Before the Big Bang

[jordonus]

So instead of "nothingness" there was this very complex and advanced intelligence?

I think you blew my mind even more with that idea.

Didn't you get the memo?

The universe is so intricate and complex that it could have only come from an even more intricate and complex cosmic dictatorial intelligence.

- - - Updated - - -

In fact less and less scientists have begun to accept the notion of a creator of the universe.

Absolutely.

- - - Updated - - -

I fully disagree with you, sure its probably a question that might never be answered by humans at least as we know ourselves now but knowing what was before would unlock alot of door ways for us. I mean something had to be before as something caused the Big Bang and before that where did the mater and energy come from?

- - - Updated - - -

Possible, like i said short of us becoming near god like in our knowledge of the universe and almost Q or Ancients (depending on your cup of tea) We will never truly know sadly

Why pack various presumptions into your reasoning? Like in this latest post how you make the claim that something just HAD to have caused the Big Bang event; as if presuming that everything has to have a cause.

- - - Updated - - -

I love to throw this idea at people.

Our universe could be the atoms that make up an object. For all we know, our universe is a tea cup.

Yeah man, I'm totally with you on this one; for all we know: bigfoot is real, aliens really are working with the US government and abducting people, ghosts are real, psychics, astrology, homeopathy/alt medicine, etc... no.

[Martyn 470]

The first thing I thought of when reading the first few posts was the maddening whispers of Herald Volazj, which are pretty fitting.

"Gul'kafh an'shel. Yoq'al shn ky ywaq nuul - Gaze into the void. It is the perpetuity in which they dwell."
"Ywaq ma phgwa'cul hnakf - They are the whisper on the shivering wind."
"Ywaq maq oou; ywaq maq ssaggh. Ywaq ma shg'fhn - They do not die; they do not live. They are outside the cycle."

Well, I find that it's pretty fitting anyway, something must have existed before the Universe started or else ( to me, anyway) there couldn't be a Universe, creating something so vast from nothing is mind fucking.

[Darksoldierr]

We don't know, and probably won't be able to measure it in any way or form. In time, we can get closer to the point of big bang, but before that will be probably impossible.

[Tzalix]

It actually explains everything if you believe in god. In fact more and more scientists have begun to accept the notion of a creator of the universe.

Yes, and the flying spaghetti monster explains everything as well. Except, we are not after belief or faith, we want answers. Of course, according to many "gods", if their followers are to be believed, any sort of curiosity is wrong, and to question anything is a sin.

"Science adjusts its views based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation, so that belief can be preserved." -Tim Minchin

Oh, and that would be "less and less".

[cityguy193]

It actually explains everything if you believe in god. In fact more and more scientists have begun to accept the notion of a creator of the universe.

lol

/10char

[Deleted]

I struggle to get behind the concept of my mother grinding nasties to create me, let alone the big bang; But i tend to follow religion on this one, specifically the church of the flying spaghetti monster.

[oxymoronic]

It actually explains everything if you believe in god. In fact more and more scientists have begun to accept the notion of a creator of the universe.

creator has nothing to do with a "god" or religion... and there is only a handful that think this, because as one said (michio kaku) "everything is too perfect not to have a creator" but i think he is wrong. he is basing it off faith no scientific value at all. he was raised in a religious home so its easy to see how he was forced to think these things before he could form his own opinions. i mean no real scientist can truly believe in the stories that are in the bible.. noahs ark for example... adam and eve...

[Mister K]

My theory is, and I may be way off base here, is that we are apart of what happens in a black hole. We have no idea what a black hole does but we know it pulls matter and everything into itself. What if the matter that gets sucked into a black hole get jettisoned out like a massive bang inside of it. all the stuff inside becomes a new universe. forever expanding and creating new universes inside itself to be sucked in and created anew.

Yeah this was talked about in the new 'Cosmos's series ^^

- - - Updated - - -

creator has nothing to do with a "god" or religion... and there is only a handful that think this, because as one said (michio kaku) "everything is too perfect not to have a creator" but i think he is wrong. he is basing it off faith no scientific value at all. he was raised in a religious home so its easy to see how he was forced to think these things before he could form his own opinions. i mean no real scientist can truly believe in the stories that are in the bible.. noahs ark for example... adam and eve...

I don't recall him saying that but ok.

[Arlon]

Alot of people have already said "we don´t know", but i think it´s important to understand that the current theory is that the big bang is what created our laws of physics and logic. Even if there is "something", it´s nature could be a literal paradox that will never make sense to us.

[Allieskiller]

Only god knows...

[Mayhem]

It isn't hard to imagine 'nothing.' Can you imagine what lies outside of reality? Oh, you can't? Well; you're doing it right. That's how you imagine 'nothing:' By not succeeding to imagine anything on the subject.

ha, thank you, never thought of it like that, that´s a great answer

as far as i´m aware there is no prior to the big bang because there was no time... so without time a "what was before" question seems kind of silly

[Buu]

Here's some questions that can start to make you feel a touch insane if you try and comprehend them. What was before the big bang? Obviously nothing, but it goes further than that. With the universe contained in an infinitely small point, a singularity, what was 'outside' that point, if anything? How can you visualize nothing? If you think of a dot (the singularity) in...nothingness as the point from where space was about to expand, what did it look like...'around' it? Black darkness? Did the concept of no light (black), even exist?

Big Bang as people still insist in professing today is a big mistake, and hence a big fat lie.
The idea of nothing before and small point expanding is just as retarded as creationism. In fact it sound like creationism.

Brane theory say that there is a chance 2 branes collided at some point and it reset the physics in the branes, opening the chance of a new setup of sub-atomic particles that formed the present setup of dimensions and physic laws our universe have today.

The decay of dark energy inside big masses of matter (galaxies) and expansion of our universe makes more sense with the theory of Brane Collision than with that retarded magical micro-egg expanding abruptly, after appearing from nothing.

The only reason why people even talks about this OLD ANACHRONISTIC theory of the big bang it's because people that devoted their lives to research this fairy tale don't want to see years of their work being thrown to the garbage as the waste of time it is. Sooner or later they will all be dead, and there will be no reason to perpetuate the lie.

[Arlon]

That´s an ironic statement. No matter the theory, you will eventually get to the point of nothing becoming something as you move further down the line of causality.

[Dhrizzle]

Asking what was before the big bang is like asking what is north of the north pole. Not a relevant question really

(Looking at this in a Flatland sort of way). There's two ways of traveling north. One is to travel in the direction of the north pole, the other is to travel away from the south pole. If you reach the north pole and carry on traveling away from the south you will discover a new dimension (up/down), which allows you to enter "space" and see the old north/south distinction as something arbitrary to the planet. Jumping this up a couple of dimensions, if you travel to the "beginning" of the universe you just have to keep moving away from the "end" of the universe to discover what happens "before" time and "outside" space.

Following that analogy, the "beginning/north" and "end/south" poles of the universe may not be the best places from which to launch, and it might be a better idea to wait until we get to the "middle" of the universe, at least half a googol years away.

"Science adjusts its views based on what's observed. Faith is the denial of observation, so that belief can be preserved." -Tim Minchin

Oh, and that would be "less and less".

Currently observations are leaning in favour of our universe being the result of something occurring beyond its boundaries. If you can accept statements like "the sun creates heat and light" without worrying about it being a religious devotion then it is not inaccurate to say that more and more scientists are believing in a creator.
http://io9.com/did-the-higgs-boson-d...erse-512856167

That´s an ironic statement. No matter the theory, you will eventually get to the point of nothing becoming something as you move further down the line of causality.

I'm more a fan of "turtles all the way down" :-)

Where did the universe come from? The multiverse.

Where did the multiverse come from? The multi-multiverse.

Where did the X x multiverse come from? The (X+1) x multiverse.

[Juvencus]

Big Bang as people still insist in professing today is a big mistake, and hence a big fat lie.
The idea of nothing before and small point expanding is just as retarded as creationism. In fact it sound like creationism.

Brane theory say that there is a chance 2 branes collided at some point and it reset the physics in the branes, opening the chance of a new setup of sub-atomic particles that formed the present setup of dimensions and physic laws our universe have today.

The decay of dark energy inside big masses of matter (galaxies) and expansion of our universe makes more sense with the theory of Brane Collision than with that retarded magical micro-egg expanding abruptly, after appearing from nothing.

The only reason why people even talks about this OLD ANACHRONISTIC theory of the big bang it's because people that devoted their lives to research this fairy tale don't want to see years of their work being thrown to the garbage as the waste of time it is. Sooner or later they will all be dead, and there will be no reason to perpetuate the lie.

Yes because String Theory is not a dead end. Have you even heard about the latest evidence discovered in the field?

http://www.scientificamerican.com/ar...-polarization/

[Yvaelle]

Where did the X x multiverse come from? The (X+1) x multiverse.

I posted the solution earlier in the thread

Dr. Worf of Qo'noS postulated a theory on this subject decades ago - that resolves the dissonance of causality you suggest

Maybe all time is a mobius, a twist in the fabric of space where time becomes a loop

[Vargur]

Relevant

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=CzSMC5rWvos

[schwarzkopf]

Relevant

https://www.youtube.com/watch?featur...&v=CzSMC5rWvos

Silly question really, you can be both ... or neither.

[usiris]

Silly question really, you can be both ... or neither.

He started to get into it, but then went in an entirely different direction; They're 2 entirely different ideas. One is a claim about knowledge the other is a claim of faith.

like you said, someone can be one, both or neither..

[Tzalix]

Currently observations are leaning in favour of our universe being the result of something occurring beyond its boundaries. If you can accept statements like "the sun creates heat and light" without worrying about it being a religious devotion then it is not inaccurate to say that more and more scientists are believing in a creator.
http://io9.com/did-the-higgs-boson-d...erse-512856167

Something occuring beyond the boundaries of our universe does not mean there has to be a creator.

Unless you have any actual numbers that show the number of scientists believing in a creator over a period of time, then "more and more scientists are believing in a creator" is a useless statement. If we look at the bigger picture, the number has quite obviously decreased, seeing as it's not actually that long ago that the church ruled what scientists could and could not say.