could the universe began with complete zero. [Archive]

Mars Man

Nov 20, 2007, 23:51

That...is a really hard one. I have no idea...but I kind of get hung on the 'nothing for nothing' idea. As it stands, we seem to have a firm conclusion that there is nothing in the universe that we can get for nothing...everything has a cost...which would tend to imply that likewise, that there is not a singe thing which arises from, or comes from nothing. Hence, nothing comes from nothing.

The universe it self? or the possible several universes? Who really knows...

ps--I moved this here because this is the right place for it, since it didn't have anything to do with Japan. Thanks for your understanding. MM

Derfel

Nov 20, 2007, 23:51

Favorite theory? I suppose it would be the Big Bang. It seems to most realistic.

cohen avshalom

Nov 21, 2007, 02:52

ok-nice to hear from till now-and hope also other will post there opinion.
and even say why.

icarus

Annubis

Dec 8, 2007, 18:08

What is ZERO? Is it infinity and nothing together? Isn't that what space is? Do you mean VOID?

Isn't void something? Hahaha... Good question. What about time? Isn't time something... what about existence?

If you think of the space-time matrix of the universe and how mass and time affect every element in the universe, it is impossible to say that nothing ever existed. On the other hand, if you think of the space beyond matter, then time stands still because there are no particles being effected, since there are no particles. HAHAHA

It is known that all existence has a tendency toward entropy. Could this be the final state? Could this have been the original state... From chaos to order and the end state from order to chaos? What of Stephen Hawking and his Black hole theory?

Am I going on a tangent?

nanook

Dec 8, 2007, 18:59

Cause and effect, IMHO. Big bang was caused by something. If Big Bang was the birth of our universe, then the cause must have been outside (maybe something like a cell division?). We might have to wait, until the scientists find and give us a method to see outside our universe. Then, maybe, we can find out more. Until then: guesswork, IMHO.

Annubis

Dec 8, 2007, 19:08

What of the multiple universe theory and that one particle can exist in two places at once. Like the nutrino experiments in the 90s. But only when it was observed, did the nutrino exist in another place. What if nothing exists all the time and all that is exists outside of nothing at the same rate as nothing. What if we are nothing but a particle in time? What if time was the real particle and all else is nothing?

cohen avshalom

Dec 8, 2007, 22:13

what will be the temperature outside the universe?(if you could get there).
but please dont give me no-"there are not having outside the universe"-let say for this conversation there are such point-now give me the guess -what will be the temperature there(you can get down from the max (min-temperature-since you are not at the universe))

till now i have find people that like to think-so keep stay with me.

cohen avshalom charly
israel /haifa
www.icarus5.com

Annubis

Dec 8, 2007, 22:41

I assume our universe is active. If it is active, than a substantial amount of energy is created. If you could imagine the universe as a sort of star emitting radiation-like particles or energy, than the minimum temperature would probablby be... nothing... HAHAHA!!! hmmm... that is since the outside of the universe would not be effected by such energy, for it is like an iscolation chamber separating all other universes.... hmmm... but if our universe could effect other universes, such is the theory of multiple universes, then the temperature can range as high and as low as whichever tempereture is emitted by the reciprocal universe. NO? Of course who knows... I'm just having fun!! :)

cohen avshalom

Dec 8, 2007, 23:22

Annubis:
could be-that outside of the universe -it will be down the max(min temperature)???

cohen avshalom charly
israel/haifa
www.icarus5.com

Annubis

Dec 8, 2007, 23:26

I'm sorry Cohen, but I really don't understand your question. Perhaps someone else can answer.

cohen avshalom

Dec 8, 2007, 23:39

what will be the temperature-outside the universe?
could see get down from the max---min?

cohen avshalom charly
israel /haifa

Mars Man

Dec 9, 2007, 00:20

If we really wanted to ponder over such things, admittedly we're gonna have to have some basic framework around which to work. With the questions presented, really, we have none.

It is not known, nor is it knowable at the moment that there is any 'outside' the universe. Even in the hypothesis of multiply universes, as far as I know, we don't yet have any 'outside' universe because of the continuum of the 'stream' of superpositions.

However, simply and only for the fun of mental exercise. . . I say there is no temperature outside the universe.

Chi65

Dec 9, 2007, 06:28

Moebius, padam, padam...

Mars Man

Dec 9, 2007, 08:55

Howdy there Chi65 chan... You might have to give an English rendering of that too. I'm not familiar with that one ! Thanks ! MM

cohen avshalom

Dec 10, 2007, 05:07

for all the people since i have probleam with my computer- i have virus on my computer-therefore- i will reback to this topic later-after i will fix that probleam-if you like what i was writting -you can read more at icarus5-and i will reback later.
sorry that i should dial now with other thinks.
cohen avshalom charly
israel/haifa

Tsuyoiko

Dec 11, 2007, 20:14

Whether there is anything outside the universe depends on what you mean by 'universe'. If you mean the space-time continuum we're currently residing in, I'm quite sure there's something outside of that, in time and space. If by 'universe' you mean 'everything that exists', then clearly there's nothing outside of that: anything outside of it would exist and therefore by definition be inside it! The same goes for whether the universe came out of nothing, which is what I think you're asking in the OP. Our current universe came out of whatever was there before. The universe in the sense of everything that exists have always been and always will be. There was no 'before'. I think that's a hard concept to grasp because of the limitations in our thinking, not because it's not possible. The proof: the first law of thermodynamics.

Annubis

Dec 12, 2007, 23:15

What is absolute zero?
According to Icarus5, absolute zero is negative 173.16 degrees Celsius. This is zero Kalvin. Area is empty space with no matter. The area outside the universe is equivalent to a gas state in temperature at below absolute zero.

Since this is already stated on Icarus5, I suppose that the question is how much below absolute zero is the outside of the universe. In other words in which condition can nothing exist. If the outside of the universe can be compared to a gas, than in which state will a gas no longer exist?

Well... a gas can either become a solid or a liquid.

If the universe is expanding, that would assume that space and infinity are ironically finite. If such is the case, than the outside of the universe is decreasing as the universe increases and emits heat. solid?

A new question. What grows smaller when you heat it? Usually things expand... In the case of "outside the universe", it seems to be the opposite. It has antimatter-like qualities.

In my opinion, there are planets in the shape of dolphins, so anything is possible!! :)

karlyboo

Dec 14, 2007, 21:38

It's a very interesting topic in general. The point immediately before the big-bang becomes even more interesting when one considers that factors like cause-and-effect are a function of time, and time theoretically only existed after the point at which the universe came into being. Therefore before that there is no need of a 'first cause' for the big bang since the normal rules of cause-and-effect did not exist.
For there to be anything outside of the Universe (including temperature) is an impossibility as far as I can reason (which is not very far, I'll admit) as temperature relies on the energy within matter which in turn relies upon a set of dimensions to exist in. It seems entirely possible there may be other universes, but as for some interconnecting tissue between them (i.e. outside of any Universe), its nature would be totally alien since it would exist outside of space and time (leastways, I have a hard time imagining a substance with no dimensions and no time).
Unless all Universes exist within a larger 'Omniverse' that obeys a different set of physical laws yet provides enough for the Universes within to co-exist and for material to exist outside in a different state to that material existing within universes.
I love Astrophysics, it's something of a hobbyhorse of mine :)

Sono Ike

Dec 19, 2007, 04:30

o . o )?
Fav theory?? well... the big bang? Althought it has some strage points > _ > ) *she doesn't know how to say them in english*
Karlyboo was saying "and time theoretically only existed after the point at which the universe came into being." hell, the first time I read that (for a school homework I suppose) I was like... " o.o?... so... the time doesn't exist since ever? wow!!"

In my opinion, there are planets in the shape of dolphins, so anything is possible!! :)
xDDDD LOL!!!!!! I want to live in one dolphin-shape planet!!!!

Dimitree

Dec 20, 2007, 02:19

could the universe began with complete zero-??
could area change state like any other matterial done??
what is your opinion-irealy like to know?
and of course what is your favorite theory for the begining of the universe??
icarus

:souka::wave:

I can't stop myself from ridiculing sciance :)

We say that there are phisical laws and so on yet sciantists say that the universe started with a Big Bang :giggle:

Just try creating anything with a Big Bang :giggle:

Another populer statment is that if you put 19137979831978139889274 parts of watches in one bag and shake them long enough sooner or later there will be a watch formed from them :giggle::lol:

Ofc no one considers that if you realy do that all these parts will smash to eachother and they will be worth for nothing.

I would sujest to you to restrain yourself far away from any sciantifical explination about anything.
As long as they have the "asuming" factor in their "theorys" i personaly don't belive a nicle of it.

And i'm still waiting sciance to tell me what gave the positive particle of the atom positive charge and the negative negative :giggle:

Derfel

Dec 20, 2007, 05:59

As many smilies, as little content.

Random statements.

karlyboo

Dec 20, 2007, 17:49

:souka::wave:
I can't stop myself from ridiculing sciance :)
We say that there are phisical laws and so on yet sciantists say that the universe started with a Big Bang :giggle:
Just try creating anything with a Big Bang :giggle:
Another populer statment is that if you put 19137979831978139889274 parts of watches in one bag and shake them long enough sooner or later there will be a watch formed from them :giggle::lol:
Ofc no one considers that if you realy do that all these parts will smash to eachother and they will be worth for nothing.
I would sujest to you to restrain yourself far away from any sciantifical explination about anything.
As long as they have the "asuming" factor in their "theorys" i personaly don't belive a nicle of it.
And i'm still waiting sciance to tell me what gave the positive particle of the atom positive charge and the negative negative :giggle:

Would I be jumping the gun or might the belief that 'an old man with a beard clicked his fingers and made everything' be the obvious alternative theory slowly making its way towards this thread?

Yes of course all Scientists are silly silly people. Naturally none of them over the last century have been bright enough to see this all so simply the way you do. Well done. You must be smarter than all of them. We should completely abandon all our scientific achievements (including electricity, medicine and indoor plumbing) because they're obviously all founded on lies and stupidity and would never, ever work.

{Applauds slowly}

Mikawa Ossan

Dec 20, 2007, 18:41

Dimitree

Dec 21, 2007, 03:26

Dimitree, please do not eschew science completely because it makes some conclusions that you disagree with. Without science, there would be no Jref or internet to house it! Science may not be correct all the time, but that doesn't mean it should be ridiculed.
Hmmm :souka:
Have you ever considered that Inventions don't come because of sciance ?
A vewy quick example is Mr. Albert Einstein ... do you know what grades he had in school ? In particular in the field where he made his discovery ?
Thus you don't need sciance to invent.

O well i guess i will go in read only mode from now on :)
I don't feel welcome in this section.

Tsuyoiko

Dec 21, 2007, 03:42

Hmmm :souka:
Have you ever considered that Inventions don't come because of sciance ?
A vewy quick example is Mr. Albert Einstein ... do you know what grades he had in school ? In particular in the field where he made his discovery ?
Thus you don't need sciance to invent.Could you define what you mean when you use the word 'science'? From your comments I suspect you don't mean the same thing as most of the rest of us...

Nall-ohki

Dec 21, 2007, 04:01

Theoretical question:

If the universe will continue to exist forever, is there even a reason to believe it ever began?

Time is a subject on which we have only a limited understanding. We don't really know what it is, or how it behaves except in limited circumstances (and some very interesting ones as well).

People often mistake arguments about the big bang to say that the universe "began" at the big bang, but that's not really part of the theory.

All the big bang model states is the idea that at some time in the past, all matter in the universe was concentrated at a point, which then expanded rapidly outward, giving us the cosmological layout we observe.

We really don't know what came before, whether there was a "before", or whether "before" really has any meaning when it comes to this event. It's like asking how many yards worth of unicorn giggles you can throw; the question may not have any meaning.

Our current mathematical and physical models can't really take us to that point, and thus cannot be described.

True, there are some problems with the model (as there are with every model), but very few people in science disagree with it, and no current model predicts the events we see in the universe as well as it does.

karlyboo

Dec 21, 2007, 18:10

Theoretical question:
If the universe will continue to exist forever, is there even a reason to believe it ever began?
Time is a subject on which we have only a limited understanding. We don't really know what it is, or how it behaves except in limited circumstances (and some very interesting ones as well).
People often mistake arguments about the big bang to say that the universe "began" at the big bang, but that's not really part of the theory.
All the big bang model states is the idea that at some time in the past, all matter in the universe was concentrated at a point, which then expanded rapidly outward, giving us the cosmological layout we observe.
We really don't know what came before, whether there was a "before", or whether "before" really has any meaning when it comes to this event. It's like asking how many yards worth of unicorn giggles you can throw; the question may not have any meaning.
Our current mathematical and physical models can't really take us to that point, and thus cannot be described.
True, there are some problems with the model (as there are with every model), but very few people in science disagree with it, and no current model predicts the events we see in the universe as well as it does.

I believe you're describing Occam's Razor- we can't know so don't worry about explaining it, it's not important.

Annubis

Dec 21, 2007, 18:41

YAY!!! I think Dimitri is right!

Where did all these ideas come from. What are we trying to prove... Are we all just fumbling about and tripping over ourselves.
Some of the most intersting discoveries come from mistakes. Random information and sheer noise is the most interesting thing I can think of, because you never know what you will get in the end... will it be a flutter or a dead silence.

I think that scientists are curious children who are trying to make sense of the universe we live in.
The best way to live is with the eyes of a child... Moody Blues.

See Mars recently? Why is it called Mars? Oh... there is a reason...
Why did we call an addition, positive? Isn't positive a word we use for the way we think?

But I don't think we should be wondering these kinds of things to figure out if the universe begane at absolute zero, unless we want to use our imagination where anything is possible.

To really think scientificly we need charts and textbooks... :( I left my physics textbook in Canada... only have elctronics with me:)

Sono Ike

Dec 22, 2007, 01:06

Hmmm
Have you ever considered that Inventions don't come because of sciance ?
A vewy quick example is Mr. Albert Einstein ... do you know what grades he had in school ? In particular in the field where he made his discovery ?
Thus you don't need sciance to invent.

O well i guess i will go in read only mode from now on
I don't feel welcome in this section.

￢￢) In EVERYTHING, including your beloved Albert Einstein, there is a duality of things. Ok??? -sounds retarded, gomeeen!-
So, in ALL the invents of the human history there is a part creative and a part of sciance. Yes, including Albert Einstein. If not... how do his theorys became soooooo important in the sciance??
-I'm assuming that, for you, 'sciance' means numbers, theorys, logic... things like that...-

Annubis

Dec 22, 2007, 07:30

Well... if you think of the scientific method, there's your answer to what science is.

You have hypothesis, theory, and law through systematic experimentation. Hypothesis is always fun!

MadamePapillon

Dec 22, 2007, 08:04

If the universe will continue to exist forever, is there even a reason to believe it ever began?

Everything has a beginning, something cannot just appear from nothing. And, similarly, nothing lasts forever. Planets, stars, our whole universe is in a constant process of creation, destruction, and recycling, so while the universe probably wont last forever it wont disappear, it will only become something else.

A question that's plagued mankind for ages is the creation of the universe simply because we know that something can't come from nothing so that means there must have always been something out there that contributed to the universes creation but, if so, what created that...and so on and so forth. It's a neverending cycle, hence the need for religion to simplify it into something that everyone can understand. "We were created by such and such god, they are all powerful, the end." But even so, what created god?

There is so many vast theorys about the creation of our universe, the possibility of multiple universes, the places outside out own universe, it boggles the mind. In the end we are really on a quest to find the source of all creation, whatever or whomever that may be.

Sorry if I repeated what someone else has already said, I didn't fully read through all the posts.

Tsuyoiko

Dec 22, 2007, 19:29

Everything has a beginning, something cannot just appear from nothing. And, similarly, nothing lasts forever. In human experience and understanding, yes. In 'reality' (whatever that is), not necessarily.

Annubis

Dec 23, 2007, 19:46

If you really want to know how limited our conscious experience is, just think about all of the information that only our 5(human specific) senses translate into usable information. About 90% of the information that we sense is discarded. I mean, bats use sonar to see and fish see infrared. If we could see infrared, would we see ghosts? Would that change the way we see life the universe and everything? This is just a small example of how limited we are, and how vast the universe's existance is compared to ours.

Homerduff

Dec 23, 2007, 22:26

I guess that universe has always existed and there has always been materia throughout space. It's hard for us humans to imagine because in our life everything has a beginning and an end. We can't imagine what 'infinity' really is. Many scientists agree that the universe is never-ending so why should there be a beginning.

And I absolutely agree with Annubis. There are many things out there that we still don't - and maybe never - know.

Satorian

Dec 28, 2007, 02:48

To quote Hawking: "Why does the universe go to all the bother of existing?"

Why everything? Why anything?

Those are indeed questions that have literally kept me awake for many a night. It feels like trying to comprehend them, coupled with the total and utter inaptitude to truly imagine and grasp any alternative to our universe/ontology (like a perfect void for example), I arrive at this conceptual singularity where everything seems possible and nothing unacceptable. It drives me nuts.

But, at least it instills a monumental sense of awe and wonder and humility in me, sprinkling a bit of fairy dust onto life one tends to efficiently and mindlessly brush away in everyday turmoils.

Fantastic being here, innit? :)

Derfel

Dec 28, 2007, 03:00

So we're matter floating about just for fun eh? :D

Mavrek

Dec 28, 2007, 06:01

I have no idea a bout it . In my opinion the geographic researcher exactly can tell about this.I am sorry for this and hope you wouldn't mind it.Thank you.

Tsuyoiko

Dec 28, 2007, 20:38

Why everything? Why anything?I think the need to know why is just a human foible. There doesn't need to be a reason, the universe just "is".

Satorian

Dec 28, 2007, 21:35

But that's not a very satisfying conclusion. The questions still remains: "How can it be that there is anything at all? Why is it that there is anything at all, if by all indications it would be easier for nothing to exist?"

It may be that universe just "is", but that doesn't make it any less incomprehensible to me. It's the one fundamental question where all laws, theories and assumptions seem to break down.

Nall-ohki

Dec 29, 2007, 02:08

It may be that universe just "is", but that doesn't make it any less incomprehensible to me. It's the one fundamental question where all laws, theories and assumptions seem to break down.

It's true that it's fairly unsatisfying that the universe may just "be", without any explanation, but I ask what the alternative would be.

If the universe didn't exist, it wouldn't. If it did, it did. It's a binary question, and causality doesn't necessarily have a place in the question.

Satorian

Dec 29, 2007, 02:24

It feels like trying to comprehend them, coupled with the total and utter inaptitude to truly imagine and grasp any alternative to our universe/ontology (like a perfect void for example), I arrive at this conceptual singularity where everything seems possible and nothing unacceptable.

I'll quote myself there. I can't imagine an alternative.

Yes, perhaps even the dualistic, binary mode of viewing existence as something given or not, might not hold there.

That's the fascinating thing about it. It seems utterly incomprehensible, which I consider fantastic. :)

MadamePapillon

Dec 29, 2007, 13:29

I've always thought that the one purpose (except for humans of course) that most things on our own planet seem to have is to help keep other species alive. Our world (not including humans) is an almost perfect balance in which the plants exist to keep the planet healthy and to feed the herbivores, which in turn exist to feed the carnivores which in turn exist to eat the herbivores so they don't eat all the plants and so on and so forth....

That's how I imagine the universe could have a purpose. If you believe that the universe isn't everything in existance but a part of something larger, that our own universe is existing to keep other universes (or possibly somthing else) alive and vice versa in a cosmic symbiotic relationship.

If you think about it, what is the purpose of anything but to ensure the continued survival of everything. :relief: I hope that makes sense.

Satorian

Dec 29, 2007, 22:22

Chi65

Dec 30, 2007, 00:04

Well, to come back to Moebius:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Moebius_strip

But the idea is more related to the ying yang image of the east, hey, aren't you interested in such views?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ying_Yang

Just imagine the strip also to be an 8, but basically 2 poles, also as for infinity.

Or why not like Escher as a 3, could be many more corners/poles from there:
http://www.mcescher.com/Gallery/recogn-bmp/LW437.jpg

Insofar there is no beginning nor end, but its only a flat image, while a ying yang simply works also scientifcally, by seeing two poles (or more) that constantly change and have everything in it.

From there it is only a small step towards multiple universes, thus see our beloved Mr. Michio Kaku, once we are into Japan, and why not also America?:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michio_Kaku

now more complicated, but not without the same basic idea (anyhow, he can live on that).

Or read about multiverses directly:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Multiverse

In any case, you may have to rethink our western limited perception of time over again. There is the key.

Its not linear, even if we wish it to be. Also the chinese I ching (book of changes) has fine explanations, once you know, what to look for, because it is very well based on the same idea of constant change, yet still center there, at the same time. They have marvelous explanations about multiverses even at some places, no joke!

Because if you see time like a moebius loop, then you have it all at the same time, also(!) at the same time constantly changing, as we know from ying yang (very well understood in general!).

You even can endlessly go from nothing to something and "back" etc.
and outside is also inside etc.
That also matches the idea of infinity, and was surely meant this way, thus the 8 for it.

Just some food for thoughts, I cannot give a whole lecture or lesson about, but it was a theme for me for long, also in arts and installations (and my father was a natural scientist!). And I had the pleasure of getting special help from a japanese friend for a little animation model about time. He was the first one, who also felt free to play around with it, no problem in understandings for the first time. It was as much understood by many other cultures, even by sheiks and medicinmen etc.
While most westerners got dizzy far too early, but on science forums, it was pretty well understood these days, athough in their own language.

Its all there, one only has to realise it. And its easier than some think.
For example: everyone is a universe. . .to give a hint ;-)

It does not give an answer to any how comes though, it simply is.