WHERE DID WE (THE UNIVERSE) COME FROM?

[◊ Weezer ◊]

After years of studying the history of gods and religion, I believe they came from the minds of humans.  And I definitely do not believe any of the creation stories I have heard.  It leaves me with some unanswered questions about where everything came from.

 

So there was a "big bang."  I am not a scientist, but it kinda makes sense.   The question I am still left with is this.  If there was a big bang, where did the matter and energy come from to make the big bang (or what ever process it was) possible??

 

Until someone can answer that question I will continue to be agnostic rather than an atheist.  It just seems like there is some kind of "energy" or "force" out there we have yet to understand.

 

[LogicalFallacy]

Damn I wish BAA was here right now. He'd love this question.

 

Ok, there are several ideas about this. One of them is the idea of an eternal cosmos in which we are just one pocket universe in an infinite number of universes constantly having big bangs, evolving, then dying. The other is the idea that there never was "nothing" in the literal sense of the word. Thus something came from something.

 

As for as answering it... chances are we never will. Possibly the same with abiogenesis. It doesn't make religious explanations any more valid of course, it simply points to gaps in our knowledge.

 

One book that might be of interest is A Universe from Nothing by L Krauss.

 

As far as being agnostic - well I'm an agnostic atheist. Remember Gnosticism deals with knowledge, theism deals with belief. Thus I don't know there is no god, (agnostic) but I don't believe in any. (atheist) I also don't know how the universe started (agnostic) but follow the ideas and advances in science but so far have no way I'm leaning as yet so no 'belief' for any particular hypothesis.  

[disillusioned]

At work right now. @Weezer, it's a good question. I will give this some attention later.

[Joshpantera]

17 hours ago, Weezer said:

After years of studying the history of gods and religion, I believe they came from the minds of humans.  And I definitely do not believe any of the creation stories I have heard.  It leaves me with some unanswered questions about where everything came from.

 

So there was a "big bang."  I am not a scientist, but it kinda makes sense.   The question I am still left with is this.  If there was a big bang, where did the matter and energy come from to make the big bang (or what ever process it was) possible??

 

Until someone can answer that question I will continue to be agnostic rather than an atheist.  It just seems like there is some kind of "energy" or "force" out there we have yet to understand.

 

 

Here are some of the answers that have been discussed in the past, the relevant part starting around 5:18: 

 

 

And here it starts in at 5:00

 

 

Take this in. The something from nothing issue. Prior existence to the BB. All of it. We can use some of this to refer back to when trying to discuss the OP. 

[disillusioned]

Alright, back.

 

Apologies from the outset. I'm not as well-read on this topic as I really should be. I second LF in saying that I miss BAA. As for what I can say, here it goes...

 

There are a number of possible answers to the question of what came before the big bang, where the matter and energy came from, or however you want to put it. I’ll list a few, and we can look at some of them in more detail if they’re of interest.

 

My personal approach to these questions is usually to point out that I don’t think they really make much sense. Time is a facet of the universe, and the universe came into being at the big bang. So, there quite literally never was a time when  the universe did not exist, because unless there is a universe there is no time. Stephen Hawking and James Hartle made a model which is similar to this, called the no-boundary proposal. Essentially, on this model, asking “what came before the universe?” is like asking “what is south of the south pole?”. More on this model here, and also here. As I understand it, a major problem with this model is that it seems to predict  a universe which is basically empty, ie, not what we observe. Leonard Susskind has critiqued the model along these lines, and a number of people have responded. Moving on.

 

A number of people have proposed cyclic universe models.  Paul Steinhardt and Neil Turok have been working on these kinds of models in recent years (here's a paper they published in 2001). Under such a model the universe would basically undergo an infinite cycle of death and rebirth. The way in which this happens differs, depending on the model used, but the essence is the same.  So, under such a model the answer to the question “what came before the big bang?” is just “the last universe”. More on Steinhardt and Turok's model here. Personally, I very much like the idea of this kind of model, but I need to look into it more. Turok has a number of good videos on youtube where he discusses this as well.

 

Lawrence Krauss thinks that the universe sprang into existence, uncaused, from the quantum vacuum. More on this here. He also has quite an entertaining and accessible lecture on youtube here.

 

Then there are a host of other inflationary models, which BAA was a big fan of. These give rise to the pocket universes that LF mentioned. Then there's M-theory, and its multitude of offshoots. Things get messy.

 

The bottom line at this point is that there are a number of possible answers to your question, but no definitive answer. And yes, it is very possible (some would say, likely) that there is something out there that we don't understand. A leap from this to a God, though, is quite a manoeuvre. Also, regarding "agnostic" vs "atheist", these are just words, and they aren't necessarily mutually exclusive. Call yourself what you want. I say I'm an atheist, because I don't have the God belief. But of course, there might be something out there. We can't really know.

[Geezer]

17 hours ago, Weezer said:

After years of studying the history of gods and religion, I believe they came from the minds of humans.  And I definitely do not believe any of the creation stories I have heard.  It leaves me with some unanswered questions about where everything came from.

 

So there was a "big bang."  I am not a scientist, but it kinda makes sense.   The question I am still left with is this.  If there was a big bang, where did the matter and energy come from to make the big bang (or what ever process it was) possible??

 

Until someone can answer that question I will continue to be agnostic rather than an atheist.  It just seems like there is some kind of "energy" or "force" out there we have yet to understand.

 

 

I'm convinced were are all avatars in a highly advanced Alien computer program. We are all part of a huge hologram. None of us or our universe is real. The Big Bang was really just the Aliens booting up the computer. Our world will end when the program has to be rebooted.  

[Joshpantera]

3 minutes ago, Geezer said:

 

I'm convinced were are all avatars in a highly advanced Alien computer program. We are all part of a huge hologram. None of us or our universe is real. The Big Bang was really just the Aliens booting up the computer. Our world will end when the program has to be rebooted.  

 

 

 

 

 

[VerbosityCat]

It came from a pot-smoking magic turtle.

 

 

[LogicalFallacy]

32 minutes ago, VerbosityCat said:

It came from a pot-smoking magic turtle.

 

 

 

Rubbish it came from my invisible transcendent pink unicorn.

[disillusioned]

27 minutes ago, LogicalFallacy said:

 

Rubbish it came from my invisible transcendent pink unicorn.

Pffft. Turtles,  all the way down!

[LogicalFallacy]

31 minutes ago, disillusioned said:

Pffft. Turtles,  all the way down!

 

BLASPHEMER!!! 

 

HEATHENS!

 

Woe unto ye for ye shall all float away in the great unicorns cloud of pinkness!

[◊ Weezer ◊]

Thanks for your responses to my late night musings.  I read Hawking's and some other late theories recently, and jokingly told a friend the other day that I decided a sadistic "god" from another galaxie put earths evolution into play as a sadistic experiment.  And he/she/It is sitting somewhere watching us and laughing at our stupidity.  HA!  If we leave the door open to all theories, any one of our theories might be correct!  It is hard for my human mind to wrap around the idea that "things" may have always existed.  But I am leaving the door open to all possibilities. 

 

I mainly made the post because I was considering a few days ago about whether I was agnostic or atheist.  By the way, I don't see theism as being only about religion and "gods".  That is one reason for shying away from the atheist term.  Since the question about where "everything" began, can't be answered with information presently at hand, I think I will stick with agnostic.  LOL, as if it made any big difference!

[TruthSeeker0]

Live with the mystery, embrace it. That's my approach to life. We don't need all the answers. In fact, it would get boring, and as Anne Shirley would say, (and this is precisely why I was such a big fan of hers) there's no scope for imagination in that.

[◊ Weezer ◊]

14 minutes ago, TruthSeeker0 said:

Live with the mystery, embrace it. 

 

Amen, sister!!

[pantheory]

On 10/23/2018 at 8:46 PM, Weezer said:

After years of studying the history of gods and religion, I believe they came from the minds of humans.  And I definitely do not believe any of the creation stories I have heard.  It leaves me with some unanswered questions about where everything came from.

 

So there was a "big bang."  I am not a scientist, but it kinda makes sense.   The question I am still left with is this.  If there was a big bang, where did the matter and energy come from to make the big bang (or what ever process it was) possible??

 

Until someone can answer that question I will continue to be agnostic rather than an atheist.  It just seems like there is some kind of "energy" or "force" out there we have yet to understand.

 

 

Your question is a fundamental question of both philosophy and cosmology. The question is often called the question of the "prime mover."  Religious people have accepted God as the prime mover, the beginning entity that started it all. But logic would ask where did god come from? There are one of two answers: He has always existed, or he created himself.

 

Maybe the best religious answer involving logic was this one: 

 

There was No Time Before times beginning  (there was no change before the first change)

Saint Augustine had two answers to those who asked what was God doing before creation. Jokingly he said, God was preparing Hell for people who asked such questions. On a more serious level, he noted there was no such thing as time before God created it as well his other creations, therefore the question is meaningless. When God created the heavens and the earth He also accordingly created space and time. Before time began there was only eternity. God is a timeless being and time only began with His creation of the universe.

 

As far as religious answers go this is a logical one.

 

The Scientific answer would have some parallel logic to this answer above.

 

First one must define the universe. Is this universe the one and only one? It could be a grouping of almost countless universes separated by space in between therm, or, it could collectively be the whole generally-contiguous shebang.  Both of these possibilities could be lumped together if they fall within the same dimensions.  Are there other universes outside our known dimensions? There could be, but what evidence do we have for there existence. The correct answer to this question is "little or none." Such a possibility is more in the line of speculation than science if it will forever be unobservable.

 

As far as our known universe is concerned, either it had a beginning or it didn't. If it is the one and only universe and it had a beginning, the time-line of its existence could be considered a finite number of cause and effect sequences. If it is the one and only universe it would be logically impossible for there to have been a change to it before the first change of its beginning.  If there was a cause for the first change, then what was the cause of that change, etc.? -- the sum of cause and effect sequences would then be a continuum going backward in time.

 

It is logically impossible for the entirety of reality (a one and only universe) to have had a cause outside of itself, regardless of its beginning. If it is infinite in time, by definition it could not have had a cause, if finite, it also could not have had a cause since time would be an infinite series of prior causes and effects going backward in time. That's the simple answer to this and similar questions concerning a cause and the beginnings of the universe.

 

Bottom line is that it is logically impossible for there to have been a cause for a "the prime mover," or for the one and only beginning.
 

[VerbosityCat]

On 10/24/2018 at 9:05 PM, LogicalFallacy said:

 

Rubbish it came from my invisible transcendent pink unicorn.

 

Sir, I declare holy war against you. The turtle will NOT be denied!

[VerbosityCat]

1 hour ago, pantheory said:

 

 

It is logically impossible for the Universe to have had a cause regardless of its beginning. If it is infinite in time, by definition it could not have had a cause, if finite, it also could not have had a cause otherwise one would end up with an infinite series of prior causes going backward in time. That's the simple answer to this and similar questions concerning a cause or beginnings of the universe.

 

Bottom line is that it is logically impossible for there to have been a cause for a "the prime mover" or for the one and only beginning.
 

 

 

But yet, the idea that a large superconsciousness (which is no different from OUR consciousness metaphysically... it's just "bigger"), has always existed is just too much for the people here to take in. Okay.

 

Also, it is possible for one to assert that there is a superconsciousness from which everything else springs while also admitting that all human created religions ARE human created religions. These aren't contradictions. These two concepts can exist at the same time.

[pantheory]

1 hour ago, VerbosityCat said:

 

 

But yet, the idea that a large superconsciousness (which is no different from OUR consciousness metaphysically... it's just "bigger"), has always existed is just too much for the people here to take in. Okay.

 

Also, it is possible for one to assert that there is a superconsciousness from which everything else springs while also admitting that all human created religions ARE human created religions. These aren't contradictions. These two concepts can exist at the same time.

 

It would then just boil down to definitions. Is this superconsciousness part of this universe or not? If not what was its cause? ad infinitum. One names a cause for something, then must answer the question of the cause of that entity. Bottom line again is, there can be no ultimate cause for the beginning entity. Religious answers have been that God is eternal and outside of time. Or, God created himself.

 

Logically IMO any kind of beginning to the universe could not have had a cause -- since any cause also requires a cause for itself according to cause-and-effect logic.

 

Although I don't believe in a Big Bang beginning, I do believe in the idea that the beginning of the universe both created and defines time and space.

[VerbosityCat]

18 minutes ago, pantheory said:

 

It would then just boil down to definitions. Is this superconsciousness part of this universe or not? If not what was its cause? ad infinitum. One names a cause for something, then must answer the question of the cause of that entity. Bottom line again, is there can be no ultimate cause. Religious answers have been God is eternal and outside of time. Or, God created himself.

 

Logically IMO any kind of beginning to the universe could not have had a cause -- since any cause also requires a cause for itself according to cause-and-effect logic.

 

The Superconsciousness would be part of the universe, yes. The universe would be basically "the dream of this big mind". And it has no cause. It's eternal by definition. If you don't think a nonconscious universe needs a cause, why do you think a conscious universe needs a cause? And if you think it's an "extra thing" to posit consciousness, I don't really think so. I accept evolution but I think it's absurd to think consciousness somehow comes out of matter instead of the other way around. How would that even happen? Every time something evolves, you've got NEW SHIT. Like totally new information every time. We are not just talking one or two "starting random 'miracles' given enough time passing... we are talking billions and billions of miracles. I mean sure, I can accept this "happened". I just don't accept it happened without consciousness. Because to me that's just a goofy way of thinking that makes no sense.

 

I have a consciousness. You have a consciousness. In what way is it excessive to say the universe has a consciousness? After all, BOTH evolution and creationism are kind of lacking as full explanations. Evolution requires stuff to just "show up from nowhere" and a "creation story" requires some "magic being to make shit". Neither of these two things makes any sense. NOT REALLY. Evolution (which I accept by the way, just not that it's a non conscious thing), is just 'less stupid than' creation stories taken literally. But everybody dreams universes at night. Why can't a bigger mind make a bigger one?

 

And on the point of evolution I know people are like "mutations" but you have to have MATERIAL TO MUTATE. Stuff doesn't "mutate" before it exists. It can't be "naturally selected" before it exists. So EVERYTHING is totally new information at every fucking step of the way. Showing me evidence it has happened does not tell me HOW it happened or WHY it happened. A conscious universe gets rid of this problem. And the reason I posit it is again... because you and I both create universes. In dreams. So we already know "a way a universe can be created". So it's just not a big leap to say a big mind did the same and we're living in it.

 

 

[VerbosityCat]

12 minutes ago, pantheory said:

 

It would then just boil down to definitions. Is this superconsciousness part of this universe or not? If not what was its cause? ad infinitum. One names a cause for something, then must answer the question of the cause of that entity. Bottom line again is, there can be no ultimate cause for the beginning entity. Religious answers have been that God is eternal and outside of time. Or, God created himself.

 

Logically IMO any kind of beginning to the universe could not have had a cause -- since any cause also requires a cause for itself according to cause-and-effect logic.

 

Also, no I don't accept that something can't have a cause because if it has a cause that thing has to have a cause forever and ever and ever... because what is the cause of a piece of art... an artist makes it. Well what is the cause of the artist? You say random chance. And yet random chance didn't make the art. So that feedback loop does not go on forever. It is absolutely 100 percent logical to posit an eternal consciousness that "dreams stuff into being" as its nature and that always dreams things because that is just what it does. You are not obligated to accept this is "how it is" but my logic is flawless

 

Doesn't it strike you as pretty fucking weird that random chance could create a consciousness that can then make intentional art that isn't even as elegant or complex as the shit random chance made?

 

 

 

[sdelsolray]

9 minutes ago, VerbosityCat said:

 

...

Doesn't it strike you as pretty fucking weird that random chance could create a consciousness that can then make intentional art that isn't even as elegant or complex as the shit random chance made?

 

 

 

What is random about the laws of physics, chemistry, biology and emergence?  Be specific.  Hint:  Some is, some isn't.  Study hard.

[VerbosityCat]

1 minute ago, sdelsolray said:

What is random about the laws of physics, chemistry, biology and emergence?  Be specific.  Hint:  Some is, some isn't.  Study hard.

 

Bless your heart. The materialistic mindset is as alien to me as... well... aliens. I UNDERSTAND how physics, chemistry, biology, evolution, and all this shit works... Also "emergence"... sounds very much like you just don't want to use the word consciousness. You DO understand consciousness is not a supernatural thing, right? If it were, then that makes you and me "magic". If our consciousness is NATURAL, then a BIGGER consciousness that undergirds all things would also be JUST AS NATURAL. I know it's hard and uncomfortable. 

[VerbosityCat]

7 minutes ago, sdelsolray said:

What is random about the laws of physics, chemistry, biology and emergence?  Be specific.  Hint:  Some is, some isn't.  Study hard.

 

 

Also, just so we're clear... a HUGE universe... and possibly "multiverses", "holographic universes" "parallel universes" and whatever other crazy shit quantum physics has come up with to try to avoid consciousness... all that is TOTALLY FINE... but a large consciousness is just out of the question. REALLY?

 

REALLY?

 

Hmmmm. Yeah no.

[VerbosityCat]

12 minutes ago, sdelsolray said:

What is random about the laws of physics, chemistry, biology and emergence?  Be specific.  Hint:  Some is, some isn't.  Study hard.

 

Sorry one more thing... You all are SO fond of claiming that the simplest solution is usually the correct one. So we're just going to pretend a conscious universe is NOT the simplest solution to this whole thing? Okay.

[pantheory]

On 10/25/2018 at 8:46 PM, VerbosityCat said:

 

Also, no I don't accept that something can't have a cause because if it has a cause that thing has to have a cause forever and ever and ever... because what is the cause of a piece of art... an artist makes it. Well what is the cause of the artist? You say random chance. And yet random chance didn't make the art. So that feedback loop does not go on forever. It is absolutely 100 percent logical to posit an eternal consciousness that "dreams stuff into being" as its nature and that always dreams things because that is just what it does. You are not obligated to accept this is "how it is" but my logic is flawless

 

Doesn't it strike you as pretty fucking weird that random chance could create a consciousness that can then make intentional art that isn't even as elegant or complex as the shit random chance made?

 

 

 

 

Yes, I agree that random chance cannot create consciousness, but IMO the consciousness that we know of is derived from a long series of evolution, basically animal evolution unless one considers that plants have a type of consciousness or believes in something supernatural. An eternal consciousness would be supernatural, yes? Outside of nature? un-testable? un-provable? seemingly not scientifically testable --like a spirit or god.

 

Your quote: "It is absolutely 100 percent logical to posit an eternal consciousness that "dreams stuff into being" as its nature and that always dreams things because that is just what it does."

 

Yes, such a think is possible but is there any more evidence for such a thing than there is for a god? Then again, what would be the cause of that? If none then it could be supernatural, outside the framework of time , or time (the first change ) could be the product of the first entities creation (as theorized for a Big Bang entity). Even if all of this were true, it would not change the fact that there cannot be a cause prior to an ultimate cause in a chain of events, a change before the first change, or a beginning to an infinite series going backward it time.