this ever existed, and no human has ever shown a scintilla of evidence that it happened this way

Again... red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations say otherwise.

Except you're not listening to anyone who tells you that you can't know what's going on OUTSIDE OF THE UNIVERSE.

 

[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.

A "miracle" only within a race of animals who cry when a movie star drops dead. To a real society of intelligent beings, simpy a project of sorts. Your great grandma would have called tap-a-talk a "miracle".

If you could cram all of the matter in the universe into a space that is a fraction of a single atom, that would qualify as a miracle to me.

But there is zero evidence that this ever existed, and no human has ever shown a scintilla of evidence that it happened this way

Again... red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations say otherwise.

Except you're not listening to anyone who tells you that you can't know what's going on OUTSIDE OF THE UNIVERSE.

Or before the current universe began

 

[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.

A "miracle" only within a race of animals who cry when a movie star drops dead. To a real society of intelligent beings, simpy a project of sorts. Your great grandma would have called tap-a-talk a "miracle".

If you could cram all of the matter in the universe into a space that is a fraction of a single atom, that would qualify as a miracle to me.

But there is zero evidence that this ever existed, and no human has ever shown a scintilla of evidence that it happened this way

Again... red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations say otherwise.

Except you're not listening to anyone who tells you that you can't know what's going on OUTSIDE OF THE UNIVERSE.

I understand that.

But the formation of space and time according to the laws of physics tells us that those laws were in place before space and time itself.

 

[Rosy]

A "miracle" only within a race of animals who cry when a movie star drops dead. To a real society of intelligent beings, simpy a project of sorts. Your great grandma would have called tap-a-talk a "miracle".

If you could cram all of the matter in the universe into a space that is a fraction of a single atom, that would qualify as a miracle to me.

But there is zero evidence that this ever existed, and no human has ever shown a scintilla of evidence that it happened this way

Again... red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations say otherwise.

Except you're not listening to anyone who tells you that you can't know what's going on OUTSIDE OF THE UNIVERSE.

I understand that.

But the formation of space and time according to the laws of physics tells us that those laws were in place before space and time itself.

There is nothing in physics that details or explains the spontaneous generation of either mass or energy. In fact this violates the law of conservation of mass

 

[ding]

If you could cram all of the matter in the universe into a space that is a fraction of a single atom, that would qualify as a miracle to me.

But there is zero evidence that this ever existed, and no human has ever shown a scintilla of evidence that it happened this way

Again... red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations say otherwise.

Except you're not listening to anyone who tells you that you can't know what's going on OUTSIDE OF THE UNIVERSE.

I understand that.

But the formation of space and time according to the laws of physics tells us that those laws were in place before space and time itself.

There is nothing in physics that details or explains the spontaneous generation of either mass or energy. In fact this violates the law of conservation of mass

Vilenkin explained how it didn't violate the law of conservation. Did you even watch the video?

 

[Rosy]

But there is zero evidence that this ever existed, and no human has ever shown a scintilla of evidence that it happened this way

Again... red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations say otherwise.

Except you're not listening to anyone who tells you that you can't know what's going on OUTSIDE OF THE UNIVERSE.

I understand that.

But the formation of space and time according to the laws of physics tells us that those laws were in place before space and time itself.

There is nothing in physics that details or explains the spontaneous generation of either mass or energy. In fact this violates the law of conservation of mass

Vilenkin explained how it didn't violate the law of conservation. Did you even watch the video?

There can be no law of conservation before anything exist, and from nothing the only thing that modern physics can predict springing forth is more of nothing. Thus no science is involved.

 

[frigidweirdo]

A "miracle" only within a race of animals who cry when a movie star drops dead. To a real society of intelligent beings, simpy a project of sorts. Your great grandma would have called tap-a-talk a "miracle".

If you could cram all of the matter in the universe into a space that is a fraction of a single atom, that would qualify as a miracle to me.

But there is zero evidence that this ever existed, and no human has ever shown a scintilla of evidence that it happened this way

Again... red shift, cosmic background radiation and Friedmann's solutions to Einstein's field equations say otherwise.

Except you're not listening to anyone who tells you that you can't know what's going on OUTSIDE OF THE UNIVERSE.

I understand that.

But the formation of space and time according to the laws of physics tells us that those laws were in place before space and time itself.

No they don't. You're just making that assumption, which is a silly assumption to be making.

 

[RoccoR]

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

OK, there is a misunderstanding here. "Almost" all mathematical equations that have a graphic form to some power, has the potential for more than one solution. Basing a concept as complex as space and time, on one single solution, → from one single evaluation is dangerous.

We know that "Quantum Mechanics" (QM) and "Relativity" (REL) [sometimes expressed as the general relativity (GR) and quantum field theory (QFT)] do not match-up. Yet each has been tested over and over again, and individually are both sound and valid. Yet, as we see it today, they are incompatible theories.

I understand that.

But the formation of space and time according to the laws of physics tells us that those laws were in place before space and time itself.

No they don't. You're just making that assumption, which is a silly assumption to be making.

(COMMENT)

In the universe we know today, scientist generally say: there are four (4) fundamental forces.

• The Weak Force (WF)
  
• The Strong Force (SF)
  
• The Electromagnetic Force (EMF)
  
• Gravity (G)

• 
• Big Bang
• David Darling

The QM describes the first three (WF, SF, EMF). And REL generally describes G (the shape of space-time). So some might say that the theories (QM and REL) are so different that they cannot be unified [The Grand Unification Theory (GUT) or the Theory of Everything (ToE)].

Now, just as Sir Issac Newton needed to invent "calculas" to explain several aspects of the motion of planets; there may be a need to further invent another form of mathematics (beyond Newtonian Math) that will help explain the solutions that unify QM and REL. But we are not there yet.

Finally, there is an intriguing question... Where the laws of physics, before they separated, they same laws as we know them today? Was time the same in the beginning as it is today?

Most Respectfully,
R

 

[Vastator]

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



We know that "Quantum Mechanics" (QM) and "Relativity" (REL) [sometimes expressed as the general relativity (GR) and quantum field theory (QFT)] do not match-up. Yet each has been tested over and over again, and individually are both sound and valid. Yet, as we see it today, they are incompatible theories.

R

Which does more to suggest that cause, and effect, “the laws”, or “the rules”; (whichever you prefer), are beholden to the composition of matter, space, and time. Especially and observably, when the scale of magnitude changes drastically.
As for the existence of cause, and effect, “laws”, or “rules”, predating, and existing independent of matter space, and time..? There is not one shred of evidence. I’d even go so far as to say that nothing observable even suggests such a thing.

 

[Rosy]

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

OK, there is a misunderstanding here. "Almost" all mathematical equations that have a graphic form to some power, has the potential for more than one solution. Basing a concept as complex as space and time, on one single solution, → from one single evaluation is dangerous.

We know that "Quantum Mechanics" (QM) and "Relativity" (REL) [sometimes expressed as the general relativity (GR) and quantum field theory (QFT)] do not match-up. Yet each has been tested over and over again, and individually are both sound and valid. Yet, as we see it today, they are incompatible theories.

I understand that.

But the formation of space and time according to the laws of physics tells us that those laws were in place before space and time itself.

No they don't. You're just making that assumption, which is a silly assumption to be making.

(COMMENT)

In the universe we know today, scientist generally say: there are four (4) fundamental forces.

• The Weak Force (WF)
  
• The Strong Force (SF)
  
• The Electromagnetic Force (EMF)
  
• Gravity (G)

• 
• Big Bang
• David Darling

The QM describes the first three (WF, SF, EMF). And REL generally describes G (the shape of space-time). So some might say that the theories (QM and REL) are so different that they cannot be unified [The Grand Unification Theory (GUT) or the Theory of Everything (ToE)].

Now, just as Sir Issac Newton needed to invent "calculas" to explain several aspects of the motion of planets; there may be a need to further invent another form of mathematics (beyond Newtonian Math) that will help explain the solutions that unify QM and REL. But we are not there yet.

Finally, there is an intriguing question... Where the laws of physics, before they separated, they same laws as we know them today? Was time the same in the beginning as it is today?

Most Respectfully,
R

No description of universal forces adds up without dark matter, so either dark matter is found or gravity can not exist as the force pushing the universe apart with increasing speed. Imagine finding millions of cars in a deserted world, but no gasoline to burn and no idea that gasoline is or was needed. The cars would be an senseless enigma, until the power source is found, this is the universe without dark matter

 

[Rosy]

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



We know that "Quantum Mechanics" (QM) and "Relativity" (REL) [sometimes expressed as the general relativity (GR) and quantum field theory (QFT)] do not match-up. Yet each has been tested over and over again, and individually are both sound and valid. Yet, as we see it today, they are incompatible theories.

R

Which does more to suggest that cause, and effect, “the laws”, or “the rules”; (whichever you prefer), are beholden to the composition of matter, space, and time. Especially and observably, when the scale of magnitude changes drastically.
As for the existence of cause, and effect, “laws”, or “rules”, predating, and existing independent of matter space, and time..? There is not one shred of evidence. I’d even go so far as to say that nothing observable even suggests such a thing.

In order for something to come from nothing, we need to reinvent all of what we know. This can not happen according to all laws of physics, any student could point this out to any professor, but they would fail because the student would have just proved their intellect equal to the professors, because neither has a clue, and as such they are equal as intellectuals and one can not be educated by someone with no clue

 

[Vastator]

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



We know that "Quantum Mechanics" (QM) and "Relativity" (REL) [sometimes expressed as the general relativity (GR) and quantum field theory (QFT)] do not match-up. Yet each has been tested over and over again, and individually are both sound and valid. Yet, as we see it today, they are incompatible theories.

R

Which does more to suggest that cause, and effect, “the laws”, or “the rules”; (whichever you prefer), are beholden to the composition of matter, space, and time. Especially and observably, when the scale of magnitude changes drastically.
As for the existence of cause, and effect, “laws”, or “rules”, predating, and existing independent of matter space, and time..? There is not one shred of evidence. I’d even go so far as to say that nothing observable even suggests such a thing.

In order for something to come from nothing, we need to reinvent all of what we know. This can not happen according to all laws of physics, any student could point this out to any professor, but they would fail because the student would have just proved their intellect equal to the professors, because neither has a clue, and as such they are equal as intellectuals and one can not be educated by someone with no clue

I’ve never fully subscribed to the notion that our “universe” as we know it, came from nowhere.
I saw an interesting documentary about the theoretical nature of black holes. What was interesting was the way that time and space were so distorted by our perception that once something falls in, it never stops falling inward. It sounds counter intuitive, in that surely it must reach the center. But according to this guys calculations it never does. It just falls inward forever...
I found that interesting, and it was that phenomena he used to predicate the idea of a “white hole”. The practical opposite of a black hole. Where matter, space, and time could be issued forth into a void. It was an interesting idea. And in part try’s to explain the nature of an ever expanding universe.
It was all water cooler talk, but interesting none the less...

 

[Rosy]

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



We know that "Quantum Mechanics" (QM) and "Relativity" (REL) [sometimes expressed as the general relativity (GR) and quantum field theory (QFT)] do not match-up. Yet each has been tested over and over again, and individually are both sound and valid. Yet, as we see it today, they are incompatible theories.

R

Which does more to suggest that cause, and effect, “the laws”, or “the rules”; (whichever you prefer), are beholden to the composition of matter, space, and time. Especially and observably, when the scale of magnitude changes drastically.
As for the existence of cause, and effect, “laws”, or “rules”, predating, and existing independent of matter space, and time..? There is not one shred of evidence. I’d even go so far as to say that nothing observable even suggests such a thing.

In order for something to come from nothing, we need to reinvent all of what we know. This can not happen according to all laws of physics, any student could point this out to any professor, but they would fail because the student would have just proved their intellect equal to the professors, because neither has a clue, and as such they are equal as intellectuals and one can not be educated by someone with no clue

I’ve never fully subscribed to the notion that our “universe” as we know it, came from nowhere.
I saw an interesting documentary about the theoretical nature of black holes. What was interesting was the way that time and space were so distorted by our perception that once something falls in, it never stops falling inward. It sounds counter intuitive, in that surely it must reach the center. But according to this guys calculations it never does. It just falls inward forever...
I found that interesting, and it was that phenomena he used to predicate the idea of a “white hole”. The practical opposite of a black hole. Where matter, space, and time could be issued forth into a void. It was an interesting idea. And in part try’s to explain the nature of an ever expanding universe.
It was all water cooler talk, but interesting none the less...

The most interesting fact that I know of, and there are actually very few facts about the universe, is that the mathematical model of everything does not work in any way if the known mass in the universe is the universe. The model requires massively more mass for expansion to still be taking place and in fact accelerating as the observations show. So if you listen to the people who claim to know they are saying that 85 percent of the universe is missing, and their math does not work because of this.

Result, we know as much now about what we are and where we came from as the first Neanderthal or a fish in a pond. All we actually have is the ability to speculate, and dings that believe what they see and hear on tv

 

[Mousterian]

Nah, we just don't know enough to make any rational deductions about things like Dark Matter, the Big Bang and the nature of the Universe.
Previous generations have been content to say 'Well, God'.
It still works, if you're prepared to suspend reason, and get down on your knees.

 

[Rosy]

Nah, we just don't know enough to make any rational deductions about things like Dark Matter, the Big Bang and the nature of the Universe.
Previous generations have been content to say 'Well, God'.
It still works, if you're prepared to suspend reason, and get down on your knees.

We are informed enough to make deductions and speculations, in fact we need these in order to learn. This process is fine as long as the speculations are not presented as fact as they are by academia and the media