The Universe has always existed based on new evidence !

The universe has no center. Big bang had no center but it happened everywhere at once. We are not at the center of the universe. According to the predictions of big bang theory, the universe should be the same everywhere, which on a large enough scales it is. Like a surface of an inflating baloon, the universe expands but there is no center of the expansion, it expands everywhere equally.

Because of a finite speed of light, we see younger galaxies the further we look, because we are looking into the past. Ultimately, if we look far enough, we see the CMB, which is how the universe was like mere 300,000 years after the big bang. This is all just a consequence of light speed being finite and so light taking billions of years to reach us.

 

I don't pretend to be an astrophysicist, but I have yet to be given a plausible why the universe expanded at a rate faster than the speed of light, slowed down, and then sped up again. Seems a bit counter intuitive and that theories are created to fit our limited observations and understandings.

Scientists don't even know what space is. Here is a very good PBS program on the subject, paid for by the evil David H. Koch.

At 7:00 several physicists explain that they don't know what space is:

 

According to the Big Bang Theory, the Universe came from a singularity, from which everything expanded outward. If this is true, there has to be a center from which everything is expanding. Then everything slowed down so that stars and galaxies could form, then the universe sped up again.

There is so much that we don't know, for any scientist to proclaim that he knows for a fact that the Big Bang Theory is a fact is scientific heresy. Otherwise, we would still live on a flat Earth at the center of the Universe.

What I truly find interesting so many people mock Christians and Jews for their beliefs in an imaginary magic God who created the Universe, have no problem putting their faith in scientists who say, In the beginning ... the Universe was formless, empty, darkened void and then there was light. And the light separated from the darkness and the Earth was formed. ect ect.

They seem to be saying the same thing.

 

This information kind of proves the Bible right.

 

No, there is no center. Universe did not expand outward. It expanded in such a way that every point receded from every other point, with the speed of this recession proportional to their mutual distance. Like a surface of an expanding sphere, except that the surface is two-dimensional but the universe is three-dimensional. There is no center in this kind of expansion (at least no center located in our spacetime, that is).

Read more here:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space

Maybe there is much you do not know. But scientists know a lot, and enough to be sure that big bang happened. Only the exact moment of creation, what preceded it if anything, and some details are unknown, but we do know the rest. Pretending that we dont is stupid.

Funny that you brought up flat Earth. Educated people never believed that Earth is flat. Only uneducated laymen did. The same sort that today doubts many well established theories of science. And they are as wrong now as they were when it came to flat Earth.

 

There seem to be two choices; either there are very few or no other intelligent species in the Universe, or, as we have done so well on Earth, there are millions more like us. Now, if the Universe only had five stars and 25 planets, then perhaps only one or two intelligent civilizations might exist. However, since there seem to be billions and billions of stars and five-times as many planets, IMO there are millions of intelligent species out there somewhere.

So...that was the logic behind my opinion. What was the logic behind your spaghetti monster comment??

 

Hey, I just figure one unfounded speculation deserves another.

 

Your link does not support your assertion.

So now we are employing the art of the personal attack? That means you are losing the argument.

Did you not watch the video? I thought not. There of course is more that the scientists don't know than they do know.

How sure are you from 0 to 100%? Are you a scientist? Do all scientists agree? If all scientists agree, then what about scientist who wrote the alternate theory in the OP? Is he a dumb scientist?

Wow, that's some hubris.

The smartest men of their time believed the Earth was flat. The Big Bang Theory has only been widely accepted since the 1950's. Were all the scientists before that uneducated laymen?

 

And can that be applied in real life? With a cake that doesn't exist? You can have the -ve infinity cake, I'll take the infinity. How about money? Then the universe?

 

The ultimate question is, "Why is there not nothing ?"

The solution to this is only two possibilities;

1) X is why nothing doesn't exist
But this leads to the question of what created X.

2) Time/space/matter has always existed for no reason

The latter is much more logical in my mind and doesn't lead to an endless "what created X" situation.

 

Illogical math. Explain how something can initially be -1. The math alone derives that somehow 0 became 1 for no reason. Your assertion of -1 is completed based on your desire to justify how nothing could spawn something. But in the real world, there is no reason to start at -1 because it isn't found in the known Universe.

 

you do not believe in negative and positive energy?

 

"negative" energy is not non-existence.
negative energy exists, and is therefore above 0.


it is not plausible to denote it as "-1" to suit your desire.
your assertion is equating negeative energey as somehow not existing in any form, but that it is even observable automatically increases the value to above zero.

for example, -1 degree temperature doesn't mean it doesn't exist.

 

yes, they do exist, negative and positive cancel each other out, but while separate they both exist.. that is the point

-1 degree temperature is not a real negative, that is mearly a made up number to represent temperature, not the same as negative and positive energy

.

 

please explain how negative energy doesn't exist - IT DOES and therefore cannot be used to denote non-existence. Negative energy's value of -1 doesn't mean less than nothingness.

 

you must be mis-reading my post

I said "yes, they do exist, negative and positive cancel each other out, but while separate they both exist.. that is the point"

I never said negative energy is less then nothing... you said that

I only said you can get negative and positive energy in equal amounts from nothing given enough time

negative energy and positive energy both equally exist..... and cancel each other out equally

.

 

Yeah, but these are your exact words

I'm asserting your logic of negative energy doesn't actually explain how something can come from nothing. You are conjuring up a false equivocation in order to justify your desired result.

 

Well what a coincidence. Neither does the proposition that God always existed.

 

Just as we continue to discover/theorize smaller elements in the quantum world, perhaps going the other direction...we will discover/theorize larger and larger elements in what lies beyond our Universe. Just like those Russian dolls, one goes inside of another and another and another, etc. so perhaps our Universe is a 'small' element of something not only very large but as you say has always existed for no reason. If I could have a vantage point outside of our Universe in which I could see the entire Universe before me, as I look around what else would I see? Other universes? Nothing? A Starbucks?

 

I mean, there is an explanation for this. You could really simply Google your question. So, are you willing to admit that there IS evidence for the Big Bang?

We don't know what gravity, or really any force, is.

 

At any given point in time, whether a scientist or mere mortal, we only know what we know. IMO what makes science so special is that science is 100% open minded to accepting new information while most mortals get stuck in their polarized close-mindedness...

 

1b) what created the creator of X
1c) what created the creator of the creator
1d) repeat forever

2) agreed, 2 is much more logical... take out the creator's and say X always existed and changed with time or that everything really comes from nothing given enough time

.

 

It does, here it is:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space

This is elementary stuff. If you do not understand elementary things, then your opinion about the topic is worthless. And that is not a personal attack, but a statement of fact.

This does not even mean anything. There are some things scientists know and some they do not know. Big bang theory belongs into the first category, except for the moment of creation itself (the singularity).

His alternate theory provides a new description of the big bang SINGULARITY, the very moment of creation itself.

So big bang theory is still valid even under this new model, because Big Bang theory really does not say much about the singularity itself (or lack of it). You are merely decieved by the media (such as phys.org site) and journalists chasing clicks, so they spin the article as if the Big Bang theory was somehow overturned. This couldnt be further from the truth. The words of the scientist behind it say no such thing. Maybe you should consider other sources than an imprecisely worded pop-sci article before forming an opinion, hm?

No they did not believe the Earth was flat, only ignorant men ever thought so. Educated people knew the Earth was round even in antiquity.

 

You are VERY smart to realize those things about time and location and matter.
Now, think even deeper and realize that matter must be a consequence of thought. In other words, matter does not actually exist. Matter is simply ANOTHER thought in mind.

Quantum theory is coming to that conclusion. Some Quantum theorists already HAVE come to that conclusion. It just isn't very well publicized, perhaps for obvious reasons.

However Channe, if you can actually get to the point that you realize that matter is a mental phenomenon, you'll soon realize that God exists, albeit God knows nothing of the human situation, of matter or of the human mind. And lastly, you are not matter. You are image.
Don't fight that conclusion. That is your Saviour. That is what the man called Jesus came to teach us.

But you are REALLY on your way to that.

 

There is a point where creation starts. Let me prove it.

Understand the concept we term 'cause'. Not a material thing, but a concept. Now let's talk about 'cause'.

EVERYTHING needs a cause except one thing. Cause is the ONE THING that doesn't need a cause, because inherent in 'cause' is all the cause there is. Duh.

Cause is the only thing that can be self-existent. And it IS self-existent.

The universe is conceptual, mental. Physical objects are just thoughts, beliefs that there can exist something where thought isn't. But of course, that would be impossible, so matter must just be another one of the large number of thoughts.

Brain is not matter, it's just ANOTHER thought or belief. Mind does not need brain or any other material support to exist. That is only a belief. Brain is the belief that thought needs a material vehicle in order to exist or function.

When someone 'dies', you think, "Well, their thoughts are gone because #1, their brain shows no more electricity and #2, they can no longer communicate. -- But those two things do not prove that thoughts (aka 'mind') don't still exist.

Matter is simply a belief of incorporeal mind. An interesting belief, one that claims that it is necessary for the function of mind, but in truth nothing but a belief.