How The Universe Came Into Being

[OraProMe]

I don't know anything about cosmology so I can't contribute, but I'd be really interested to read the views of both atheists and believers...

[AccountDeleted]

Well, to get really scientific, put an empty glass on a table and wait. If the nothing in the glass ever turns into something, then you will know that nothing can produce something, but of course, if nothing ever happens, then, well, you know......

Edited January 5, 2010 by nunsense

[Aloysius]

actually, there's already air and space in that cup. it's impossible to scientifically observe nothingness, since it doesn't exist. it'd only be theoretical to say that there was nothingness before the universe came into being; it is entirely possible for the universe to be eternal (and Aquinas, since he loves Aristotle so much, said that from the point of view strictly of the natural law philosophy without divine revelation, it is entirely possible to have an eternal universe with no beginning and no end)

I think a decent argument could be made from philosophy that there was nothingness before the big bang and that all matter came into being at that moment and then expanded; but scientifically, one might say that we could trace the big bang as coming from an infinitessimally small concentration, so that the further back in time you went, the smaller that concentration of matter in the singularity that caused the big bang is squeezed in... eternally because it's just infinitessimally smaller and smaller, and thus the universe is eternal. when Aquinas said it'd be possible philosophically to say that we had an eternal universe, however, he didn't exactly forget his first cause argument and proposed that it was still necessary, even if there is no beginning, to have a first cause. if there is an eternal universe with no beginning or end, there must be a cause for that universe which also has no beginning or end, a causeless cause.

anyway, yeah, the universe as we know it totally exploded from a singularity some 13.7 billion years ago or so, but the real juicy juice of the philosophical inquiry comes when you ask where that singularity came from. and what the nature is of whatever bordered that singularity... was there indeed nothingness bordering that singularity... can we even imagine a border to existence in such a way that beyond a certain line there is literally nothing? not even blackness, not even a void (because in a void there is still space)... the singularity contained all that we know of both matter and space, so there was no space surrounding it; so how could it expand? how could it blow? it had nowhere to blow up into, as it were; the very "explosion" of the big bang created the space into which it expanded. mind boggling... and really, thinking about it that way completely takes away the security of trying to say there's an eternal infinitessimally shrinking universe going back into endless ages; because it still doesn't solve the problem of the nothingness bordering it.

it is my opinion that contemplating nothingness is the surest way to realizing the existence of God. either our intellects truly are incompetent to imagine nothingness and thus there is a defect in our intellect, because we cannot apply our logic to this basic fact of the beginning of the universe about nothingness (because think about it, every time you imagine nothingness, you imagine blackness, which is something, you imagine a void of space, which is still something; it's impossible to imagine true nothingness, imagination can't do it), or there's nothing wrong with our intellects because there's no such thing as nothingness, and there really had to be something non-material and non-spatial "bordering" as it were, the edge of all existence contained in the singularity of the big bang. that which we call the spiritual, which continues to this day to border the edge of all material existence, where we imagine there to be nothingness, there is certainly something.

[Varg]

The Big Bang.

[Mr.Cat]

[quote][url="http://www.vatican.va/roman_curia/congregations/cfaith/cti_documents/rc_con_cfaith_doc_20040723_communion-stewardship_en.html"][b]Communion and Stewardship: Human Persons Created in the Image of God[/b][/url] - Cardinal Ratzinger ([i]Pope Benedict XVI[/i])
[b]63[/b]. According to the widely accepted scientific account, the universe erupted 15 billion years ago in an explosion called the “Big Bang” and has been expanding and cooling ever since. Later there gradually emerged the conditions necessary for the formation of atoms, still later the condensation of galaxies and stars, and about 10 billion years later the formation of planets. In our own solar system and on earth (formed about 4.5 billion years ago), the conditions have been favorable to the emergence of life. While there is little consensus among scientists about how the origin of this first microscopic life is to be explained, there is general agreement among them that the first organism dwelt on this planet about 3.5-4 billion years ago. Since it has been demonstrated that all living organisms on earth are genetically related, it is virtually certain that all living organisms have descended from this first organism. Converging evidence from many studies in the physical and biological sciences furnishes mounting support for some theory of evolution to account for the development and diversification of life on earth, while controversy continues over the pace and mechanisms of evolution. While the story of human origins is complex and subject to revision, physical anthropology and molecular biology combine to make a convincing case for the origin of the human species in Africa about 150,000 years ago in a humanoid population of common genetic lineage. However it is to be explained, the decisive factor in human origins was a continually increasing brain size, culminating in that of homo sapiens. With the development of the human brain, the nature and rate of evolution were permanently altered: with the introduction of the uniquely human factors of consciousness, intentionality, freedom and creativity, biological evolution was recast as social and cultural evolution. Pope John Paul II stated some years ago that “new knowledge leads to the recognition of the theory of evolution as more than a hypothesis.[/quote]Two thoughts: David Hume (1711-1776) suggested the causality was a circular argument and an assumption. The Catholic doctrine of “creatio ex nihilo” suggests that something came from nothing, the external agent causing this being God. So perhaps we shouldn’t be so quick to assume the cosmological argument is infallible, but rather an argument with both positive and negative points, for and against.

Edited January 5, 2010 by Mr.CatholicCat

[Chestertonian]

[quote name='Varg' date='05 January 2010 - 06:43 AM' timestamp='1262699025' post='2030159']
The Big Bang.
[/quote]

Most theists I know would agree with you.

[mommas_boy]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='05 January 2010 - 07:13 AM' timestamp='1262693610' post='2030147']
actually, there's already air and space in that cup. it's impossible to scientifically observe nothingness, since it doesn't exist. it'd only be theoretical to say that there was nothingness before the universe came into being; it is entirely possible for the universe to be eternal (and Aquinas, since he loves Aristotle so much, said that from the point of view strictly of the natural law philosophy without divine revelation, it is entirely possible to have an eternal universe with no beginning and no end)

I think a decent argument could be made from philosophy that there was nothingness before the big bang and that all matter came into being at that moment and then expanded; but scientifically, one might say that we could trace the big bang as coming from an infinitessimally small concentration, so that the further back in time you went, the smaller that concentration of matter in the singularity that caused the big bang is squeezed in... eternally because it's just infinitessimally smaller and smaller, and thus the universe is eternal. when Aquinas said it'd be possible philosophically to say that we had an eternal universe, however, he didn't exactly forget his first cause argument and proposed that it was still necessary, even if there is no beginning, to have a first cause. if there is an eternal universe with no beginning or end, there must be a cause for that universe which also has no beginning or end, a causeless cause.

anyway, yeah, the universe as we know it totally exploded from a singularity some 13.7 billion years ago or so, but the real juicy juice of the philosophical inquiry comes when you ask where that singularity came from. and what the nature is of whatever bordered that singularity... was there indeed nothingness bordering that singularity... can we even imagine a border to existence in such a way that beyond a certain line there is literally nothing? not even blackness, not even a void (because in a void there is still space)... the singularity contained all that we know of both matter and space, so there was no space surrounding it; so how could it expand? how could it blow? it had nowhere to blow up into, as it were; the very "explosion" of the big bang created the space into which it expanded. mind boggling... and really, thinking about it that way completely takes away the security of trying to say there's an eternal infinitessimally shrinking universe going back into endless ages; because it still doesn't solve the problem of the nothingness bordering it.

it is my opinion that contemplating nothingness is the surest way to realizing the existence of God. either our intellects truly are incompetent to imagine nothingness and thus there is a defect in our intellect, because we cannot apply our logic to this basic fact of the beginning of the universe about nothingness (because think about it, every time you imagine nothingness, you imagine blackness, which is something, you imagine a void of space, which is still something; it's impossible to imagine true nothingness, imagination can't do it), or there's nothing wrong with our intellects because there's no such thing as nothingness, and there really had to be something non-material and non-spatial "bordering" as it were, the edge of all existence contained in the singularity of the big bang. that which we call the spiritual, which continues to this day to border the edge of all material existence, where we imagine there to be nothingness, there is certainly something.
[/quote]

Beautiful post. +1

[Lilllabettt]

"Nothing comes from nothing. Nothing ever could."

~The Sound of Music

What other authority could you possibly need?

[cmotherofpirl]

[quote name='Varg' date='05 January 2010 - 09:43 AM' timestamp='1262699025' post='2030159']
The Big Bang.
[/quote]
Interestingly enough, the Big Bang theory was proposed by a Catholic priest.

[Oliver]

God created the Universe using the big bang. That is what I believe.

[Theologian in Training]

[quote name='Aloysius' date='05 January 2010 - 08:13 AM' timestamp='1262693610' post='2030147']
actually, there's already air and space in that cup. it's impossible to scientifically observe nothingness, since it doesn't exist. it'd only be theoretical to say that there was nothingness before the universe came into being; it is entirely possible for the universe to be eternal (and Aquinas, since he loves Aristotle so much, said that from the point of view strictly of the natural law philosophy without divine revelation, it is entirely possible to have an eternal universe with no beginning and no end)

I think a decent argument could be made from philosophy that there was nothingness before the big bang and that all matter came into being at that moment and then expanded; but scientifically, one might say that we could trace the big bang as coming from an infinitessimally small concentration, so that the further back in time you went, the smaller that concentration of matter in the singularity that caused the big bang is squeezed in... eternally because it's just infinitessimally smaller and smaller, and thus the universe is eternal. when Aquinas said it'd be possible philosophically to say that we had an eternal universe, however, he didn't exactly forget his first cause argument and proposed that it was still necessary, even if there is no beginning, to have a first cause. if there is an eternal universe with no beginning or end, there must be a cause for that universe which also has no beginning or end, a causeless cause.

anyway, yeah, the universe as we know it totally exploded from a singularity some 13.7 billion years ago or so, but the real juicy juice of the philosophical inquiry comes when you ask where that singularity came from. and what the nature is of whatever bordered that singularity... was there indeed nothingness bordering that singularity... can we even imagine a border to existence in such a way that beyond a certain line there is literally nothing? not even blackness, not even a void (because in a void there is still space)... the singularity contained all that we know of both matter and space, so there was no space surrounding it; so how could it expand? how could it blow? it had nowhere to blow up into, as it were; the very "explosion" of the big bang created the space into which it expanded. mind boggling... and really, thinking about it that way completely takes away the security of trying to say there's an eternal infinitessimally shrinking universe going back into endless ages; because it still doesn't solve the problem of the nothingness bordering it.

it is my opinion that contemplating nothingness is the surest way to realizing the existence of God. either our intellects truly are incompetent to imagine nothingness and thus there is a defect in our intellect, because we cannot apply our logic to this basic fact of the beginning of the universe about nothingness (because think about it, every time you imagine nothingness, you imagine blackness, which is something, you imagine a void of space, which is still something; it's impossible to imagine true nothingness, imagination can't do it), or there's nothing wrong with our intellects because there's no such thing as nothingness, and there really had to be something non-material and non-spatial "bordering" as it were, the edge of all existence contained in the singularity of the big bang. that which we call the spiritual, which continues to this day to border the edge of all material existence, where we imagine there to be nothingness, there is certainly something.
[/quote]

How do we know about "nothingness" to begin with? Where does the concept of "ex nihilo" originate?

[ThePenciledOne]

Where is that trio?!?!?!

As in Hitchens, Dawkins and Hawking?

[Fidei Defensor]

[quote name='cmotherofpirl' date='05 January 2010 - 11:06 AM' timestamp='1262711183' post='2030198']
Interestingly enough, the Big Bang theory was proposed by a Catholic priest.
[/quote]
Interestingly enough, your Church was founded by a Jew.

All meaningless.

[kamiller42]

[quote name='fidei defensor' date='05 January 2010 - 01:57 PM' timestamp='1262717863' post='2030255']
Interestingly enough, your Church was founded by a Jew.

All meaningless.
[/quote]
Interestingly incorrect. The fact Christianity and the Church was founded by a Jew has significant meaning. Would it be the same if its founder was Muslim, Buddhist, or some pagan religion? No.

[Varg]

[quote name='Oliver' date='05 January 2010 - 12:08 PM' timestamp='1262711285' post='2030199']
God created the Universe using the big bang. That is what I believe.
[/quote]
Why would he bother using the big bang when he could just create it like *poof*?