Whether one examines the various religious beliefs of the beginning of the universe or the scientific theory, is there not always an issue that if you go far enough back, something had to come from nothing?
This has always puzzled me. If one takes the position that God created the universe, who created God? If, on the other hand, one takes the position that some natural phenomena created the universe, doesn’t it inevitably come down to stuff was there, something happened and here we are?
I am hoping that those far smarter than myself can present a theory that I have yet to find!
I think science basically says that the farthest back we can look in time is the Big Bang. At the moment of the Big Bang, the universe was a singularity, and no information from before that time can be available to us. So, we can examine all the information we want from the Big Bang onwards, in an attempt to understand the history of the universe, but whatever happened before that is unknowable, at least by observation.
We really don’t know if effects require causes or not. There certainly seem to be some things in nature (like radioactive decay) that don’t require causes. Our belief that all effects are caused is really just a byproduct of our intuitive common-sense view of the macroscopic world, but as science has often shown us, that intuitive common-sense understanding is often wrong.
The religiously minded would simply say that God always existed, and exists in all times, so there really wasn’t a beginning or end.
My perhaps flawed understanding is that given enough pressure and heat that space/time and matter can all be created basically ‘out of nothing’. It’s theorized (again, this is my perhaps flawed understanding) that before our universe existed it was a point of infinite density, energy and heat (or, perhaps, that two membranes of other universes collided and that this titanic event created such heat and energy that our universe was formed).
I know that the above aren’t exactly satisfying answers (even assuming I didn’t completely butcher them), but there are many theories that go into what MIGHT have caused the universe to initial form and expand. The trouble is that most of them involve levels of math that are frankly beyond my own wildest dreams to understand or even grasp.
1.) I think your title is misleading. You’re not interested in Cause and Effect, but in First Cause
2.) As noted, the religious believe that God always existed. The proper counter by materialists is to ask whether that implies that, if God always existed, couldn’t something else?
3.) Given that particle-antiparticle pairs are constantly being created and self-annihilating, the idea of “creation from Nothing” isn’t really alien to modern physics. See Quantum FoamQuantum foam - Wikipedia
I personally don’t believe in infinite prior timelines, due to seeing logical/conceptual problems with them. This forces me to believe that at some point, something occured or started without a prior cause.
Of course this is not an argument for any god - quite the opposite in fact. If something has to have simply popped into existence, it seems infinitely more likely that the result of that popping would be a ‘pop’ of disorganized matter/energy/spacetime, as opposed to a suddenly-appearing sentient entity.
I hope these two questions don’t sound snarky, but:
Did the point come from nothing, or did it always exist?
Where did the other universes come from?
That’s the problem. In a similar thread I said that whether or not the universe came from nothing, was always there, or was created by God, none of these seem logical, and yet, here we are. Actually though, I guess there’s a fourth option you touched on, we’re part of a multiverse and two universes created another. But where did the universes in the multiverse come from?
I seriously doubt we’ll ever know conclusively one way or another how we came into being.
I think that we can conclusively deduce that even if our particular universe is a microcosm created by a diety of dubious benevolence for some unknown purpose, that diety did not spring fully-formed from the forehead of nothingness, but instead developed after a ‘pop’ that created his own environment. This deduction is based on the fact that while a pocketwatch may evolve to some level of complexity, they don’t just appear that way.
I read that even if there is a cycle of big crunch leading to big bang, there may be ways for information to leak through, and so clues about the previous universe.
And in the current Scientific American there is an article about the end of the universe, that observes that perhaps time will lose various of its properties in some kind of sequence. For example, at some point, it may stop sorting causes before effects. Perhaps some think that might happen at the beginning, tool.
There is no way to tell, since (from my understanding) we don’t have information that comes to us about the universe prior to the formation of the universe. That’s why the term ‘singularity’ is often used.
Again, no way to tell. Hell, there is no way to tell if I’m even accurately characterizing M-Theory there, or if I’m completely butchering it. Even if I’m vaguely right, it’s a THEORY.
No way to really be sure. If the multiple universes theory is correct then either they have always been around or they stretch back so far in ‘time’ that the beginning is meaningless. After all, our own universe is 13+ billion years old and could potentially be hanging about for…well, for a hell of a long time. And during that time, our universe’s membrane might come in contact with another universe and create yet another universe, etc etc.
Ultimately, I doubt that a first cause for all of creation will ever be known, even if they figure out how our own universe formed.
Depends on what you mean by ‘we’. If you mean human beings, I’d say that’s pretty well understood. If you mean the solar system…again, that’s pretty well understood. Same with the galaxy. As to the universe, it will probably never get beyond theory, but even that might not be the case forever. If you mean all of the multiverse (assuming such a beast exists) then…well, probably not. Though I’m sure that a good model of how it MIGHT have happened will emerge, and there are certainly good models even today as to how our own universe MIGHT have formed. That’s probably as good as it will get though.
I thought this had been completely discounted. My understanding is that current data seems to indicate that the universe, far from going into a big crunch, is destined for the Big Rip…i.e. it’s continuing to accelerate and expand, and that eventually even the sub-atomic structures will fall apart, and there will be a lot of nothing.
(Of course, my understanding is heavily based on a Science Channel and Discovery Channel outlook)
There is no always in this context, see my earlier reply. Similarly, there wasn’t any “Where” for it to come from. Time and space came into existence in the big bang.
If you mean human beings, I’d say that’s pretty well understood. If you mean the solar system…again, that’s pretty well understood. Same with the galaxy. As to the universe, it will probably never get beyond theory, but even that might not be the case forever. If you mean all of the multiverse (assuming such a beast exists) then…well, probably not. Though I’m sure that a good model of how it MIGHT have happened will emerge, and there are certainly good models even today as to how our own universe MIGHT have formed. That’s probably as good as it will get though.