My Big Bang Challenge

[AV1611VET]

The event, no. The theory, yes.

Great to see you back here again, you've been missed!

Thank you, guys!

You're too kind!

It's good to feel welcomed back!

 

[Warden_of_the_Storm]

We are completely ignorant of of any conditions before the big expansion.
Our cosmos might just be one drop of matter in the midst of a sneeze by God.
God might have been hosting guests from the community as well.

It is possible, though in a massive magnitude of 1 to the power of several million billion to 1.

In spite of what some poetic scientists are saying about nothingness being unstable, I think it must have been amazingly serene before the big bang.

That honestly would be very interesting to know too. Just to see what the universe would be like before the Big Bang. I imagine... very quiet. Like the sort of quiet where you can hear your own heartbeat.

 

[Shemjaza]

In spite of what some poetic scientists are saying about nothingness being unstable, I think it must have been amazingly serene before the big bang.

From a certain point of view perhaps the expansion itself is peaceful and serene. On a slow enough timescale the whole Universe is slowly opening up, brightly glowing at first then darkening to black covered in whirling patterns of sparkles before finally fading to an even matt black.

 

[AV1611VET]

From a certain point of view perhaps the expansion itself is peaceful and serene. On a slow enough timescale the whole Universe is slowly opening up, brightly glowing at first then darkening to black covered in whirling patterns of sparkles before finally fading to an even matt black.

Would a woman want that to happen to her diamond ring?

How about the eggs in your refrigerator suddenly expand and "open up" all over everywhere?

 

[Shemjaza]

Would a woman want that to happen to her diamond ring?

How about the eggs in your refrigerator suddenly expand and "open up" all over everywhere?

 

[AV1611VET]

Blooming Flowers Time Lapse

 

[Petros2015]

That honestly would be very interesting to know too. Just to see what the universe would be like before the Big Bang. I imagine... very quiet. Like the sort of quiet where you can hear your own heartbeat.

 

[AV1611VET]

View attachment 310189

Nice picture of a water fountain.

But how does that compare to the Primordial Atom?

Suppose I cut up the Mona Lisa into a beautiful 300-piece intellectually-challenging puzzle?

Have I done better? or worse?

 

[public hermit]

Can the Big Bang Theory be considered a natural disaster on a universal scale?

What definition of natural fits the Big Bang? It is natural in the sense all of nature is the result. But, is it natural in the sense of conforming to the usual order of nature or natural in the sense of produced by nature? How could we know either of the latter since, from our perspective, the Big Bang is without precedent? Maybe the James Webb telescope will give us more clues.

As far as it being a disaster on a universal scale, that remains to be seen, I guess, but to whose perspective do we appeal? Whose perspective is such that they can make that judgment?

 

[FrumiousBandersnatch]

What definition of natural fits the Big Bang? It is natural in the sense all of nature is the result. But, is it natural in the sense of conforming to the usual order of nature or natural in the sense of produced by nature? How could we know either of the latter since, from our perspective, the Big Bang is without precedent? Maybe the James Webb telescope will give us more clues.

It's considered natural because - as described - it conforms to natural laws, i.e. the laws of physics.

 

[Mark Quayle]

It is possible, though in a massive magnitude of 1 to the power of several million billion to 1.



That honestly would be very interesting to know too. Just to see what the universe would be like before the Big Bang. I imagine... very quiet. Like the sort of quiet where you can hear your own heartbeat.

I was tongue-in-cheek. And more than a little bit picking at the 'poetic scientists'.

By 'universe', here, I mean the omni —all that is— but in which I don't include God, because he being first cause, places him logically outside of it all (and no, I am not saying he isn't also within it). Then, the notion of pre-Big Bang, lends me both feelings: of a nothingness with an almost agoraphobic feel of openness —too open, too much emptiness; and of an almost smothering closeness of cloaking darkness. If my mind had to breathe, I imagine, I would not be able to there.

But, by the way the definitions in Quantum Mechanics sound, what I consider non-existence, when I think of 'nothingness', doesn't even exist pre-Big Bang. If they are correct —and, by the way, that does fit Biblical and philosophical descriptions concerning God— then the infinitely small ("infinitesimal", is the word I hear them use) speck from which the universe sprang, was all there is/was. The thought intrigues me then: How would we know the Big Bang even really happened? Because, to the mind of God, this universe is still an infinitesimal speck.

Off in the distance, I think I hear the hysterical giggling of a physicist gone mad.

 

[public hermit]

It's considered natural because - as described - it conforms to natural laws, i.e. the laws of physics.

Okay, that makes sense. For some reason I thought the laws of physics applied post-Big Bang but not to an initial singularity, but I'm not even sure if anyone talks about an initial singularity anymore.

 

[Mark Quayle]

It's considered natural because - as described - it conforms to natural laws, i.e. the laws of physics.

Sounds just a bit like confirmation bias. Just saying...

 

[Mark Quayle]

From a certain point of view perhaps the expansion itself is peaceful and serene. On a slow enough timescale the whole Universe is slowly opening up, brightly glowing at first then darkening to black covered in whirling patterns of sparkles before finally fading to an even matt black.

I like that. But then, from God's point of view, is not this whole universe, even 'the omni', still but a singularity?

 

[AV1611VET]

I like that. But then, from God's point of view, is not this whole universe, even 'the omni', still but a singularity?

Isn't it the Singularity that destroyed the Primordial Atom's state of existence?

Had the Singularity not occurred, we wouldn't be on our way to heat death.

 

[Shemjaza]

Isn't it the Singularity that destroyed the Primordial Atom's state of existence?

Had the Singularity not occurred, we wouldn't be on our way to heat death.

Meh, I'll take time and eventual death instead of a timelessness primordial state where ultimately nothing matters because nothing changes.

 

[Shemjaza]

I like that. But then, from God's point of view, is not this whole universe, even 'the omni', still but a singularity?

Not sure, but if you take the perspective of time as another dimension of the Universe it's ultimately already complete, beginning to end, all at once and time is just a perspective.

 

[AV1611VET]

Meh, I'll take time and eventual death instead of a timelessness primordial state where ultimately nothing matters because nothing changes.

The question though is:

Are we the products of a universal natural disaster?

 

[Petros2015]

It's considered natural because - as described - it conforms to natural laws, i.e. the laws of physics.

Which pre-date the space-time they create, apparently. Given the "laws of nature" (which are eternal, pre-dating space-time), "Quantum Fluctuations" allow for the creation of the universe we experience from nothing but themselves.

"And the Laws of Nature fluctuated: Let there be Light"

And there was Light. And a whole lot more.

 

[Frank Robert]

Can the Big Bang Theory be considered a natural disaster on a universal scale?

If the BB was responsible for the life on earth and the ultimate violence and poverty then I would say it was a disaster.

In any event, it's good to see you again, welcome back.