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

[harmonica]

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.

Define “a miracle”...

post # 12
supposedly a miracle is anything you want to believe according to ding

 

[Montrovant]

define miracle

Each person can decide for themselves. I define miracle as when all of the matter and energy in the universe occupies the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom.

So there's only one thing that constitutes a miracle to you? That's an odd definition.

Give me a break. I'm not here to play games or to quibble. Define miracle any way you want. I am sorry if you missed the humor in my response.

I responded to humor with humor.

Put me down for a 'no' as far as a miracle, as I don't think any sort of divine or supernatural power is required for the existence of the universe. It could be a miracle, but doesn't have to be.

You mean you don't believe it is a miracle for existence to pop out of nothing?

Not necessarily. Assuming that is an accurate description of events, that existence did "pop out of nothing," I would repeat that a divine or supernatural cause is possible, but not necessarily true. As I understand it, before the Big Bang it is theorized that the physical laws of the universe may not have applied or existed. Who knows what may have caused the creation of the universe, or if such terms even make sense for the beginning of our reality?

 

[ding]

Einstien belived in an expanding universe>

Most everyone does. Inflation theory explains how it got to that point without violating the law of conservation.

 

[ding]

Each person can decide for themselves. I define miracle as when all of the matter and energy in the universe occupies the space of 1 billionth of 1 trillionth the size of a single atom.

So there's only one thing that constitutes a miracle to you? That's an odd definition.

Give me a break. I'm not here to play games or to quibble. Define miracle any way you want. I am sorry if you missed the humor in my response.

I responded to humor with humor.

Put me down for a 'no' as far as a miracle, as I don't think any sort of divine or supernatural power is required for the existence of the universe. It could be a miracle, but doesn't have to be.

You mean you don't believe it is a miracle for existence to pop out of nothing?

Not necessarily. Assuming that is an accurate description of events, that existence did "pop out of nothing," I would repeat that a divine or supernatural cause is possible, but not necessarily true. As I understand it, before the Big Bang it is theorized that the physical laws of the universe may not have applied or existed. Who knows what may have caused the creation of the universe, or if such terms even make sense for the beginning of our reality?

The leading cosmological model - Inflation - says otherwise.

 

[well named]

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

There's a line in one of my favorite books, discussing the possibility of having to accept certain truths about the world as brute facts (i.e. as things which we have to take as givens because there is no possibility of situating them in some kind of larger explanatory context). Essentially it's a rejection of the principle of sufficient reason. That whole philosophical discussion is interesting, but the upshot of it is that if we have to take some things as given, it makes sense to also see them as gifts. Which is close enough to a "miracle" for me. I've always enjoyed that statement, even if it's mostly just word play.

 

[sparky]

As in sh*t one is incapable o comprehending? Or that of blind faith? ~S~

 

[sparky]

hadda do it>

 

[Vastator]

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.

Define “a miracle”...

already posted that

Yeah... I started at the beginning and resided from there. Seems to be an obvious parameter for formulating an answer..:

 

[Vastator]

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.

Define “a miracle”...

post # 12
supposedly a miracle is anything you want to believe according to ding

Hmmmm... the ancients thought miraculous, that which they didn’t understand...

 

[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.

Define “a miracle”...

post # 12
supposedly a miracle is anything you want to believe according to ding

Hmmmm... the ancients thought miraculous, that which they didn’t understand...

But we do understand this. Existence spontaneously appeared out of nothing 14 billion years ago. The Laws of Nature, which existed before space and time itself, predestined intelligence to exist. That ought to rouse some suspicions.

 

[Natural Citizen]

I believe he is arguing against it.

I am, too. At least the idea that it constantly inflates until it dies. I reject that theory for the sole purpose that 1 - every known law of physics tells us that the universe is bi-directional, and 2 - the math that dictates the 2nd, also resolves backward. That is to say that the same math that tells us the universe expands also tells us the universe rretracts and possible reflects back so as not to keep expanding until it experiences a thermal death.

So, if we look into a mirror, the thing you're caling a big bang of empty space would be the smallest point in space between ourselves and our reflection in that mirror.

If course, that, too, is just a theory. But it makes more sense, given that, as I said, every other law of physics tells us the universe is naturally bi-directional. And that's not even counting the fact that the same math that resolves expansion also resolves itself coming backward.

 

[Natural Citizen]

Existence spontaneously appeared out of nothing 14 billion years ago. The Laws of Nature, which existed before space and time itself, predestined intelligence to exist. That ought to rouse some suspicions.

No!!

You can't say that, Ding.

The laws of physics tells us the universe is naturally bi-directional. Not one-directional.

You're only focusing on one direction. When we do that, we completely disregard the opposite direction.

 

[ding]

I believe he is arguing against it.

I am, too. At least the idea that it constantly inflates until it dies. I reject that theory for the sole purpose that 1 - every known law of physics tells us that the universe is bi-directional, and 2 - the math that dictates the 2nd, also resolves backward. That is to say that the same math that tells us the universe expands also tells us the universe rretracts and possible reflects back so as not to keep expanding until it experiences a thermal death.

So, if we look into a mirror, the thing you're caling a big bang of empty space would be the smallest point in space between ourselves and our reflection in that mirror.

If course, that, too, is just a theory. But it makes more sense, given that, as I said, every other law of physics tells us the universe is naturally bi-directional. And that's not even counting the fact that the same math that resolves expansion also resolves itself coming backward.

Inflation is an extremely short lived event.

Your statement "that it constantly inflates until it dies" makes me wonder if you understand this at all. Inflation only explains how space and time were created from through a quantum tunneling event without violating the law of conservation. After it was created it is all General Relativity and Friedmann's solutions to those equations.

 

[ding]

Existence spontaneously appeared out of nothing 14 billion years ago. The Laws of Nature, which existed before space and time itself, predestined intelligence to exist. That ought to rouse some suspicions.

No!!

You can't say that, Ding.

The laws of physics tells us the universe is naturally bi-directional. Not one-directional.

You're only focusing on one direction. When we do that, we completely disregard the opposite direction.

That is exactly what inflation theory postulates.

 

[well named]

The Laws of Nature, which existed before space and time itself

I'm not an expert, but I don't believe there's really any justification for believing that the laws of physics existed prior to the universe. It's not even clear what it would mean to say that anything could exist as such "prior to the universe". There's also no way of answering the question.

It also depends a little bit on how you define the laws. A lot of physics depends on various constants which we measure empirically, some of which we know to have been different in the very early universe. Does the changing of those constants over time imply differing laws of physics? I think in a sense it does, given that changes in those constants yield incredibly different phenomena. There's a good article about this question here.

 

[Vastator]

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.

Define “a miracle”...

post # 12
supposedly a miracle is anything you want to believe according to ding

Hmmmm... the ancients thought miraculous, that which they didn’t understand...

But we do understand this. Existence spontaneously appeared out of nothing 14 billion years ago. The Laws of Nature, which existed before space and time itself, predestined intelligence to exist. That ought to rouse some suspicions.

No. People still wonder what the impetus was. And where the material came from; spawning theories such as white holes, God, God’s, multiverses, and cosmological “membranes” that have come into contact with one another, and exchanged material.... The fact is we don’t know for certain; and we don’t know “what about before?”. Some think we have more work to do. Some give up and say “we don’t know, therefore God”...

 

[Natural Citizen]

Your statement "that it constantly inflates until it dies" makes me wonder if you understand this at all.

Ding, I have to say it country simple so everyone understands it. That's the best way. I've counted maybe three people on this board with a background in the natural sciences.

Here's what I know, smartass. lol. I'm the only one in this thread that I know of so far who actually has a physics and math degree. Okay? You'r;re an engineer, and that's commendable, too, but I happen to understand a little bit about the way the universe works. And I'm also a regular guy., I'm not gonna sit here and try to sound like I'm smarter than everyoneelse and use language that very, very, few people would understand absent a background in the field. Okay? So, that;s why I speak the way I do. It doesnlt matter what you think about me. It just doesn't.

Now. Here's the difference between you and I Ding. I'm not so arrogant as to claim that all of the questions have already been asked and that no more are required. That's not the nature of scientific research, Ding. The very nature of science demands that we always ask more questions. That's humility, Ding. Knowing that we don't have all of the answers. But guys like you pretent otherwise. You guys who want to prop up your deity and pretend that you have all of the answers and that no more questions need asking are the ones who really have a lot to learn before speaking.

The universe is naturally bi-directional. Every single law of physics tells us this. It is not one-directional, Ding. That's my point. It's quickly becoming an obsolete theory that never even made mathematical sense in the first place. Thankfully, we're gradually coming arond to realizing the absurdity of it.

 

[Damaged Eagle]

Fortuitous and miraculous are the ways of God,

*****SMILE*****

 

[ding]

I'm not an expert, but I don't believe there's really any justification for believing that the laws of physics existed prior to the universe.

According to inflation theory which is the leading cosmological model for how space and time began, space and time were created through a quantum tunneling event which followed the laws of conservation. This means the laws of quantum mechanics and conservation of energy had to exist before space and time. A simpler way to look at this is that we live in a universe governed by physical laws. It goes to reason that the creation of this universe was also governed by some physical laws. Ergo the Laws had to exist before space and time could be created out of nothing.

 

[Natural Citizen]

You know what your problem is, Ding? I'll tell you. You can't think beyond the human experience. Either you refuse to or you're simply not capable of putting yourself aside from the bigger picture. The universe knew itself long before humanity added their opinions into the equation. It'll remember itself long after we're not in it to tell it how we think it should function according to us and our sacred beliefs and sacred truths.

 

[well named]

According to inflation theory which is the leading cosmological model for how space and time began, space and time were created through a quantum tunneling event which followed the laws of conservation.

Fair enough, I'm roughly familiar with that idea. I think I'm just understanding "before the universe" a little differently than you. I would say that the theoretical state prior to the big bang, but in which those quantum potentials exist, is a state in which the universe also exists, even though it's a very different universe. But I wouldn't say the difference between that state of potential and the point immediately after the big bang is much larger than the difference between that post-big-bang point and the present, so it doesn't make a lot of sense to me to define one of those three points as being "before" the universe and the other two after it. I seem to recall reading some debates about the semantics of this though, or how to define "the beginning". It's an interesting philosophical problem at some point. Quantum foam isn't exactly "nothing" in the usual sense that people have in mind when they ask about creating Being from Nothingness. YMMV?

 

[ding]

Your statement "that it constantly inflates until it dies" makes me wonder if you understand this at all.

Ding, I have to say it county simple so everyone understands it. That's the best way. I've counted maybe three people on this board with a background in the natural sciences.

Here's what I know, smartass. lol. I'm the only one in this thread that I know of so far who actually has a physics and math degree. Okay? You'r;re an engineer, and that's commendable, too, but I happen to understand a little bit about the way the universe works. And I'm also a regular guy., I'm not gonna sit here and try to sound like I'm smarter than everyoneelse and use language that very, very, few people would understand absent a background in the field. Okay? So, that;s why I speak the way I do. It doesnlt matter what you think about me. It just doesn't.

Now. Here's the difference between you and I Ding. I'm not so arrogant as to claim that all of the questions have already been asked and that no more are required. That;s not the nature of scientific research, Ding. The very nature of science debands that we always ask more questions. That's humility, Ding. Knowing that we donlt have all of the answers. But guys like you pretent otherwise. You guys who want to prop up your diety and pretend that you have all of the answers and that no more questions need asking are the ones who really have a lot to learn before speaking.

The universe is naturally bi-directional. Every single law of physics tells us this. It is not one-directional, Ding. That's my point. It's quickly becoming an obsolete theory that never even made mathematical sense in the first place.

I'm not getting into a pissing match with you. I don't believe you understand what you are talking about.

I understand the laws say time can run backward but no one has ever observed it. So if your point is that because the universe is bidirectional it could have existed forever, the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics says it can't. Cyclical models are dead. So if your point is that parts are expanding and parts are contracting, I will tell you what Vilenkin says on that, "If the universe is expanding then it must have a beginning. If you follow it backwards in time, then any object must come to a boundary of space time. You cannot continue that history indefinitely. This is still true even if a universe has periods of contraction. It still has to have a beginning if expansion over weights the contraction. Physicists have been uncomfortable with the idea of a beginning since the work of Friedman which showed that the solutions of Einstein's equation showed that the universe had a beginning."