Science question need some nerds

[Julian Rayne]

This explains it well enough for me:

[Hammerfest]

Precisely because they are unsubstantiated bullshit that don't rely on a lick of observational evidence.

Again, there's no way that statement can be honestly made given the stark lack of discussion.

[Soeroah]

That's the thing about asking what was "before" the Big Bang; time as we know it started with the Big Bang, so there was no before. But "before" itself is a concept that only works when there is time.

Doesn't mean the Big Bang hypothesis isn't possible, though. There are just different theories we don't know. A previous universe's death leading to ours being born, essentially resetting "time"; our universe being brought into being through the actions of matter in another universe; quantum shittery, etc.

[Elegiac]

Again, there's no way that statement can be honestly made given the stark lack of discussion.

You don't get it; it doesn't merit a seat at the same table precisely because it's not based on a posteriori conclusions drawn from observational evidence but a priori assumptions based on.....whatever the fuck people were smoking back in the day.

- - - Updated - - -

That's the thing about asking what was "before" the Big Bang; time as we know it started with the Big Bang, so there was no before. But "before" itself is a concept that only works when there is time.

Doesn't mean the Big Bang hypothesis isn't possible, though. There are just different theories we don't know. A previous universe's death leading to ours being born, essentially resetting "time"; our universe being brought into being through the actions of matter in another universe; quantum shittery, etc.

Petition to rename quantum physics to quantum fuckery since it borders on magic at times.

Why do electrons cease to exist between energy levels? Quantum fuckery. Why is there baryon asymmetry? Quantum fuckery. How does gravity work across nearly infinite distances? Quantum fuckery.

[Soeroah]

You don't get it; it doesn't merit a seat at the same table precisely because it's not based on a posteriori conclusions drawn from observational evidence but a priori assumptions based on.....whatever the fuck people were smoking back in the day.

- - - Updated - - -



Petition to rename quantum physics to quantum fuckery since it borders on magic at times.

Why do electrons cease to exist between energy levels? Quantum fuckery. Why is there baryon asymmetry? Quantum fuckery. How does gravity work across nearly infinite distances? Quantum fuckery.

Would that make the scientists quantum fuckists or quantum fuckers?

[Elegiac]

Would that make the scientists quantum fuckists or quantum fuckers?

Quantum fuckists has a nice ring to it.

[Queen of Hamsters]

The thing I love about Science, is that it'll gladly say "We don't know", and yet they'll never settle for that.

[Elegiac]

The thing I love about Science, is that it'll gladly say "We don't know", and yet they'll never settle for that.

The quantum fuckists will find us an answer. Maybe.

[Queen of Hamsters]

The quantum fuckists will find us an answer. Maybe.

Quantum Fuckists?... I like it! ( ͡° ͜ʖ ͡°)

[Hammerfest]

You don't get it;

No, you don't get it. You've got a circular argument on your hands. "We don't talk about certain topics because they're bullshit and because they're bullshit, we don't talk about them." That's all you've got.

[Nihilist74]

I was thinking to myself and I had a thought that I'd like some answers to. So by hawkins logic space and time began with the big bang right? So if time started with the big bang, how could anything outside of space and time exist beforehand? There had to be a cause for the big bang it couldn't just "happen". But if space and time is literally everything in this universe which enables cause and effect, how can something that is outside of cause and effect cause the big bang to happen? Anyone have any ideas?

Personally i believe in the multi universe theories and that our universe came about from the big bang as part of a never ending cycle of universes coming into existence and dying off. I seen documentaries about theories like this by serious physicists but i do not know how concrete it is. Their are mathematical models of it.

[Elegiac]

No, you don't get it. You've got a circular argument on your hands. "We don't talk about certain topics because they're bullshit and because they're bullshit, we don't talk about them." That's all you've got.

They're bullshit because they're unsubstantiated and invented a priori, and because they're unsubstantiated they do not merit discussion in the same context as science. It isn't remotely circular.

[Hammerfest]

It isn't remotely circular.

"We don't discuss unsubstantiated things and because we won't discuss them, they're unsubstantiated."

[Elegiac]

"We don't discuss unsubstantiated things and because we won't discuss them, they're unsubstantiated."

Substantiation or at the very least being derived conclusions of observations or mathematical proof is the minimum entry fee for a seat at the table. Your 'ideas' don't meet that.

[Hammerfest]

Substantiation or at the very least being derived conclusions of observations or mathematical proof is the minimum entry fee for a seat at the table. Your 'ideas' don't meet that.

Getting dizzy yet from all those circles you're making?

[Chrysia]

Again, there's no way that statement can be honestly made given the stark lack of discussion.

The actual reason those topics can't be discussed on this forum is because they lead to flame wars.

The reason they aren't discussed in science is because nobody has proposed a test for them, and science only deals with testable claims.

[Elegiac]

The actual reason those topics can't be discussed on this forum is because they lead to flame wars.

The reason they aren't discussed in science is because nobody has proposed a test for them, and science only deals with testable claims.

You can't really create a test for something not derived from empirical observation or mathematical proof.

[Doctor Funkenstein]

I was thinking to myself and I had a thought that I'd like some answers to. So by hawkins logic space and time began with the big bang right? So if time started with the big bang, how could anything outside of space and time exist beforehand? There had to be a cause for the big bang it couldn't just "happen". But if space and time is literally everything in this universe which enables cause and effect, how can something that is outside of cause and effect cause the big bang to happen? Anyone have any ideas?

What physicists refer to as "space and time," or more correctly "space-time" (they even rightfully tried to create a new word for it, but they're not known for their creativity) is not actual space or actual time. It's something else entirely, and represents all the "stuff" of the observable universe. There was a time before the Big Bang, and it did happen somewhere in a space. Those two concepts just have next to no meaning for physicists. So when they refer to space and time, they're referring to space-time, not the actual concepts of space or time but rather than the substance of it within the observable universe that seems to stretch and flow, as oppose to the absolutes of the concepts.

[Bloodwolf]

I was thinking to myself and I had a thought that I'd like some answers to. So by hawkins logic space and time began with the big bang right? So if time started with the big bang, how could anything outside of space and time exist beforehand? There had to be a cause for the big bang it couldn't just "happen". But if space and time is literally everything in this universe which enables cause and effect, how can something that is outside of cause and effect cause the big bang to happen? Anyone have any ideas?

My guess is that humans have an extremely limited understanding of nothingness and that it could be at least from my perspective that we are already living n a form of nothingness. We know from thermodynamics that nothing can just begin to exist out of nowhere (the energy of a closed system doesn't change), but what if there is a negative equivalent for the existing things we know (Energy, matter, dark energy, dark matter) so that they exactly cancel each other out? The universe would have zero energy and the big bang would just be the split of the "negative" and the "positive" part.

[Powerogue]

I was thinking to myself and I had a thought that I'd like some answers to. So by hawkins logic space and time began with the big bang right? So if time started with the big bang, how could anything outside of space and time exist beforehand? There had to be a cause for the big bang it couldn't just "happen". But if space and time is literally everything in this universe which enables cause and effect, how can something that is outside of cause and effect cause the big bang to happen? Anyone have any ideas?

It's kind of a non sequitur, because part of your question includes "before the big bang" but if time didn't exist yet, there was no "before." The universe would have existed in a state that did not involve time, which is still a non-sequitur, because I used the words "would have" and "did not", implying time.

I'm not sure we'll ever be able to wrap our minds around that.