Briefly explain why an expanding universe implies a beginning (called a Big Bang).?
To get something from nothing would require a supernatural event (magic). We have no evidence for the supernatural. Therefore the only logical rational conclusion is that the universe (time,space,matter/energy) has always existed in a state of perpetual motion and the "big bang" ,if it actually happened, was simply a natural event in the already infinite/ageless existing universe. The "god theory" is too absurd to be taken seriously. An invisible creature from some other dimension that occasionally has sex with human females? Give me a break. Pure fiction.
Besides the jokes, how accurate was Futurama's explanation last week of how the universe will end and begin?
I liked it, for all we know it could be true. ( for those who didn't see it) They were stuck in a time machine that could only travel forward in time. They tried to go forward in time to where technology had developed a backwards traveling time machine. They only found it once, but bender screwed it up. So they decided it was futile to search for such a time period and all agreed on putting the time machine on full speed ahead and watch the universe end. So, the universe drifted apart as space expanded and began to fall victim to the cold. Just as the last star died. Another universe burst into existence (the big bang theory). So they tried going forward to the time which before they entered the time machine so they could stop themselves. A few misses made them have to go through the whole process again. The way the universe died is very accurate. If space keeps expanding and we keep drifting farther apart with each day, then it will inevitably end up a cold dead space where galaxies and stars would cease to exist because they would eventually run out of star creating gas and when that happens its all downhill from there, the last stars in existence will eat up their remaining fuel and there will be nothing left but the remnants from their supernovas, but even if that material would somehow coalesce into a star, that star would too eventually run out of fuel and befall victim to the cold. They basically showed that the universe keeps creating itself over and over and over again and the same universe occurs each time.I thought it was very clever, and you never know... that's how it could actually be, or at least id like to think so. side note: although there is a few problems with watching the universe die in a time machine. (if there was no time before the big bang then how can they be in a "time machine" they too would cease to exist. I think they did a pretty good job of portraying the universe's death
What is the origin of the universe?
The origin of the universe occured some 13.8 billion years ago when a atom sized primordial atom sized singularity of extremely immense pressure eploded. This caused the energy to be converted into mass, And yes, time did began at the time of the big bang due to Einsteins equation E =mc2 In order for time to have started in our Universe energy would have had to begun to be converted into mass. Time is definitely not static as time had its beginning moment that the 'big bang' the point where the immense energy of the primordial began to expand causing this energy to be converted into mass. Now, there could very well be a brute force behind the beginning of time. Also, there could very well be much higher force,God, perhaps, that gave reason for the Universe to begin. This is something that we know but there is no reason not to belive in a hgher power that is responsible for the Universe to exist. These beginnings of the current Universe could very well point to God's hand in the result occurring. Actually there inot proofoof that Gog did not start thUniverserse. Veinterestingtig.
Which theory describes the creation of the universe other than the big bang theory?
Let us first know and appreciate the current theory of “Big Bang”.Nearly 14 billion years ago, there was nothing and nowhere. Then, due to a random fluctuation in a completely empty void, a universe exploded into existence. Something the size of a subatomic particle inflated to unimaginably huge size in a fraction of a second, driven apart by negative-pressure vacuum energy. Scientists call this theory for the origin of the universe the Big Bang.One alternative theory is the Steady State universe. An early rival to the Big Bang theory, Steady State posits continuous creation of matter throughout the universe to explain its apparent expansion. This type of universe would be infinite, with no beginning or end. However, a mountain of evidence found since the mid- 1960s indicates that this theory is not correct.Another alternative is the Eternal Inflation theory. After the Big Bang, the universe expanded rapidly during a brief period called inflation. The Eternal Inflation theory posits that inflation never stopped, and has been going on for an infinite length of time. Somewhere, even now, new universes are coming into existence in a vast complex called the multiverse. Those many universes could have different physical laws.The Oscillating model of the universe involved an endless series of Big Bangs, followed by Big Crunches that restarted the cycle, endlessly. The modern cyclic model involves colliding "branes" (a "membrane" within a higher-dimensional volume called the "bulk").Implications found in quantum gravity and string theory tantalizingly suggest a universe that is in reality nothing like how it appears to human observers. It may actually be a flat hologram projected onto the surface of a sphere, for example. Or it could be a completely digital simulation running in a vast computer (pretty much like in the Matrix Movie).Thanks For Reading, and I hope this helps.
How does metaphysics explain the universe creation?
Metaphysics (Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy) Read section 2.1.Within “metaphysics”, the “universe creation” falls under the heading of “First Cause”. https://www.calvin.edu/academic/...What was the First Cause that set in motion the chain of cause-and-effect that is the universe? The argument goes back to Aristotle but its most famous expositor was Thomas Aquinas: Cosmological argument - WikipediaWilliam Lane Craig put the argument in a general form:“1. Whatever begins to exist has a cause.2. The Universe began to exist.3. Therefore, the Universe had a cause. “However, that doesn’t really “explain” anything, does it? It doesn’t tell us what the “cause” was or how it worked. It is more a statement that such a cause, logically, should exist.An alternative metaphysical argument was “the universe has always existed.” When scientific data showed that the current form of our universe could not have always existed (the night sky would be white, for instance), the argument was modified to “the universe has always existed in some form.”And that is as far as metaphysics went. Not much of an “explanation”.Some people tried to take the metaphysics further into the existence or non-existence of metaphysical entities. Some theists — Thomas Aquinas, for instance — figured that deity (God) was the First Cause. The idea was that deity was the only being without a cause sufficient to cause the universe. Other people used the “universe has always existed in some form” as a means to say deity did not exist.Now, Aquinas’ position was undermined by hypothesis of other entities besides deity that could be the cause of the universe: the laws of the universe, quantum fluctuation, and the collision of 4D ‘branes (ekpyrotic theory). There was also Hawking’s No Boundary Proposal that the universe just “is” without any cause.The ‘always existed’ argument got a boost last year when a new theoretical model of the universe was published: No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning I would caution that this does not seem to have been generally accepted by physicists.The final arbiter on what does and does not exist is not metaphysics, however. It’s science, which places a premium on observation, not logic. When logic and observation clash, science chooses observation. Thus, quantum fluctuation is observed within the universe, and thus was proposed as a possible “cause” of the universe, even though quantum fluctuations themselves are not caused.