The Eternal Universe.

Discussion in 'Religion' started by Xelasnave.1947, Sep 11, 2018.

  1. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member

    The concept of an eternal universe is not a new idea and clearly many very intelligent phillosophers have presented this solid idea to such a degree that the logic of all these folk would seem to make the proposition of an eternal universe perhaps the best determination on cosmology we have.
    The big bang takes us back to a point where we can say time and space began but it seems that even before the big bang there was something suggesting that our science observations suggest strongly the universe is eternal.

    The eternal universe would mean that there was no point that we could call creation which in turn would logically mean there is no creator.

    Theists will avoid this thread for obvious reasons as they will not argue against the proposition that there was no creator but for the atheist here what observations do you think give this strong idea even more support.

    If there are any theists who would like to contribute could you comment upon how a God would fit into an eternal universe.
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  3. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    None, I'm afraid. Science can only tell us things as far back as the Big Bang. Anything before that event is pure speculation, with no evidence at all.
    All we can say is that we experience space and time within our universe. We can say nothing about what might go on, if anything at all, outside (not that "outside" is meaningful in this context as it presupposes there is something beyond the universe).
    There is certainly on-going scientific enquiry into the nature of our own universe, whether it is flat, open or closed, and current evidence suggests it is pretty close to flat... meaning (if true) it will likely rip itself apart in the far distant future, long after the cold death. Highly unlikely to be eternal. There are even arguments against the theorised bang-crunch cycle that might be a model for an eternal universe.
    Once you step outside the universe, i.e. talk about how the universe was created, or what existed before, my view is that you're into the realms of meaninglessness. We can speculate, but there is zero means of validating any notion. Did time even exist before the Big Bang, which is our only reference point for the start of time? Does time have any meaning outside the universe? We can speculate, but in doing so can only use as reference points the properties of the universe in which we reside. And there is no way of knowing whether these properties have meaning should there be any realm "outside" of the universe. If time has no meaning, can something be considered eternal with any meaning? So we can only talk about the universe being eternal with regards what goes on inside it. And I don't think science supports the notion of the eternal universe... at least no yet.

    There was an interesting paper in 2015 or so, by Ali and Das, that seem to suggest the universe could be eternal, but it is just one of many theories.

    So I'm very much in the "I don't know" category. But I don't think science can provide any evidence for it.
    Yazata likes this.
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  5. Michael 345 Looking for Bali in Nov Valued Senior Member

    Full disclosure - I am not a theist but my unscientific personal opinion with nothing that I am aware of being published and I only thought of it today is

    Where was I? Oh right - god would fit in because god is eternal and the Universe has always been within god

    Not in its current form

    Here's what happened

    The ETERNAL lottery (the one that dictates everything can, and eventually will, happen) noted in the text of the typing monkeys a coded message (still waiting on the full text of Shakespeare - although some contend since Shakespeare has done it the monkeys can work on something else)

    Please don't ask where the monkeys, typewriters, paper etc etc came from

    Where was I? Oh yes - the code could be translated, from billions of written communications markings, into a single message


    Of course god being god got right on it and it was shat our

    Our section took 6 Earth units (local name days)

    That was fine as the ETERNAL lottery had, up until then, never had such a large event

    Soooo that's my blah blah blah hypothesis

    I was working on one about dinosaurs but it was stolen

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Edit - spat out not shat out sorry. Not sure much of a improvement but Babble is clear

    Word not Fart
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement

    to hide all adverts.
  7. Xelasnave.1947 Valued Senior Member


    Yes I was not thinking of using evidence given the section we are in....

    You cant say that...we dont know past the big bang and therefore we dont know what is possible or can not give any specilation a likely unlikely or highly unlikely.

    We just dont know.

    The fact is we dont know what was going on at or before the big bang.

    So if I speculate the universe cycles or you speculate it came from nothing the fact is we still do not know.

    Yes that is why I placed this thread in this section...theists speculate in this area and so now do I.☺

    We know only our universe and the fact is we cant even now tell how big it is...we are confined to the observable universe and it certainly seems there is an outside to our observable universe.

    Any comment would be speculative but the big bang presumably came from pre existing conditions and perhaps time existed as well...we dont know...we can not even say exactly what the big bang was...all we can determine is an evolement of the universe after things had already started...

    Who says meaning can not be found?
    If conditions existed before the big bang and that is reasonable to believe that they must have then they would exist in something in which time would pass.

    If not you must have a creation event were there was nothing before the big bang...

    In any event if the universe is eternal time would still is a measure ... so the universe we can teasonably establish has been around for approx 14 billion years and yet measurement of time seems a recent thing... a clock made today will measure time for its life but the life of that clock has no bearing on how long time has been running...

    We can not answer such a question as all we know is that what we believe that exist in was a product of the big bang in other words our universe...we do not know if we were in anything before or not...we do not know.

    Speculation past the big bang is speculation...I speculate the universe has always been and cycles thru big bang crunch and big bang...that appeals primarily because that means no creation event is needed...
    One could speculate as to what went before the big bang and all you come up as decent guesses are two ideas ending in a third... easily..firstly ..there was nothing and the big bang mysteriously started from well nothing...second we can put in a creator or creation event...thirdly an idea that needs no creator or creation event. The choices are to accept that the universe came from nothing demanding an explanation of it crestion event... or we can happily speculate the universe is eternal...

    Well if it was indeed a theory that means it is accepted science and if there were/are many theories well then science is saying it agrees else peer review would have destroyed them...if it was thrown out we can find a lead as to why...but if there was a theory and it has not been replaced well science agrees...the universe is eternal.☺
    If you can say that you dont know you are indeed a clever human and an honest human.

    I bet General Relativity would support it but so far it has not been use to test such a model.

    It really makes sense...
    It would seem impossible for the universe to start from nothing therefore there was something before and unless you accept a creation event or you must keep following investigation of pre existing conditions with no limit.

    Eternal universe makes sense creation makes no sense... ut we still dont know.t

    Last edited: Sep 11, 2018
  8. Sarkus Hippomonstrosesquippedalo phobe Valued Senior Member

    [QUOTE="Xelasnave.1947, post: 3542175, member: 283952"You cant say that...we dont know past the big bang and therefore we dont know what is possible or can not give any specilation a likely unlikely or highly unlikely.

    We just dont know.

    The fact is we dont know what was going on at or before the big bang.

    So if I speculate the universe cycles or you speculate it came from nothing the fact is we still do not know.[/quote]The "Highly unlikely" refers to the flat universe I mentioned, which will continue to expand ever faster, eventually ripping itself apart (Big Rip scenario). That potentially limits the forward life of the universe. As for infinite in the past, I argue that it is meaningless once you step on or before the Big Bang, precisely because we don't even know if time has meaning at that point. Thus being able to call the universe eternal I see as being highly unlikely... for a flat universe.
    You asked atheists to provide arguments in support of the eternal universe... are you expecting something unsupported by science to be convincing?
    There is, and almost everything currently within our observable universe will eventually move beyond observable range. Unless we assume that it somehow is no longer there, it would be rational to conclude that it would exist even if beyond our observable limit. But if one is of the view that things don't exist if they can not interact with you then I suppose philosophically they wouldn't exist.
    I'm not talking about meaningful with regard our own frame of reference... words have meanings as they relate to it. But if we have no frame of reference, i.e. if we can not pierce the veil and look outside of the universe, we have no frame of reference for such things. And thus all things are simply one guess after another... and ultimately meaningless with regard finding an answer.
    One could argue that all those words are referenced to what happens inside our universe. We have no understanding of what is not within our universe so I am not sure we can say that there must have been a creation event or not. Just because things happen a certain way within the universe is no guide to what may happen without.
    But all we know is that the clock works inside the universe, and we only know it has meaning inside the universe. To extrapolate outside might seem reasonable, but we have no way of confirming. Time as we understand it, or can ever understand it, may only exist within our universe.
    I agree. And it is why I consider it meaningless when we have no frame of reference for what is not within our universe.
    But it has its own issues to contend with, like the laws of thermodynamics, entropy et al. Also, choosing an idea simply because it does away with something you don't like, when you have no way of confirming your own idea, seems like an inconsistent approach. Certainly some notions may appeal more than others, perhaps on an aesthetic level, but I'd rather say "I don't know" than pin my flag to the mast of something I don't think I can know.
    Sure, but if you're looking at it as simply as that then you have 1/3 chance of being right, and more chance of being wrong.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Firat, it's not a theory, it's an idea. It may not even be testable. Plus you need to be wary of assuming that any "theory" is necessarily strictly scientific. String theory is one such "scientific" theory but I am not aware that it is testable. Certain aspects of it may be, but not the whole.
    Honest I'll take. But it doesn't take being clever to say that one doesn't know, only a very little wisdom.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    That's the thing though... every such notion of whether the universe is eternal or not would have to be supported by GR, or by whatever may ultimately replace GR. So being supported by GR is not proof, or even really evidence, but merely a prerequisite. If it doesn't conform with GR, etc, then it's currently going to struggle.
    Making sense may be the aesthetic reason for favouring. But creation makes sense as well, even if the creation event is the colliding of branes (as in M-brane theory). Conscious or deliberate creation, though...

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    Xelasnave.1947 likes this.
  9. StrangerInAStrangeLand SubQuantum Mechanic Valued Senior Member

    There are many planets, many suns, many solar systems, many galaxies & many galaxy groups yet it seems to be assumed there is only 1 universe. We do not know there is only 1 & we do not know there are 333 trillion & the 1st is at least as much speculation as the latter. Currently, it seems impossible to discover such yet we do not know whether humans will do so. If there was a big bang for this universe, there is no reason to assume that is the only 1. There may have been many separate big bangs resulting in many separate universes. There may be other origins for universes. Some of them may have much more life than this 1 & some may have no life. IF some or all of universes come & go, maybe the whole is eternal. Time & space beginning with our big bang is a huge assumption, at best.

    I try to promote saying I do not know but I do not know involves many possibilities & no assumptions.

    I use the word universe here in the way I see it commonly used when discussing the possibility of more than 1. I hope that if we do find more than 1, we then call everything the universe & come up with a new name for what we now call universe. Knowing people, it will probably be the opposite.

    Last edited: Sep 14, 2018 at 3:58 AM

Share This Page