Does Space really go on forever?

[ChristinaMarieUK]

Originally Posted by sometimes

I believe man made god to explain the universe. We know considerably more than our ancestors, yet as far as I understand it they were no less intelligent, simply ignorant. Man invents make belief characters to explain things away. Take the tooth fairy - we tell kiddies about the tooth fairy, they believe, until their ignorance is relieved. It's man's way of coping with the infinite.

What does the tooth fairy explain to small children? It is simply a story to help children cope with tooth loss. It doesn't explain anything, so I don't see how it compares at all to any concept of God. There are many concepts of God, of course.

[sometimes]

Originally Posted by ChristinaMarieUK

There are many concepts of God, of course.

Absolutely, whch is why I was keen to refer to god not God.

We are not good at coping, we 'invent' to help us cope. It's easier for a youngster to cope with teeth loss caused by a tooth fairy than understand any biological reasoning (though I was meaning more the magical disappearance of a tooth with replacement of a coin). And so it is with 'the universe' and other big stuff. It's easier to believe in a Sun god when you don't know what the sun is. For death we invented heaven, it's easier to cope with loss when we believe that 'there is a better place' - that there is a chance of being reunited.

I apologise, I seem to be going down a theological route, which is not appropriate for this thread and perhaps this forum. I will stop.

[MazH]

It was bound to happen though, wasn't it? Humans always want to know "why" even though there are often no easy answers.

[ChristinaMarieUK]

I think whenever the origin of the Universe is considered, it is appropriate to discuss whether there is a Creator of the Universe, however conceived, without getting into religion. Metaphysics as well as Theology discuss God or gods, whatever. Metaphysics being a branch of Philosophy without which we could not do Science.

I agree that every human society has invented stories to explain things, but disagree that that is an argument that proves there is no Creator. Every religion on Earth could be wrong, but there still could be a Creator.

[Strontium]

Originally Posted by Ipso Facto

So what of the theory that there is actually more than one universe?

Yeah, I believe why not, should there only be one universe? - but which one are we talking about? I don't believe in the many universes the theory that every time a choice is made the universe splits into 2, like 1 where this happened and the other where it didn't. I mean, this would mean that by simply not doing something a completely new universe, with all the matter, energy, but in a slightly different state suddenly comes into being. I guess the only way around this is that they existed side by side and had already been in existence from the start of the big bang, and only at a certain time when a choice was made, they became different and split from each other. But that doesn't help - what about choice? Does the 'universe' already know in the beginning how many multiverses it needs? Which one of the multiverses do we experience after our choice?

[Ipso Facto]

Originally Posted by sometimes

Absolutely, whch is why I was keen to refer to god not God.

We are not good at coping, we 'invent' to help us cope.

But isn't that also the basis of good science - we invent theories, which we call hypotheses, to explain the inexplicable and then those hypothese stand as 'fact' until they are either proven or disproven.

Over the years there have been many hypothese that have been torn to shreds and consigned to the bin whilst others have been shown to have been well founded. For example, many of the minor particles were only discovered when someone said, "for my equation to balance, there must be something out there that looks like ...." and then others have gone away to look for the evidence. Conversely, some will never believe in the concept of dark matter until they have seen some (or is it not seen some?) in a bottle because they only have a hypothesis (be it quite a good one!) that it exists.

The existence of God could be likened to dark matter (as long as you don't try to push the analogy too far). For many, there is a hypothesis that God exists only in matters of religion the word 'hypothesis' is usually displaced by the word 'faith'. However, unlike theories of the the physical world, this particular hypthesis is difficult to either prove or disprove.

Again over the years many of the things that were thought to be 'of God', i.e. by direct intervention, have been disproven - take Darwin for example - but that should not be taken as proof that God is only a figment of our collective imagination. I have heard even confirmed atheists stumble for words when asked for a better 'hypothesis' of what happened immediately prior to the big bang.

I personally think that there is more to God (yes, I am one of those 'people of faith') than creation, science or tooth fairies - but as some have suggested already, that is probably for a different forum.

[snowdrop]

The latest theories are.. Space as we know it is made up af multiple universes each the shape of a doughnut. ( yes I know, the mind boggles. )
So our space is enclosed in a membrane, as are the other worlds.

These thoughts are the result of a progression of theories beginning with the string theory...and the inclusion of gravity.

[Ipso Facto]

Originally Posted by snowdrop

The latest theories are.. Space as we know it is made up af multiple universes each the shape of a doughnut. ( yes I know, the mind boggles. )
So our space is enclosed in a membrane, as are the other worlds.

These thoughts are the result of a progression of theories beginning with the string theory...and the inclusion of gravity.

"Membrane" suggests something that separates two entities ... so what is on the other side? - any theories for that??

[ChristinaMarieUK]

If I remember correctly, from a book by Stephen Hawking on Branes (membranes), the hypothesis is that 2 branes collided which started the Big Bang. I think of it like bubbles in a bath, the foam being the Multiverse with each bubble being a Universe.

[russj1975]

This is a taxing question, to which there is i believe no answer. What was there before the big bang? how can something go on forever? Its like contemplating what things would be like if there were no colours, no black and no white or anything in between. it is beyond comprehension. If there is a creator, that provides one answer, but it does not answer the question, who created the creator....

Infinity exists, but does it exist only as an idea? We can count and there can be no end to the counting - it goes on forever, but we can stop counting if we chose to. Did infinity exist before Neanderthal man got clever and invented numbers? Then again, did the numbers exist before man got clever and merely discovered them?

I personally believe that space does go on forever (the universe has a size but is expanding into the nothingness of space) but i dont tend to think about it that often as it can make one mentally unstable, lol

[Adam Cheeseman]

Originally Posted by Birchy

The big bang!!! everyone is taking about it but who came up with the idea that there was such an event? I mean it's just an idea or theaory that someone has thourght of isn't it? And everyone just seems to accept that it's it.
The fact that there was nothing before the big bang is mind blowing. So there was no time, matter, anything. I am thick really about all of this stuff and I started this thread but to say there was just nothing is silly. Then answer this. WHERE DID ABSOLUTELY NOTHING COME FROM, IF THERE WAS NOTHING TO START WITH WHERE DID IT COME FROM?. There must have been something there from the start to make the big bang.

Even Nothing is Something

Incidentally, a theory is something that has been subjected to scientific testing and (generally) accepted. Something that has been proposed as being the case but not tested or accepted is an hypothesis.

Cheers,

Adam

[Strontium]

Originally Posted by Ipso Facto

"Membrane" suggests something that separates two entities ... so what is on the other side? - any theories for that??

The membranes thing is just a hypothesis for the 11 dimensional universe that comes before the creation of our space-time universe. The extent of space is not known, and its time span is unknown. These kinds of theories are only just now being tested at CERN. But the general idea is its infinite, and there are membranes spanning space, like layers of jam between the sponge layers of a cake. The big bang happened when two jam layers collided, and suddenly our time space-time 4D universe began expanding from a singularity - like a bubble expanding.

[Ipso Facto]

Originally Posted by russj1975

This is a taxing question, to which there is i believe no answer ... i dont tend to think about it that often as it can make one mentally unstable, lol

You are right: it's good to ponder the imponderable from time to time (some people even do it for a living) but not to let it ruin your life.

[Ipso Facto]

Originally Posted by Strontium

The membranes thing is just a hypothesis for the 11 dimensional universe that comes before the creation of our space-time universe. The extent of space is not known, and its time span is unknown. These kinds of theories are only just now being tested at CERN. But the general idea is its infinite, and there are membranes spanning space, like layers of jam between the sponge layers of a cake. The big bang happened when two jam layers collided, and suddenly our time space-time 4D universe began expanding from a singularity - like a bubble expanding.

What flavour was the jam? I hope it wasn't black currant; I hate black currant!

[hsl]

Originally Posted by Strontium

The membranes thing is just a hypothesis for the 11 dimensional universe that comes before the creation of our space-time universe. The extent of space is not known, and its time span is unknown. These kinds of theories are only just now being tested at CERN. But the general idea is its infinite, and there are membranes spanning space, like layers of jam between the sponge layers of a cake. The big bang happened when two jam layers collided, and suddenly our time space-time 4D universe began expanding from a singularity - like a bubble expanding.

that makes no sense whatsoever and just throws up more questions than answers imo.

[Strontium]

Originally Posted by hsl

that makes no sense whatsoever and just throws up more questions than answers imo.

I absolutely agree, its a great big mess of jam. But seriously, if our universe is like this then what on earth are we supposed to do with it?

[Adam Cheeseman]

Originally Posted by Strontium

I absolutely agree, its a great big mess of jam. But seriously, if our universe is like this then what on earth are we supposed to do with it?

Why do anything with it?

[Ipso Facto]

Originally Posted by Strontium

I absolutely agree, its a great big mess of jam. But seriously, if our universe is like this then what on earth are we supposed to do with it?

To an extent I agree with Adam although I suppose that we could try to understand it a bit more ... Why? ... because it is there. Hovever, I would suggest that we would be better served by concentrating on matters a little nearer to home, let's say, planet earth. How can we use our natural resources sustainably and to everyones benefit and how do we stem the effects of global warming?

[hsl]

Originally Posted by ChristinaMarieUK

I think whenever the origin of the Universe is considered, it is appropriate to discuss whether there is a Creator of the Universe, however conceived, without getting into religion. Metaphysics as well as Theology discuss God or gods, whatever. Metaphysics being a branch of Philosophy without which we could not do Science.

I agree that every human society has invented stories to explain things, but disagree that that is an argument that proves there is no Creator. Every religion on Earth could be wrong, but there still could be a Creator.

There has to be something that created everything.IMO every religion is wrong, and it's obvious - every holy book that is read today is edited and not the original book. So anyone who bases their beliefs on such books is wrong to do so.

Some higher being MUST have created the original settings for life, all the chemicals etc... I just have no faith in any religion and all the selfish ways of people.

[Ipso Facto]

Originally Posted by hsl

IMO every religion is wrong, and it's obvious - every holy book that is read today is edited and not the original book. So anyone who bases their beliefs on such books is wrong to do so.

Modern relgious texts may not be perfect but they are probably the best that we have particularly when you consider that most, if not all, religions began with an oral tradition, i.e. one of story telling and where nothing was written down. However, in recent years, there has been a vast amount of research to get as closer to the original meaning and content of the texts contained in the older manuscripts and scrolls but, like yourself, I realise that they will never be 100%. There are bits missing and texts that had already been subjected to editorial change. None-the-less, I feel that your assertion that "anyone who bases their beliefs on such books is wrong to do so" is a little bit harsh.

Scriptual passages from many sacred texts can be inpirational if they are used in the right way and whilst I am possibly in agreement with you to some extent in that I feel that their literal interpretation can be misleading, I do believe that their underlying message is one of love and hope.

Take the creation story from the Biblical book of Genesis as an example of a passage open to literal misinterpratation - if you read it for yourself you will find that there are actually two versions, one with an optimistic ending, the other rather less so. I personally do not accept either of them as a literal truth: I suppose that I am more of a Darwinist than a Creationist and I have real problems with the concept of Intelligent Design - the evidence for an evolutionary process is compelling. But stories such as these were "invented" to try to explain the origins of life: I suppose that in their own way these early theologians were generating the original hypothesis for the creation of the world, the universe and all that, that long pre-dates the Big Bang Theory (which for me is still within the realms of an hypothesis requiring a bit more hard evidence before we can move on). However, the thing that really amazes me is that, dispite their less than perfect appreciation of time, they did get the order of the events of "creation" more-or-less correct ... HOW DID THEY KNOW?

Some higher being MUST have created the original settings for life, all the chemicals etc... I just have no faith in any religion and all the selfish ways of people.

This is a perfectly admissible stance but don't be tempted to confuse the ideals that most religions hold dear with the waywardness of human nature.

[ChristinaMarieUK]

Originally Posted by hsl

There has to be something that created everything.IMO every religion is wrong, and it's obvious - every holy book that is read today is edited and not the original book. So anyone who bases their beliefs on such books is wrong to do so.

Some higher being MUST have created the original settings for life, all the chemicals etc... I just have no faith in any religion and all the selfish ways of people.

One of the differences between religious and humanistic views of humanity, is that religions tend to teach about the selfishness of humans, while humanistic views tend to deny it.

[ChristinaMarieUK]

About Scripture and Genesis 1-11.

Consider the following scenario.

A committee meeting for a project. They are discussing whether to have more people join the committee.

Member 1 : "Too many cooks spoil the broth!"

Member 2: "Many hands make light work!"

We still sometimes argue using sayings and proverbs as well as logic.

At the time Genesis 1-11 was told, the cultures used myths about the world. When compared with Gilgamesh and Atrahasis, Genesis 1-11 look like a counter-myth, just as the above example of counter-proverb.

Interestingly, Genesis 1 says that God created the 'greater and lesser lights, and the stars also'. It deliberately does not use the words 'sun' and 'moon' because these words had a double meaning - gods and goddesses, as well as the physical objects. Mars and Venus still have double meanings.

Another interesting fact is that in Genesis 1 God tells the Earth to bring forth creatures, and He tells the seas to bring forth creatures.