The Big Bang? Beginnings and/or endings of the universe? How it is, or what we are seeing now?

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

OK, so for awhile now I've been trying to reconcile the Big Bang, and the universe only being 13.8 billion years old, with things like us being able to see 46.5 billion light years away and the like, etc, and with the help of this article (below) I am trying to accept it, etc, and, as I understand it, the universe is 13.8 billion years old no matter where you are at in it, etc, (another thing I was trying to reconcile, etc, but think I might have maybe now, etc), anyway, as I understand it, the universe started as a single point, that flung everything out very, very quickly, and very, very, very fast, etc, until it just about as quickly, slowed down a lot very, very greatly in a also very very short amount of time also into what we see and observe now, etc, which is almost a stop or standstill now, etc, except for the forces of gravity trying to pull everything in, and forces inside quote/uquote "pockets" or "cells" trying to push everything out, etc, and I'll get into a little more detail about that in a minute, etc...

The article I was looking at is here: What Is It Like As You Approach The Edge Of The Universe?

But, what we see and observe now is what I want to focus on, etc, and there are many theories on how the universe might go from now, and/or end, and/or begin all over again, etc...

Link here: Ultimate fate of the universe - Wikipedia

But, I have wondered about it being in "perfect balance" and an "infinite dance", etc, with what is pushing out on and/or making it expand, being almost just exactly equal to gravity or what is trying to pull it all back in, etc, hence the "dance" that I am talking about, etc...

This would of course almost force us to question it's original origins and/or true beginnings as well "maybe", etc, or then again "maybe not" also, since it could have had a beginning, but maybe no determinable or indeterminate end also, etc...

This may seem a very child like explanation, or maybe way, way to simple of a picture and/or explanation, etc, but taking the whole universe as very large whole, etc, I've often thought about it as a "honeycomb" but in three dimensions, where there is just as much force pushing out on each cell equally (equal amount of growth inside each cell equally, etc), as there is force on the quote/unquote "walls" or surrounding material going around it (going around those cells, etc) being pulled back in on it, etc, (or pulling in on the whole universe, etc) (or at least the attraction of all the normal matter and/or material making up the quote/unquote cell "walls" being attracted to each other, etc) (but traveling around those cells, etc)...

And at any kind of theoretical "edge" or end, etc, the material making up the quote/unquote "walls", etc, just falling around those cells and/or coming back in, etc, while the cell just goes out into the distance or nothingness at that point or quote/unquote "edge" at that point, etc...

Another thing I find strange, is no point is the center point of the growth and/or expansion, etc, and like I already said, the best and most simplest way I can picture it, and from pictures of the observable universe, etc, is to simplify it into a "honeycomb" like structure, etc, and then adding and equal amount of growth in each cell, etc, but then also the material making up the cell "walls", etc, also pulling back in, etc, and that maybe in a kind of perfect balance or dance maybe, etc...

So, what is the point of all of this, or what am I specifically asking...? Well, I really don't know really I guess really, etc... But maybe only to discuss these things or your takes on the theoretical beginnings and/or endings, and/or re-beginnings after endings maybe, etc, of the universe maybe, etc, according to the way it all seems to to be behaving right now maybe, etc...?

Anyway...?

Discuss...?

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

Many scientists seem very divided about this, how the universe will end, and/or begin again, etc, or whether it is perpetual, and will be "infinite" now, etc, which the very last latter of those, is what I am really wishing to discuss, etc...?

What do you think based upon what we are seeing right now, etc...?

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

I don't think the initial Big Bang is any longer responsible at all for the expansion we are seeing right now anymore now at all anymore now, etc, and like I said earlier, it seems to be the result of "dark matter" or whatever, from the quote/unquote "cells" or pockets I mentioned earlier in the OP now, etc, that is now only anymore now causing or is resulting in any kind of growth and/or expansion anymore now in the universe anymore now, etc, but is it "too much" for gravity to compensate, or maybe "not enough" maybe, or maybe "just right" maybe, etc...?

What do you think, etc...?

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

Neogaia777 said:
I don't think the initial Big Bang is any longer responsible at all for the expansion we are seeing right now anymore now at all anymore now, etc, and like I said earlier, it seems to be the result of "dark matter" or whatever, from the quote/unquote "cells" or pockets I mentioned earlier in the OP now, etc, that is now only anymore now causing or is resulting in any kind of growth and/or expansion anymore now in the universe anymore now, etc, but is it "too much" for gravity to compensate, or maybe "not enough" maybe, or maybe "just right" maybe, etc...?

What do you think, etc...?

God Bless!

Oh, and, for that matter, will that factor ever at all change at all ever, etc, is it more now but will be less so later on, or is it less now but will be more so later on, etc, for there is also that to discuss as well, etc...?

And I'm talking about "either one", etc, either force, etc...

What do you think, etc...?

And/or what do we really truly even know about it right now, etc...?

Because I could still be missing some of that maybe still maybe, etc, cause I certainly don't know "everything there is to know about it all, or all of that yet" right now I'm sure, etc...?

Anyway, discuss...?

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

Or maybe you think it will eventually result in a heat death, because everything is in state of decay, "eventually", etc, but then, how do you know it will not eventually result in everything coming back in on itself again, resulting in, eventually, in the end, maybe a big bounce again, with everything starting all over again, etc...?

Or how do you know that it all may or may not all be perfectly balanced right now, and may stay that way for a very, very, long, very, very long; long long time yet, etc...?

What do you think, etc...?

And what do you think, based upon what we see, etc...?

God Bless!

Friedrich Rubinstein · Apr 28, 2021

The age of the universe (13.8 billion years) is calculated by measuring the current expansion speed (Hubble factor) and taking the reciprocal of that value (1/H). The basic assumption here is that the universe has always been expanding at the same speed. It was never "explosion-like expansion in the beginning and slowed down to what it is now". The Big Bang theory supposes an even, constant and smooth expansion rate from singularity to today's universe.

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

Friedrich Rubinstein said:
The age of the universe (13.8 billion years) is calculated by measuring the current expansion speed (Hubble factor) and taking the reciprocal of that value (1/H). The basic assumption here is that the universe has always been expanding at the same speed. It was never "explosion-like expansion in the beginning and slowed down to what it is now". The Big Bang theory supposes an even, constant and smooth expansion rate from singularity to today's universe.

It's not expanding that fast now, etc, and it has not been expanding at the same rate it always has from the beginning now either...

And I don't know what kind of research or knowledge you have been looking into and/or seeking, but that's not at all what I have found, etc...

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

Friedrich Rubinstein said:
The age of the universe (13.8 billion years) is calculated by measuring the current expansion speed (Hubble factor) and taking the reciprocal of that value (1/H). The basic assumption here is that the universe has always been expanding at the same speed. It was never "explosion-like expansion in the beginning and slowed down to what it is now". The Big Bang theory supposes an even, constant and smooth expansion rate from singularity to today's universe.

Dark matter is responsible for the growth and/or expansion now, etc...

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

Friedrich Rubinstein said:
The age of the universe (13.8 billion years) is calculated by measuring the current expansion speed (Hubble factor) and taking the reciprocal of that value (1/H). The basic assumption here is that the universe has always been expanding at the same speed. It was never "explosion-like expansion in the beginning and slowed down to what it is now". The Big Bang theory supposes an even, constant and smooth expansion rate from singularity to today's universe.

Do you even understand that space, or the fabric of space-time is "expanding equally (and at an equal rate) everywhere", etc...?

Or at least, it is now, etc, and do you even understand that concept truly, etc...?

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

@Friedrich Rubinstein

And that we would see the very same things, and have all the same limits on what we can see, no matter where you are or were at, or wherever you are or were in it, etc...?

That it's 13.8 billion years old (supposedly) everywhere, etc...?

Do you understand any of this, etc...?

God Bless!

Friedrich Rubinstein · Apr 28, 2021

Neogaia777 said:
It's not expanding that fast now, etc, and it has not been expanding at the same rate it always has from the beginning, etc...

And I don't know what kind of research or knowledge you have been looking into and/or seeking, but that's not at all what I have found, etc...

God Bless!

I just told you how the age of the universe is calculated and what the Big Bang theory states about the expansion of the universe. You can look it up everywhere. If you think that the universe did not expand at a constant speed then you don't have to reconcile your view with the "13.8 billion years", because that age only applies to constant expansion.

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

Friedrich Rubinstein said:
I just told you how the age of the universe is calculated and what the Big Bang theory states about the expansion of the universe. You can look it up everywhere. If you think that the universe did not expand at a constant speed then you don't have to reconcile your view with the "13.8 billion years", because that age only applies to constant expansion.

Well, I'm still not stuck on the figure of 13.8 billion years old exactly, or at least, I wasn't always, nor was I always stuck on the the whole entire theory of there even being a Big Bang either, etc, but after reading the first article I quoted in the OP, I might be now, cause that article mainly pointed out to me that the universe does have a "past" and by looking far away we can see into that past, etc, and it leads me to at least conclude that the universe probably had a beginning, and a beginning that we can see and observe by looking very, very far away, etc, and a beginning that still happened very much like they say, etc, and that however old it is, it probably started with a giant kind of big huge super explosion that sent all the material out super, super fast, but that has slowed down very, very significantly since then, etc, and "that", maybe even to the point now, to where the quote/unquote "Big Bang" is not even responsible for the expansion now anymore, etc, but that dark matter (and dark energy) and dark pockets seem to be now, etc... Then gravity (on and/or between the other material) trying to pull it back in, etc...

Anyway, the article is a good read, you should check it out...

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

The important thing about looking at things that are very, very far away, is that were seeing it/them in the past, and not at present, etc, since the age of everything is the same everywhere, etc...

And while that does absolutely nothing as to seeing things very, very far away as they currently are in the quote/unquote "present", etc, what it does actually allow us to do is to look into the universes "past", etc...

And it cannot still be expanding, if it all started with any kind of "big bang" anyway, anyway, it cannot all still be expanding at the same rate of speed now since then, or from the very, very beginnings back then, if that's the way it all truly started, and/or came about, and/or all really all still started all really truly happening back then, etc...

And I think that the evidence shows that it has slowed down, or has to have slowed down some, or has done so significantly (slowed down) since then, etc...

But still expanding, etc, just not very fast at those scales now, etc, and like I said, I think that is only now just due to only the dark matter and/or material/energy now, etc, when you are looking at it in the now still anyway , etc...

Anyway,

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

Personally I'm really waiting on what the James-Webb telescope will see...?

Pretty excited about that, etc...

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

I wonder if there is theoretical model or picture that would give us a picture of our universe as to where everything in it should be currently at "now", etc, or at least, relative to our now right now, etc...?

Which is said to be the only "now", etc...?

Anyway, anyone know of anything like that maybe, etc...?

Cause I would really like to see it, etc...?

But our ability to predict/project right now, might be quite limited in that regard still maybe right now, etc, at least with anything very far away most especially maybe right now, etc...?

But knowing where things actually should actually be at, what stage or age they should be in right now, etc, might be very useful right now, etc, maybe right now, etc...?

Or I would at least like to see it right now, etc...?

Anyway,

God Bless!

Neogaia777 · Apr 28, 2021

Neogaia777 said:
I wonder if there is theoretical model or picture that would give us a picture of our universe as to where everything in it should be currently at "now", etc, or at least, relative to our now right now, etc...?

Which is said to be the only "now", etc...?

Anyway, anyone know of anything like that maybe, etc...?

Cause I would really like to see it, etc...?

But our ability to predict/project right now, might be quite limited in that regard still maybe right now, etc, at least with anything very far away most especially maybe right now, etc...?

But knowing where things actually should actually be at, what stage or age they should be in right now, etc, might be very useful right now, etc, maybe right now, etc...?

Or I would at least like to see it right now, etc...?

Anyway,

God Bless!

Might help with the model to know that things very far away from us, are not actually moving away from us as fast as they maybe seem to be maybe, etc, "maybe", etc, but that everything is actually moving away from everything at an equal rate equally, etc...

Or at least became or came to be that way very, very shortly after the big bang anyway, etc...

Might help with the model maybe, etc...?

Anyway,

God Bless!

Friedrich Rubinstein · Apr 28, 2021

Neogaia777 said:
Well, I'm still not stuck on the figure of 13.8 billion years old exactly, or at least, I wasn't always, nor was I always stuck on the the whole entire theory of there even being a Big Bang either, etc, but after reading the first article I quoted in the OP, I might be now, cause that article mainly pointed out to me that the universe does have a "past" and by looking far away we can see into that past, etc, and it leads me to at least conclude that the universe probably had a beginning, and a beginning that we can see and observe by looking very, very far away, etc, and a beginning that still happened very much like they say, etc, and that however old it is, it probably started with a giant kind of big huge super explosion that sent all the material out super, super fast, but that has slowed down very, very significantly since then, etc, and "that", maybe even to the point now, to where the quote/unquote "Big Bang" is not even responsible for the expansion now anymore, etc, but that dark matter (and dark energy) and dark pockets seem to be now, etc... Then gravity (on and/or between the other material) trying to pull it back in, etc...

Anyway, the article is a good read, you should check it out...

God Bless!

The article you quoted doesn't state that we can observe the past of the universe. It states that we assume observing the past by conclusions that are logical to an atheist/naturalist. All the numbers in the article are based on the following assumptions:
1) everything started in a singularity and expanded from it
2) the light we observe today is as old as it takes time for it to travel

Ignore the expansion of the universe for a second. Let's say we observe an object which is 1 million light years away. Then the conclusion is that we see this object as it was there 1 million years ago (in other words, the light was emitted 1 million years ago and reached us now). It might have died since then, but it must've been there 1 million years ago. That's the naturalist's conclusion.
What do we, as Christians, believe? "And God said, “Let there be light,” and there was light."
We believe that God created not only the stars but the light as well. Instantly. God said, and it was immediately there. When God created Adam, how old was Adam? No, he wasn't 30 years old. He appeared to be ~30 years old, but he was 1 day old.
How old were the stars when God created them? If a modern scientist measured the redshift right after creation he would conclude that the stars are millions of light years away, just as today. The stars appeared to be millions of years old, while they were not even a day old.

In naturalism you assume that the light started somewhere. You see a light source and assume that the light had only this or that amount of time to travel from there.
When you believe in God as creator of the universe you don't believe this naturalistic view. You believe in a God who said “Let there be light,” and there was light.

Halbhh · Apr 28, 2021

Neogaia777 said:
OK, so for awhile now I've been trying to reconcile the Big Bang, and the universe only being 13.8 billion years old, with things like us being able to see 46.5 billion light years away and the like, etc, and with the help of this article (below) I am trying to accept it, etc, and, as I understand it, the universe is 13.8 billion years old no matter where you are at in it, etc, (another thing I was trying to reconcile, etc, but think I might have maybe now, etc), anyway, as I understand it, the universe started as a single point, that flung everything out very, very quickly, and very, very, very fast, etc, until it just about as quickly, slowed down a lot very, very greatly in a also very very short amount of time also into what we see and observe now, etc, which is almost a stop or standstill now, etc, except for the forces of gravity trying to pull everything in, and forces inside quote/uquote "pockets" or "cells" trying to push everything out, etc, and I'll get into a little more detail about that in a minute, etc...

The article I was looking at is here: What Is It Like As You Approach The Edge Of The Universe?

But, what we see and observe now is what I want to focus on, etc, and there are many theories on how the universe might go from now, and/or end, and/or begin all over again, etc...

Link here: Ultimate fate of the universe - Wikipedia

But, I have wondered about it being in "perfect balance" and an "infinite dance", etc, with what is pushing out on and/or making it expand, being almost just exactly equal to gravity or what is trying to pull it all back in, etc, hence the "dance" that I am talking about, etc...

This would of course almost force us to question it's original origins and/or true beginnings as well "maybe", etc, or then again "maybe not" also, since it could have had a beginning, but maybe no determinable or indeterminate end also, etc...

This may seem a very child like explanation, or maybe way, way to simple of a picture and/or explanation, etc, but taking the whole universe as very large whole, etc, I've often thought about it as a "honeycomb" but in three dimensions, where there is just as much force pushing out on each cell equally (equal amount of growth inside each cell equally, etc), as there is force on the quote/unquote "walls" or surrounding material going around it (going around those cells, etc) being pulled back in on it, etc, (or pulling in on the whole universe, etc) (or at least the attraction of all the normal matter and/or material making up the quote/unquote cell "walls" being attracted to each other, etc) (but traveling around those cells, etc)...

And at any kind of theoretical "edge" or end, etc, the material making up the quote/unquote "walls", etc, just falling around those cells and/or coming back in, etc, while the cell just goes out into the distance or nothingness at that point or quote/unquote "edge" at that point, etc...

Another thing I find strange, is no point is the center point of the growth and/or expansion, etc, and like I already said, the best and most simplest way I can picture it, and from pictures of the observable universe, etc, is to simplify it into a "honeycomb" like structure, etc, and then adding and equal amount of growth in each cell, etc, but then also the material making up the cell "walls", etc, also pulling back in, etc, and that maybe in a kind of perfect balance or dance maybe, etc...

So, what is the point of all of this, or what am I specifically asking...? Well, I really don't know really I guess really, etc... But maybe only to discuss these things or your takes on the theoretical beginnings and/or endings, and/or re-beginnings after endings maybe, etc, of the universe maybe, etc, according to the way it all seems to to be behaving right now maybe, etc...?

Anyway...?

Discuss...?

God Bless!

So, there are quite a few speculative theories about how the Universe would evolve far into the future (if something else not yet seen/observed didn't change the outcome...).

The idea of a perfect balance of forces is only one of many, and not always the currently more popular (it comes and goes I've seen). But here's a version of that in a clear written article:
No, The Universe Is Not Expanding at an Accelerated Rate, Say Physicists
(note this isn't yet proven, but instead under contention:
https://www.quantamagazine.org/no-dark-energy-no-chance-cosmologists-contend-20191217/)

At the moment another widely thought speculative view includes that the expansion of the Universe might (if nothing else changes) expand faster and faster, accelerating. Everything spreading further and further apart until even compact masses fall apart.

That key parameters behind this one are currently in question also though.

Another theory (not strongly supported now but still not ruled out 100%): An Oscillating Universe, that contracts and then rebounds.

Why can't we pin down which is right? Because even a very gradual tiny change in forces such as from the theorized 'dark energy' could radically change the outcome eventually, very far in the future, and we don't yet have the observational precision to say which way it will go.

So, having followed this stuff for decades, I keep all the theories still possible in mind, and only as an intellectual curiosity, since I understand that there is a force more decisive than nature.

SelfSim · Apr 28, 2021

There are soo many misconceived (and simply errored) statements made about the Standard Cosmology Model, (SCM), in this thread, its hard to know where to start ..

I suggest everyone who's made assertive claims about the SCM, needs to go back and do more study ..

Halbhh · Apr 28, 2021

SelfSim said:
There are soo many misconceived (and simply errored) statements made about the Standard Cosmology Model, (SCM), in this thread, its hard to know where to start ..

I suggest everyone who's made assertive claims about the SCM, needs to go back and do more study ..

And/or read links from my post, to get more of a sense of where we are at about these questions from theoretical physicists. Also, the first link in the OP is a reasonable lay person level article and legit (real information, pretty well written).

The Big Bang? Beginnings and/or endings of the universe? How it is, or what we are seeing now?

Old Soul

Old Soul

Old Soul

Old Soul

Old Soul

Well-Known Member

Old Soul

Old Soul

Old Soul

Old Soul

Well-Known Member

Old Soul

Old Soul

Old Soul

Old Soul

Old Soul

Well-Known Member

Everything You say is Life to me

A non "-ist"

Everything You say is Life to me

Similar threads