StarCraft® II

I saw what caused the big bang in a dream

Posts: 332
Since I became an atheist years ago I've been obsessed with things like quantum mechanics and super string theory along with theoretical physics.

And so last night I had this dream where everything came to light and it made so much sense to me as to what happened before the big bang, and what caused this universe to come into existence.

It wasn't god, it seemed like some kind of process where our universe was created from multiple existing universes combined that were much more simple than our own universe and the laws of thermodynamics came into play where everything becomes more and more complex with time.

I forget most of it, but I actually saw how it happened with objects representing space time showing me how it all happened... Idk if it was just a crazy dream but it all made so much sense when I saw it.
I was pretty much thinking "Oh... so that's how it happened" and It didn't really seem like a big deal to me at the time.
Edited by CiniCraft on 12/19/2011 7:56 PM PST
Reply Quote
Posts: 5,286
Sorry for being blunt but...

I don't like that you said the universe was not made by ---Censoring Zanon's Religious Opinion--- Besides that, you had a breakthrough. You are going and telling people you had a huge Idea but then gave no clear details.

It's kind of like saying: 'How to cure cancer came to me in a dream. It has to do with science and genetics. But It really doesn't seem that important. Bye!'

(Nearly) Everyone who reads this part of the forums is an extremely smart person and is looking for either knowledge or intelligent debate.

All I see here is a subtle attack of religion and nothing to make any of us more knowledgeable about the big bang.






By the way... Congrats on understanding one of the universe's great mysteries.
Reply Quote
Posts: 89
Pretty interesting.

However, I must point out that when you talk about multiple universes creating our universe, there is a big problem with that.

First, the classic view is that the universe is everything, which means that nothing can create the universe since nothing exists outside of it (i.e. there is no 'outside' to the universe).

Second, some people believe that there could be multiple universes, as I believe you do. This is fine. But usually one of the criteria to multiple universes is that they cannot interact with each other. Think about it, if a universe created our universe, then wouldn't our 'universe' just be a part of what is already in existence? In other words, what would be the boundaries of one universe to another? If a universe created another universe, that would suggest continuity throughout the two, which means they would be a single universe.
Reply Quote
Posts: 3,739
Acuse, I thought you should know that you are basically guilty of "god of the gaps" thinking. We don't know something explicitly (yet) so therefore a magical being which by definition we can't understand or even gather evidence for is somehow reasonable? What happens when we do find that information out and your god has one less hole to hide in? That could be very damaging to a persons faith.
Edited by Ponera on 1/18/2012 11:55 AM PST
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,741
01/18/2012 06:07 AMPosted by Astrai
"I don't understand how it could work, therefore it doesn't work."


Similarly, we don't understand what causes phenomina we interperet as "Paranormal." Some may say that a universe before ours collapsed into a small particle and mysteriously overcame the forces of gravity to explode into the universe we have today. That raises the question, "Where did that universe come from?" Many more will raise the question, "Where did God come from?"

Apparently, we find ourselves unable to truly grasp the concept of a beginning, or the knowledge of a true origin. We can only believe, hypothisize, and theorycraft.
This takes the Big Bang Theory out of the realm of science completely.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/Scientific_method

For all we know, time could be a mere 4th dimension that can be manipulated easily by beings that exist in 5+ dimensions. That would explain a lot of things but is without a doubt too simple an explanation.
https://secure.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/wiki/String_theory
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,741
@Astrai

So, for a reason too obvious for you to explain, you attack my statement with an ad hominem .

Did I say something wrong? I didn't state anything false.....
<proof reads>

Are you saying that the Big Bang is upheld by the scientific process? By definition it isn't.

Are you claiming that we are unable to believe things and hypothesize? People do that all the time.

OOOOOOH I GOT IT!
04/24/2011 07:23 PMPosted by Astrai
Massive Straw Man
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,741
02/01/2012 05:40 PMPosted by Astrai
And how to correct it.

Scroll up, there are no insightful statements you made in post #13

02/01/2012 05:40 PMPosted by Astrai
There's another place you're wrong. (Also; scientific method.)

I provided a link to a wikipedia page that defines the scientific method. You actually think that you can uphold the Big Bang theory with experimentation and observation?

Yes, there was a hypothesis.
Yes, there were predictions made about the outcome of a proven hypothesis.
No, there were no experiments.
No, there was no scientific analysis.

This causes the Big Bang Theory to be what it is; a theory. It can't be scientifically proven, and is therefore outside the realm of science. (It's technically a hypothesis because no empirical data regarding the Big Bang exists)
You have a better chance of creating a blackhole in the kitchen.

02/01/2012 05:40 PMPosted by Astrai
There's where you're wrong as well. Might want to examine just what hypotheses and theories are (and how they have absolutely zero relation to beliefs), just as a hint to get you started.


Where did I say that they are related? What are you trying to do??
02/01/2012 11:15 AMPosted by Astrai
People who try to jam words into others' mouths are morons.


A Hypothesis is a possible explanation for a phenomenon.
A Theory is a hypothesis with any amount of emperical data to back it up.

Hypothesis != Theory != Belief


02/01/2012 05:40 PMPosted by Astrai
You also need to look up what ad hominem means as well

Rather than attacking my argument, you attacked me.


Edit:
Hmmmm we're going to break some rules if we keep this up. Let's just learn to respect each other's oppinion and get off the Technology/Science Forum for now.
Do not reply.
Edited by TiberiumDSV on 2/1/2012 7:35 PM PST
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,488
This causes the Big Bang Theory to be what it is; a theory. It can't be scientifically proven, and is therefore outside the realm of science.


I don't think Tiberium knows what a scientific theory is, or a scientific law, hypothesis, etc. Nor an ad hominem (me telling you that you're an idiot and that your argument is wrong because of it, however, is an ad hominem). I suggest you do some reading on the big bang theory as the theory was developed due to observable cosmological evidence, in addition to some modeling of theoretical physics concepts.

@Clinicaft
Since I became an atheist years ago I've been obsessed with things like quantum mechanics and super string theory along with theoretical physics.


Perhaps this is off-topic, but what does being an atheist have to do with being obsessed with elements of physics? You make it sound as if religiosity and studying physics (or interest in) are mutually exclusive.


I think Ethri has it right, time is an element of the universe (of matter, to be exact, if I recall correctly), rather than the other way around to often try to establish a "beginning."
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,741
D'oh,.
I was tricked into arguing the definition of scientific theory. The point of my original statement involved the statement:
Classic argument from ignorance.

"I don't understand how it could work, therefore it doesn't work."

My point was that we shouldn't claim that we know how something works when we don't even know IF it works. Several assumptions are being made that lean on the Big Bang theory. Many, many people accept the big bang theory as fact even though it is by far one of the most controversial topics in physics. I believe more evidence is required.

[slightly more on topic]
The Big Bang theory was developed to explain the origin of our current universe, right? It accounts for universal expansion and rests firmly upon the principles of general relativity. The recent leaps in our knowledge of quantum mechanics enabled such a theory to be formulated.

Experiments were done to prove certain principles that uphold the big bang theory. Yet the event itself obviously can't be observed or proven. It would remain a respectable theory as long as no evidence that contradicts it is presented.

Arguably, there are some weaknesses in said theory.

  • The Big Bang theory breaks the law of conservation of energy.
  • Cosmic inflation has yet to be confirmed or demonstrated.
  • If all the planets and bodies in the universe were formed by particles sent forth by the big bang, all of the planets would be rotating in the same direction. Two planets in our own solar system spin backwards.


Sorry, that's my amateur argument. It should give you something constructive to work with.



Oh, and i'm pretty sure post 13# is an ad hominem. The author of the post discredited my argument by stating that I don't understand my material, and that my argument is therefore invalid. I found it to be an offensive response considering that no effort was put forth to form a rebuttal against my actual argument.
Reply Quote
Posts: 1,741
A hypothesis is a proposed explanation for an observed phenomenon which can be tested using the scientific method.
A theory is a set of principles which explains a phenomenon and has a large volume of data to support it and no data to contradict it.


Fair extension of my definition. We seem to be reading from the same source.




02/03/2012 08:10 AMPosted by Astrai
Perhaps you've not heard of the Relativistic Heavy Ion Collider, Tevatron, the Large Hadron Collider, or any of the many other particle accelerators

^
Experiments were done to prove certain principles that uphold the big bang theory. Yet the event itself obviously can't be observed or proven.


We seem to have an understanding. If you would like to discuss the particle accelerators you mentioned and the valuable insights they have to offer us, we could probably create a new thread. ♥
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]