I differentiate Cosmogony from the science of Cosmology, as the philosophical and theological epistemology of the 'origins' of our physical existence. Cosmology in general is the physics of the physical existence of our universe and all possible universes. I will emphasize the Cosmology of 'origins' of our physical existence prior to the one plank time of the expansion of our universe when comparing it to cosmogony.
Natural Laws we use to understand our physical existence are a product of our sciences. Science over time develops the human Natural Laws to explain and understand our physical existence as approximations of the ultimate Laws that determine everything which are only known by God, or in the case as some believe god(s) do not exist, the ultimate nature of our physical existence without god(s). For the purposes of my view in this thread is that both views are possible based on the scientific evidence at present which is neutral.
Science, at present, cannot explain nor determine whether our physical existence is finite/temporal or infinite/eternal, nor the nature of the ultimate 'origins' of our physical existence. Nor is it likely that science can ever determine the existence/nonexistence, nor the nature of the Divine worlds of God. Even though I do not put limits on what science can ultimately explain, I do not believe that science can ultimately answer these questions.
I believe that the present barrier of the one planck's time of the expansion of the universe is the present barrier between the physical science knowledge of our universe, ie the expansion of the universe, and the cosmology of origins, and theological cosmogony of 'origins,' before this time. In the science of cosmology the present knowledge of science is based on 'possible' models and theorems falsified by our knowledge of the Quantum world and theories like Relativity. Pretty much most models are based on the existence of something like a gravitational singularity prior to the expansion of the universe, therefore the expansion itself is not the beginning. At this point possible models propose such things as the collapse of a black hole, collision of two branes using string theory, and possibly M-theory where multiple universes form from Quantum fluctuations. One alternative without a singularity is the Loop Quantum Gravity model. The above referenced are possible models and theorems for the nature of our universes, and picking one model or selectively citing material form one model is not good science.
I personally believe that the infinite/eternal, or the Hawking timeless view, of the nature of our physical existence are the best present possible conclusions based on the models and theorems concerning the possible existence of the multiverse Quantum World.
The next post I will discribe the problem between the philosophical 'absolute nothing,' and the Quantum Zero State world sometimes described as 'nothing' by some scientists and layman.
Unknowns and unanswered question concerning our physical existence are the driving force behind the Methodological Naturalism methods search for answers.
Natural Laws we use to understand our physical existence are a product of our sciences. Science over time develops the human Natural Laws to explain and understand our physical existence as approximations of the ultimate Laws that determine everything which are only known by God, or in the case as some believe god(s) do not exist, the ultimate nature of our physical existence without god(s). For the purposes of my view in this thread is that both views are possible based on the scientific evidence at present which is neutral.
Science, at present, cannot explain nor determine whether our physical existence is finite/temporal or infinite/eternal, nor the nature of the ultimate 'origins' of our physical existence. Nor is it likely that science can ever determine the existence/nonexistence, nor the nature of the Divine worlds of God. Even though I do not put limits on what science can ultimately explain, I do not believe that science can ultimately answer these questions.
I believe that the present barrier of the one planck's time of the expansion of the universe is the present barrier between the physical science knowledge of our universe, ie the expansion of the universe, and the cosmology of origins, and theological cosmogony of 'origins,' before this time. In the science of cosmology the present knowledge of science is based on 'possible' models and theorems falsified by our knowledge of the Quantum world and theories like Relativity. Pretty much most models are based on the existence of something like a gravitational singularity prior to the expansion of the universe, therefore the expansion itself is not the beginning. At this point possible models propose such things as the collapse of a black hole, collision of two branes using string theory, and possibly M-theory where multiple universes form from Quantum fluctuations. One alternative without a singularity is the Loop Quantum Gravity model. The above referenced are possible models and theorems for the nature of our universes, and picking one model or selectively citing material form one model is not good science.
I personally believe that the infinite/eternal, or the Hawking timeless view, of the nature of our physical existence are the best present possible conclusions based on the models and theorems concerning the possible existence of the multiverse Quantum World.
The next post I will discribe the problem between the philosophical 'absolute nothing,' and the Quantum Zero State world sometimes described as 'nothing' by some scientists and layman.
Unknowns and unanswered question concerning our physical existence are the driving force behind the Methodological Naturalism methods search for answers.
Comment