Announcement

Collapse

Philosophy 201 Guidelines

Cogito ergo sum

Here in the Philosophy forum we will talk about all the "why" questions. We'll have conversations about the way in which philosophy and theology and religion interact with each other. Metaphysics, ontology, origins, truth? They're all fair game so jump right in and have some fun! But remember...play nice!

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

An Infinite Past?

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
    Presented many times in many threads describing the current knowledge of physics and cosmology. Go back into your Motte and Bailey and throw away the rusty key.
    Ok Shuny, list one physically known piece of evidence for a multiverse.
    Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

    Comment


    • Originally posted by seer View Post
      Well yes Shuny, there is good physical evidence that our universe is expanding. And that it could not have been expanding past-eternal because all our galaxies would be much further apart - so far apart, because of the speed they are moving, that we could not presently observe them. And by this time, if this universe was past-eternal we would have long ago reached full entropy. So yes there is good evidence that this universe if finite.
      You did not answer the question, nor provide the reference to the evidence. The question did not involve future expansion or possible future infinities.

      Seer, you apparently are not aware that there is no direct physical evidence of our universe has a beginning. The physical evidence we have does not go back to very near the point of the beginning, but thee are other possibilities as to what happens here. Of course, most models predict that the universe had a beginning with a singularity, but there is no physical evidence of a beginning. If you know of any 'Direct Physical' evidence that our universe has a beginning, please cite it.

      We do not 'know' that the universe had a beginning.
      Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-30-2014, 05:05 PM.
      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

      go with the flow the river knows . . .

      Frank

      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
        You did not answer the question, nor provide the reference to the evidence. The question did not involve future expansion or possible future infinities.

        Seer, you apparently are not aware that there is no direct physical evidence of our universe has a beginning. The physical evidence we have does not go back to very near the point of the beginning, but thee are other possibilities as to what happens here. Of course, most models predict that the universe had a beginning with a singularity, but there is no physical evidence of a beginning. If you know of any 'Direct Physical' evidence that our universe has a beginning, please cite it.

        We do not 'know' that the universe had a beginning.
        You are dishonest Shuny. The only way you can deny a beginning is to deny the expansion of the universe. That is evidence, physical evidence, that the universe is not past eternal - and you know it. Now please show us your physical evidence for your fictional multiverse - I'll be waiting.
        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

        Comment


        • Originally posted by seer View Post
          You are dishonest Shuny. The only way you can deny a beginning is to deny the expansion of the universe. That is evidence, physical evidence, that the universe is not past eternal - and you know it. Now please show us your physical evidence for your fictional multiverse - I'll be waiting.
          Seer, you apparently are not aware that there is no direct physical evidence of our universe has a beginning. The physical evidence we have does not go back to very near the point of the beginning, but thee are other possibilities as to what happens here. Of course, most models predict that the universe had a beginning with a singularity, but there is no physical evidence of a beginning. If you know of any 'Direct Physical' evidence that our universe has a beginning, please cite it. Still waiting . . .

          I do not deny the likelihood that our universe had a beginning, it is simply a matter of fact the we do not have direct 'physical evidence,'
          Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-30-2014, 08:25 PM.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • Originally posted by seer View Post

            To shunyadragon:

            You are dishonest Shuny.
            You clearly don’t understand the point shunya is making.

            The only way you can deny a beginning is to deny the expansion of the universe. That is evidence, physical evidence, that the universe is not past eternal - and you know it. Now please show us your physical evidence for your fictional multiverse - I'll be waiting.
            The undoubted fact of the expanding universe does not necessarily take us back to the very moment of a beginning of this universe; it probably doesn't. We just don’t know what happened at that point.

            Big Bang theory “says nothing about the underlying physics of the primordial explosion. It gives not even a clue about what banged, what caused it to bang, or what happened before it banged. The inflationary universe theory, on the other hand, is a description of the bang itself, and provides plausible answers to these questions and more”. Alan Guth, Theoretical Physicist MIT.

            http://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/G..._contents.html

            And once ‘inflationary theory’ has been securely established, which seems increasingly likely, the consensus is that: "although not all inflation theories necessarily lead to a multiverse most do". Stanford University theoretical physicist Andrei Linde,
            “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

            Comment


            • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
              The undoubted fact of the expanding universe does not necessarily take us back to the very moment of a beginning of this universe; it probably doesn't. We just don’t know what happened at that point.
              How about some solid evidence that "it probably doesn't."
              Micah 6:8 He has told you, O man, what is good; and what does the LORD require of you but to do justice, and to love kindness, and to walk humbly with your God?

              Comment


              • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                Seer, you apparently are not aware that there is no direct physical evidence of our universe has a beginning. The physical evidence we have does not go back to very near the point of the beginning, but thee are other possibilities as to what happens here. Of course, most models predict that the universe had a beginning with a singularity, but there is no physical evidence of a beginning. If you know of any 'Direct Physical' evidence that our universe has a beginning, please cite it. Still waiting . . .

                I do not deny the likelihood that our universe had a beginning, it is simply a matter of fact the we do not have direct 'physical evidence,'
                I thought it had been established that the universe is not eternal. Hawking seems to have been drawn to that conclusion.
                Last edited by tabibito; 07-31-2014, 02:13 AM.
                1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                .
                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                Scripture before Tradition:
                but that won't prevent others from
                taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                of the right to call yourself Christian.

                ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                Comment


                • http://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html
                  All the evidence seems to indicate, that the universe has not existed forever, but that it had a beginning, about 15 billion years ago. This is probably the most remarkable discovery of modern cosmology. Yet it is now taken for granted. We are not yet certain whether the universe will have an end.
                  1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                  .
                  ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                  Scripture before Tradition:
                  but that won't prevent others from
                  taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                  of the right to call yourself Christian.

                  ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                  Comment


                  • Originally posted by Jedidiah View Post
                    How about some solid evidence that "it probably doesn't."
                    Whatever happened before the few moments of the Planck epoch is unknown - Planck time is the earliest moment in the history of the universe where our physics still works. So, given we know that the expansion of the universe could only have begun began in the Planck epoch, it is reasonable to argue that the expanding universe does not take us back to the very moment of a beginning of this universe. Or even if there was a beginning rather than an infinite, eternal quantum vacuum out of which our particular Universe was born of a quantum fluctuation.
                    Last edited by Tassman; 07-31-2014, 05:10 AM.
                    “He felt that his whole life was a kind of dream and he sometimes wondered whose it was and whether they were enjoying it.” - Douglas Adams.

                    Comment


                    • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                      Seer, you apparently are not aware that there is no direct physical evidence of our universe has a beginning. The physical evidence we have does not go back to very near the point of the beginning, but thee are other possibilities as to what happens here. Of course, most models predict that the universe had a beginning with a singularity, but there is no physical evidence of a beginning. If you know of any 'Direct Physical' evidence that our universe has a beginning, please cite it. Still waiting . . .

                      I do not deny the likelihood that our universe had a beginning, it is simply a matter of fact the we do not have direct 'physical evidence,'
                      Ok Shuny, if an expanding universe is not evidence for a finite universe then what is it evidence of? What are these other possibilities? The point is, it is evidence for a beginning, even if it is not conclusive. So where is such physical evidence for your multiverse?
                      Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                      https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                      Comment


                      • Originally posted by Tassman View Post
                        You clearly don’t understand the point shunya is making.



                        The undoubted fact of the expanding universe does not necessarily take us back to the very moment of a beginning of this universe; it probably doesn't. We just don’t know what happened at that point.

                        Big Bang theory “says nothing about the underlying physics of the primordial explosion. It gives not even a clue about what banged, what caused it to bang, or what happened before it banged. The inflationary universe theory, on the other hand, is a description of the bang itself, and provides plausible answers to these questions and more”. Alan Guth, Theoretical Physicist MIT

                        http://ned.ipac.caltech.edu/level5/G..._contents.html

                        And once ‘inflationary theory’ has been securely established, which seems increasingly likely, the consensus is that: "although not all inflation theories necessarily lead to a multiverse most do". Stanford University theoretical physicist Andrei Linde,
                        Again Tass, I don't generally have a problem with inflation theory. But as of yet there is no physical evidence for inflation, and it does not necessarily lead to a multiverse nor does it tell us if this multiverse is past-eternal - that question may be unanswerable at least when it comes to direct evidence.
                        Last edited by seer; 07-31-2014, 05:20 AM.
                        Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                        https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by tabibito View Post
                          I thought it had been established that the universe is not eternal. Hawking seems to have been drawn to that conclusion.
                          First, you have to understand seer's demands for Newtonian 'physical evidence' for the multiverse universe. It reflects a religious agenda, and cynical negative view toward, science. It is unethical to cherry pick a cosmological model or theorem to justify a religious agenda. Borg and Goth have both publically stated that greater universe is most likely infinite.

                          Hawking drawing that conclusion is valid, but it applies to our universe only and all possible universes. Hawking's model, like most other cosmological models, includes a multiverse word. Hawking's proposes a timeless Quantum World where all possible
                          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                          go with the flow the river knows . . .

                          Frank

                          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                          Comment


                          • Originally posted by seer View Post
                            Ok Shuny, if an expanding universe is not evidence for a finite universe then what is it evidence of? What are these other possibilities?
                            The evidence for the multiverse has been repeatedly presented from many sources in past threads, and it will not at presently satisfy your demands for Newtonian 'physical evidence. This how science looks at our universe, note highlighted.

                            Source: http://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/24017/is-the-universe-finite-or-infinite



                            The current, widely accepted model for cosmology is λ -CDM. The universe appears (exactly) flat, and for simplicity the universe is infinite. Note that we distinguish between the observable universe (which is the local patch that light could have travelled between since the Big Bang) and the totality — we have constraints that even if the universe is not infinite, its size is many orders of magnitude larger than the observable one.

                            In the literature (especially the popular science one) the details are very muddled, because the consensus around λ -CDM model is quite recent — relying heavily on detailed measurements of the cosmological microwave background radiation, largely done by WMAP in the last 8 years or so. In a sense, the lay reader should be exceedingly careful when she reads statements (even from heavy-weight scientists) regarding cosmology — it is (perhaps ironically) a fast moving field.

                            © Copyright Original Source



                            Again, and again and again, science does not prove or 'know' anything in terms of the infinite and eternal or finite and temporal nature of our physical existence.
                            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                            go with the flow the river knows . . .

                            Frank

                            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                            Comment


                            • OK - I've read enough to make me go cross eyed.

                              I've probably misunderstood it, but it seems that even the multiverse is finite - but the beginning of the multiverse still exists and is eternal.
                              1Cor 15:34 Come to your senses as you ought and stop sinning; for I say to your shame, there are some who know not God.
                              .
                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛
                              Scripture before Tradition:
                              but that won't prevent others from
                              taking it upon themselves to deprive you
                              of the right to call yourself Christian.

                              ⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛⊛

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                                First, you have to understand seer's demands for Newtonian 'physical evidence' for the multiverse universe. It reflects a religious agenda, and cynical negative view toward, science. It is unethical to cherry pick a cosmological model or theorem to justify a religious agenda. Borg and Goth have both publically stated that greater universe is most likely infinite.
                                And Vilenkin explains why inflation theory can not get us to an infinite past: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=NXCQelhKJ7A

                                And when I ask for physical evidence that is not beyond the pale Shuny. For instance Inflation theory predicts that we should see primordial gravitational waves left over from the initial inflation. That would be credible, physical evidence.
                                Atheism is the cult of death, the death of hope. The universe is doomed, you are doomed, the only thing that remains is to await your execution...

                                https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Jbnueb2OI4o&t=3s

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by shunyadragon, 03-01-2024, 09:40 AM
                                160 responses
                                507 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post JimL
                                by JimL
                                 
                                Started by seer, 02-15-2024, 11:24 AM
                                88 responses
                                354 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by Diogenes, 01-22-2024, 07:37 PM
                                21 responses
                                133 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X