|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The infinite space of the Universe | |||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4717 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
Is space bounded? Not in the model we have been most often been discussing, no. A boundary is an edge. Not to short your model, but it isn't well enough filled out for anyone to be able to predict what properties are forced upon it based on the few parameters you have assigned it. It does, in fact, seem to contradict most of the properties we know our universe to have. Kindly There is a spider by the water pipe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Agobot Member (Idle past 5530 days) Posts: 786 Joined: |
Wouldn't an infinite space negate the existence of god? How would god or any other entity create something that's infinite? IMHO, if space is truly infinite, there could be no creator.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Agobot writes: Wouldn't an infinite space negate the existence of god? How would god or any other entity create something that's infinite? IMHO, if space is truly infinite, there could be no creator. That's a very good question, Agobot. I have addressed that other times but I'll run it by you to see what you think. According to scripture, God is infinite, having been infinitely creating , recreating and managing things in his universe things to suit his purpose and pleasure. If space were not eternal, neither could God be eternal and without total energy as per LOT 1 being also infinite he could not have eternally existed since all things are of him an come from him in their own time. So with God, Spacetime is eternal. The people who have the real problem regarding this are all the temporal universe creationists and the temporal big bang folks whether creationists or not. They can't have it both ways. Either God and and the universe which he exists in are eternal or God is temporal. That and the thermodynamics is why I go with eternal universe including space and time. Spacetime is eternal. BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
lyx2no writes: Not in the model we have been most often been discussing, no. A boundary is an edge. That's ambiguous. If it's not bounded, it's unbounded. Which is it, (abe: bounded or unbounded)? Edited by Buzsaw, : as noted BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4717 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
What is ambiguous about "no"? Would "yes" also have been ambiguous? Would "maybe" be redundant?
Kindly There is a spider by the water pipe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
ICANT Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: Member Rating: 1.5 |
Straggler writes: At best creationist theories are a hotchpotch of alternative explanations for the effects and phenomenon that proper scientific theories have already predicted, discovered and uncovered. So when did the BBT predict inflation? Was it some 50 years or more after the theory? When there was enough problems with the BBT that it should have been discarded. Inflation was not predicted. It was necessary or the BBT was dead. It was an invented add on theory to save a failed theory. Then it was worked on and modified for the next 20 years to make it fit. God Bless, "John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3669 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
I wont go there - I'm not into talibanic science. But, before enlightening about space, do you except space is a post-uni product, or did it 'ALWAYS EXIST' - which violates the finite universe premise. The preamble rules.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3669 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
The problem with the BBT is, while there is no other known knowledge of the uni origins - this is not in itself a reason to accept the BBT. Basically, the BB is a brylcream kid's definition, namely if space is expanding this-away, it must have come from that-away, and if everything in space is getting bigger, it must have started at a smallest point. It is back zooming of some inferences.
The negative factor of the BB is that it avoids the non-negotiable factor of an external impact applying.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4717 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
I assume that your question in English is: "Do you think that space came into existence at T=0 or pre-existed the Universe which expanded into it?"; but, as you have threatened to "enlighten" me after I answer, I'm going to dodge the bullet.
Kindly There is a spider by the water pipe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Buzsaw Inactive Member |
Is space bounded or unbounded, Lyx2no?
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
IamJoseph Member (Idle past 3669 days) Posts: 2822 Joined: |
quote: I must have asked a scary question. Just to make it even more interesting - unbounded has no relationship with un-ending. My confusion is, are you not confused when speaking of the universe origins, without first stating a preamble, like which universe are you discussing - a finite or infinite one - like as if this is a superflous factor?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
lyx2no Member (Idle past 4717 days) Posts: 1277 From: A vast, undifferentiated plane. Joined: |
Buzsaw: is space bounded?
lyx2no: . no. Buzsaw: That’s ambiguous. lyx2no: What is ambiguous about “no”? Buzsaw: Is space bound or unbound? lyx2no: Yes. So as not to waste a post: It was not the question that scared me, IaJ. Kindly There is a spider by the water pipe.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Agobot Member (Idle past 5530 days) Posts: 786 Joined: |
If we accept the BB theory, what scientific and physical arguments would negate a multiple big bang thesis and the existence of multiple(infinite?) number of universes? If one big bang is possible under the quantum fluctuations premise, why wouldn't there be 2 or 3 or 10 000?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
dawkinsisNOTGod  Suspended Member (Idle past 5770 days) Posts: 33 From: Lashville, Tennessee Joined: |
God only allowed for one big bang as creation is complete. We can only destroy not create in my humble opinion.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||
Hiram  Suspended Member (Idle past 5770 days) Posts: 14 Joined: |
Whatever. Did you not have a lego set as a lid?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024