It is possible for matter and energy to come from nothing? Also why is there something rather than..

I didn't say there was. I said we have experimental and observational data supporting the evolution of the Universe from a hot dense state we call the BB.
But of course if we look at the BB as t=0, then there was no before, no nothing, that we understand at this time, so one can logically assume "nothing".

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I think "nothing" and "something" are relative and dependent upon what else is doing the interacting and/or observing.

For example, the Earth exists for us but does it "exist" for a neutrino, something that can pass right through the Earth like it wasn't even there?

The sky exists for us but does it "exist" for something like a rock buried underground, which can't perceive or interact with the sky?

A rock, like a human, can respond or react to a hill by rolling down it. Therefore a hill exists for both a rock and a human.

If you can't directly or indirectly observe or interact with something, for all intents and purposes, does it exist for you? And yet, at the same time, it might exist for something that can perceive or interact with it.

For example, certain colors "exist" for some birds, insects and special cameras but not for the unaided eyes of humans.

And so it follows this Universe "exists" for us because we can perceive and interact with it but it might be "nothing" to some other unknown entity that cannot perceive or interact with our Universe.

That is because what we can observe and interact with is limited to the spectrum of existence our senses and bodies are able to detect and react to. We could be only detecting a small sliver of the true Universe. Indeed, the true Universe (if we had the power to detect it in its entirety) might amount to our concept of Nothing. But because we can only interact with and perceive parts of the true Universe, it appears to us that there are separate things and entities.

For instance, suppose you're looking at a colorful picture on the wall. And in the picture you can see the image of a bird. Now suppose something happened to your eyes that suddenly enabled them to see more or less colors. With your new eyesight you turn to look back at the picture and the image of the bird is gone. The bird no longer exists for you and now you wonder whether if it was even really there in the first place. All you see is a square. That is because your original color palette you used to detect contrasting colors and images (like the bird image) has been altered. The colors now blend together and none stand out any more than another in a way that would form an image of a bird.

Perhaps that is how our observation and interaction with the Universe works. By being an existent with only finite powers of perception and interaction, we observe and interact with the Universe by a process of subtraction. In other words, we can see and interact with some things precisely because we can't see and interact with everything. And perhaps the more we can and the better we get at observing and interacting with the true Universe, the more it appears and becomes to us what it truly is: Nothing.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

The thing is that not All Neutrinos pass through the Earth , hence the Sudbury detector in Ontario of Neutrinos

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

We actually don't know - "The Big Bang theory does not provide any explanation for the initial conditions of the universe; rather, it describes and explains the general evolution of the universe going forward from that point on."

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

But after reading onward to the top of page two I got lost in confusion what point people were trying to make.

 

To your first statement , They don't know , hence the problem , something from nothing , which is totally irrational and illogical

To your last statement not surprised

 

Evidence shows that something cannot originate from nothing and that is if we trust the evidence of our eyes, let alone our instruments which are more sensitive than our eyes.

It doesn't matter which way you cut it, our life experiences and our experiments show us definitely that something cannot come from nothing.

My conclusion is: The universe has always been there. Everything we see around and in space has always been there in one form or another. In other words, the universe must be eternal.

 

It would seem like, if the universe quantum tunneled out of a singularity, the universe would have had been made out of only energy in order to be capable of having the material escape. Then energy doesn't have mass, so then it would not be constrained to a singularity...

It seems like this theory could be missing a lot of aspects about the universe. The odds of a person tunneling through the earth could only happen once in the lifetime of the universe. The more massive something is, the greater the odds of it not occurring. Then the odds of the entire universe quantum jumping would be more than astronomical, almost infinite.

 

If we divided the "fabric" of space-time into separated threads of time and space, then one could theoretically move along a time thread without space restrictions and/or move along a space thread without time restrictions. These characteristics are not inertial. Neither matter or energy can act this way. Energy moves at the speed of light, but it has time and space woven together as wavelength-frequency and therefore is connected to the fabric of space-time. This unique state of separated space and time only occurs within a pure speed of light reference, different from energy.

If one could move in time without space restrictions, you essentially could see the entire universe progress in time, simultaneously. If one could move in space, without time restrictions, you can be anywhere in the universe at the same time. Conceptually, one way to do this, is if the universe was a point. As a point, one can move forward in time and see this entire point universe progress, simultaneously. You can also move anywhere, in the point, in zero time. This point is a unique state, where separated threads of time and space, and the fabric of space-time, compressed to zero, see the same thing. This is where thread of time and a thread of space, cross. This is not a fabric, yet, because there is only one space-time interface.

 

Even considering that, there is no proven scientific theory that states that the presence of gravity should even exist in that frame or from energy alone. Therefore, there would be no singularity. There is no spoon, so to speak. The theory would be implying that a singularity or a large force of gravity could be created from energy alone.

I think the appearance of mass would cause the universe to expand due to the Special Theory of Relativity. A particle of mass wouldn't be able to travel the speed of light. Then from the frame of reference of mass, the universe would be larger. In effect, mass wouldn't cause the universe to collapse, but it would cause it to expand from it's new frame of reference. "Masses" measuring rods would grow bigger traveling slower and slower than the speed of light, from when it was energy. Then it just so happens that gravity is losing the war against dark energy...

 

The mistake that the scientists make is that they assume that everything was born at the Big Bang, that
the universe came from nothing.
The universe came from something. Where did this something come from is quite an other question.

We should first find out what is this something. If I had to quess, this something is the fundamental
particles: electrons and positrons. They did not come from the Big Bang. They were present at the Big
Bang.

 

It doesn't necessarily have to be electrons and positrons.

It could also be that a giant Bose-Einstein condensate of gravitons may have formed very early on, have lasted forever, and which accounts for both dark matter and dark energy.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencet...niverse-NO-beginning-explain-dark-energy.html

http://www.techtimes.com/articles/3...suggests-universe-has-no-beginning-no-end.htm

 

It may have. Although still speculative, it is far more likely than accepting some magical, omnipotent being that had no begining that waved his and and puff!