Kalypso
Smash Journeyman
This is a scientific argument, relating to the creation of the universe.
The accepted theory of the universes creation is that at a point, matter exploded and expanded rapidly, forming the universe. The point immediately following the big bang is known as plank1, or the beginning of the universe. However, this argument is about what happens before?
On another forum, the argument went like this:
Kalypso: There has to have been some form of time or existence pre-big bang, if there wasn't what caused it? Something does not come out of nothing.
Dude: The laws of physics don't exist when discussing the bang itself or the time before, because the theory establishes that physical laws started at plank1, and we don't know what happened at the bang or before.
Kalypso: How does that logic fly in science? You can't just say that the laws of physics break down at plank1 with no reason for it, either there is time before the big bang or there is immutable proof that physics breaks down at plank1. Do you have any reason to believe that physics breaks down at plank1?
No answer. My theory is, there has to have been something pre-big bang to cause it, and that physical laws don't just stop pre-plank1, I see no reason for this. To me, it makes infinitely more sense that our universe is not everything, and that there is some larger structure that led to the big bang and the creation of our universe, and that what we are a part of is a part of something larger. There is much more on this in select advanced physics theories. I see the big bang as a 'spontaneous, unexplainable' event to be the same as a religious belief.
Barring strong scientific theory to suggest plank1 breaks down physics, I would sooner believe in God than believe that science leads us to believe that everything came out of nothing.
So, do you think that physics breaks down at plank1 or not? I'd love to be proven wrong, so bring the sources and whatnot, I'd love a solid reason that physics can't exist pre-plank1.
The accepted theory of the universes creation is that at a point, matter exploded and expanded rapidly, forming the universe. The point immediately following the big bang is known as plank1, or the beginning of the universe. However, this argument is about what happens before?
On another forum, the argument went like this:
Kalypso: There has to have been some form of time or existence pre-big bang, if there wasn't what caused it? Something does not come out of nothing.
Dude: The laws of physics don't exist when discussing the bang itself or the time before, because the theory establishes that physical laws started at plank1, and we don't know what happened at the bang or before.
Kalypso: How does that logic fly in science? You can't just say that the laws of physics break down at plank1 with no reason for it, either there is time before the big bang or there is immutable proof that physics breaks down at plank1. Do you have any reason to believe that physics breaks down at plank1?
No answer. My theory is, there has to have been something pre-big bang to cause it, and that physical laws don't just stop pre-plank1, I see no reason for this. To me, it makes infinitely more sense that our universe is not everything, and that there is some larger structure that led to the big bang and the creation of our universe, and that what we are a part of is a part of something larger. There is much more on this in select advanced physics theories. I see the big bang as a 'spontaneous, unexplainable' event to be the same as a religious belief.
Barring strong scientific theory to suggest plank1 breaks down physics, I would sooner believe in God than believe that science leads us to believe that everything came out of nothing.
So, do you think that physics breaks down at plank1 or not? I'd love to be proven wrong, so bring the sources and whatnot, I'd love a solid reason that physics can't exist pre-plank1.
