Origins of the Universe

[ShimmerSwirl]

Simply put...where did anything come from? I can wrap my head around existing things changing into something new, but I can't understand where things originated from. I'm talking about the most basic, trace elements (or whatever they are) that initially formed into the universe. Where did those things come from?

[Deleted]

Science doesn't have the answer to that question, only religion does.

[Puupi]

Big bang. Probably.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_History

Big History might be something you'd like to take a look at.

[Lynarii]

Evolution and universal genesis are completely different things. Evolution is, for the most part, fairly understood at this point. Universal genesis is not, at best we have a handful of educated guesses as to what might have happened, but any claim of true understanding of the process and details is still a long long way off.

[mage21]

People will tell you to separate out abiogenesis from evolution. We have no idea how to explain abiogenesis, so we don't try to. We just tell you that it happened somehow, just take it on faith, and then evolution took over.

After abiogenesis, the spontaneously created life form slowly changed into other life forms. The biggest hurdle for evolution to overcome is the lack of vast amounts of transitional fossils. That is, one large organism did not suddenly become another overnight; there would be gradual change over vast amounts of time. Unfortunately the abundance of these types of fossils haven't shown up, only single examples, many of which are debated. There should be so many that we find them everywhere.

[Machismo]

The simple answer is, we don't know... yet. Anyone who says they know what happened before the Big Bang, is selling you something.

[Kalis]

Evolution is what happened once life had started, it does not sound as if evolution is what you are asking about.

[Puupi]

Science doesn't have the answer to that question, only religion does.

DISCLAIMER: That doesn't mean the answer is correct.

[Neyze]

Out with the old, in with the new

[P for Pancetta]

At first there was the beginning (or maybe it wasn't the beginning, but for now it is) some people call this moment the Big bang, energy happened and filled the universe, some elements where created here that are not created by our universe naturally. Many many years later it has clumped together in various places and conditions, one of these places is earth. Sometime when our earth was younger complex molecules where created in the earth's "seas". We can create complex molecules simulating these conditions, some which are the basic ingredients of life.

There is no global consensus on how these complex molecules came together to form the first life though.

after this life started living and changing like everything else in this universe.

[Jaransan]

Science doesn't have the answer to that question, only religion does.

Religion and Science are amusing opposites in regards to the question.
Religion has one theory that is impossible to confirm or deny that it wont bother looking to deeply at and brooks no argument about. It says thats the answer.

Science has a bunch of theories based on well educated guesses and an understanding of other existing aspects of our universe, but refuses to be so pretentious as to declare any of its potential answers as absolute without absolute proof.

Nominally though, since op was presumably asking for the scientific answer or at least a theory therein. I believe the working consensus is on some form of big bang dispersing atoms across the cosmos in a variety of configurations and combinations, thus producong the basic buildings blocks of existence which then formed planets, proteins, atnosphere and life forms capable of one day becoming the ones we know today.

[Underverse]

People will tell you to separate out abiogenesis from evolution. We have no idea how to explain abiogenesis, so we don't try to. We just tell you that it happened somehow, just take it on faith, and then evolution took over.

After abiogenesis, the spontaneously created life form slowly changed into other life forms. The biggest hurdle for evolution to overcome is the lack of vast amounts of transitional fossils. That is, one large organism did not suddenly become another overnight; there would be gradual change over vast amounts of time. Unfortunately the abundance of these types of fossils haven't shown up, only single examples, many of which are debated. There should be so many that we find them everywhere.

Your understanding of evolution and abiogenesis is rudimentary. First, know that fossilization is an incredibly rare event, and the preservation of fossils within an ever-changing landscape compounds their contemporary rarity. One must also consider how much territory there is to cover; new fossils are being discovered all the time, and we aren't even close to scraping the surface of what there is to fine.

As for abiogenesis, you're completely wrong. Not only have many people put forth hypotheses on the process, but experiments have actually been done to confirm some of these hypotheses. Skin through the wikipedia page when you have time.

[NED funded]

Since that you are looking for the origin of life rather than how evolution works.

[ShimmerSwirl]

People will tell you to separate out abiogenesis from evolution. We have no idea how to explain abiogenesis, so we don't try to. We just tell you that it happened somehow, just take it on faith, and then evolution took over.

After abiogenesis, the spontaneously created life form slowly changed into other life forms. The biggest hurdle for evolution to overcome is the lack of vast amounts of transitional fossils. That is, one large organism did not suddenly become another overnight; there would be gradual change over vast amounts of time. Unfortunately the abundance of these types of fossils haven't shown up, only single examples, many of which are debated. There should be so many that we find them everywhere.

I didn't even know the field of abiogenesis existed until now, good to understand the distinction between that and evolution.

[Enthusiastic Steward]

Your post and your thread title are asking different questions.

[Sky High]

water, basically the reason we have life to begin with.
https://blogs.scientificamerican.com...e-needs-water/

[Kalis]

I didn't even know the field of abiogenesis existed until now, good to understand the distinction between that and evolution.

In chronological order:

1. No idea
2. Big Bang
3. Stuff happened
4. Planets and shit
5. Abiogenesis - the formation of life
6. Evolution
7. Dinosaurs
8. Humans
9. Trump

Which part do you want explained? Is it 1-4, or 5-6?

[gioderpington]

The working hypothesis is that a pool of elements, by chance, managed to form a self replicating molecule within in that pool. For before that the big bang explains most of the rest. Before the big bang not sure.
MS in evolutionary psychology.

[Puupi]

This thread somehow sparkled an idea I would like to see: Donald Trump giving out a scientific lecture. I would pay big money to see that, that would be the best stand up comedy ever.

[ShimmerSwirl]

Nominally though, since op was presumably asking for the scientific answer or at least a theory therein. I believe the working consensus is on some form of big bang dispersing atoms across the cosmos in a variety of configurations and combinations, thus producong the basic buildings blocks of existence which then formed planets, proteins, atnosphere and life forms capable of one day becoming the ones we know today.

My question really is where did those atoms in your example come from? Once things (even if 'things' is just atoms) exist, I can conceive at least somewhat of how they turn into something else over time. Understanding where the first components came from is what I struggle with.