Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 07:53:33 UTC No. 16554892

>>16554890
It always existed.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 07:55:33 UTC No. 16554893

>>16554892
then why did it suddenly expand

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 07:55:42 UTC No. 16554894

We're born with it

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 07:56:13 UTC No. 16554895

>>16554893
It isn't expanding.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 09:04:11 UTC No. 16554920

We can't make observations outside of our universe, so whatever precedes it or contains it is unknown to us.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 09:19:32 UTC No. 16554927

>>16554920
How do you know it's unknown rather than that it doesn't exist?

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 09:27:48 UTC No. 16554932

>>16554890
>christfags need not apply

you do realize that Christian were the driving force behind research on universe..

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 10:27:59 UTC No. 16554965

>>16554932
and it shows

Apologize at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 10:52:48 UTC No. 16554975

>>16554890
I wound bet on something similar to an endless cycle of big bangs and big crunches

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 10:54:49 UTC No. 16554977

>>16554975
you would lose

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 11:50:26 UTC No. 16555018

>>16554892
>always existed
the word "exist" itself means something had a starting point

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:21:35 UTC No. 16555045

>>16555018
etymology doesn't necessarily determine semantics

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 12:40:35 UTC No. 16555058

>>16555018
if time started with it it always existed, even if the "always" is not infinite.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 13:08:13 UTC No. 16555089

>>16554893
'why?' is not a scientific question. this is a science board

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 13:17:07 UTC No. 16555097

>>16555089
>'why?' is not a scientific question.
"Why does he feel bad?" is not a scientific question? "Why is the sky blue?" is not a scientific question? "Why does the lightning strikes?" is not a scientific question?
Trolling you believers out of churches definitely was not our brightest move.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 13:43:36 UTC No. 16555122

>>16555058
We have a solid, clear understanding of "nothing, nonexistence", which is easily interpreted by math and by simple logic, along with our own personal experience of "nonexistence", which is still in our memory and can be reexperienced by scrolling our timeline to the point before birth.
That is the state in which nothing exists, not even the possibility of something to start to exist.
Anything that exists had to have a starting point, conditions, in which it started. The term "always existed" is a product of weak human nature, that tends to poeticize everything it can't explain, understand. Nothing could've existed forever, because the fact of existence is a result of initial conditions, that were the source of something to exist out of those conditions.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 13:44:39 UTC No. 16555124

>>16555122
+
And the sequence of these procreations(including our universe) can be "infinite", incalculable, just imagine an infinite mirror, except each reflection is not the same, but has completely unknown, unique characteristics,( like laws of physics, different types of matter, etc, etc, or their complete absence), so the first reflection, the front one,(our universe) is relatively explainable(let's just assume we made it), and after this we came to conclusion, that our universe(first reflection) was born out of second reflection(as a minor accidental side effect of something massive and absolutely unexplainable that is going on in this second "layer", or universe, whatever, and boom!, great success, we even managed to decode the creation of the second universe\reflection\layer, and have a solid chained sequence of one universe being born from another, then, after this, we hit the wall of an absolutely different type of science, principles, features, conditions of the third reflection, for thousands of years we create new science to explain how the previous two reflections\universes were born out of this third universe/reflection, and after thousands of years or calculation we made it again, only to discover that the forth reflection, out of which the previous three were born, is an absolute mindfuck, and that it was born out of billions and billions of previous reflections, that are most likely even harder to decode. And besides this, the fact that all previous explanations were very surficial, only concentrating on a few interconnecting details, not considering the probability, that each reflection\universe, has billions of "directions" in which it created billions of other universes, like ours, which have created billions of their own universes, etc etc. And this is what human mind calls "always existed", "infinity", inability to calculate, analyze, explain, imagine.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 14:21:20 UTC No. 16555146

>>16555122
seems to me like you're the one stuck in intuitive human logic.
>which is still in our memory and can be reexperienced by scrolling our timeline to the point before birth.
schizo babble
>Nothing could've existed forever
how do you know this? you have no proof. you have no proof matter/energy can be created nor destroyed. you're just infering that based on...what?
what is creation anon? define this concept. what do you understand by creation? matter/energy arrangements? is that creation for you? putting atoms in a certain way means you CREATED anything?
define what you understand by creation, because sure as fuck nobody ever fucking proved matter/energy can be created, or destroyed. until that happens I don't really care what you monkey brain tells you. nobody created shit, ever. just made various arrangements which matter to human brain that's it. that is not creation in the energy/matter sense, that's "I am le creator" bullshit. all humans ever created are abstract ideas, that has nothing to do with matter/energy creation/destruction.
again, you arranging atoms in various configurations does not prove matter/energy must have been "created" whatever the fuck that means

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 18:48:47 UTC No. 16555397

>>16554890
>Where did the universe come from?
Scientific suggestions state it came from the collapse of a previous universe. Physicist's invented the concept of anti-mater to solve this issue. They state before the universe began there was a whole universe full of the stuff. Then it got squished down really small and blew up into our universe! Matter has always existed, just in a different form.

>>16554893
That's easily observable, heat expands. I pose the opposite question, why did all matter suddenly compact? A universe (using current scientific understanding) cannot switch from matter into anti-matter at random. So how could our universe rubber band from expansion into compression? Once heat death occurs all matter must be violently forced back into a single point in the universe. Which takes an nearly infinite amount of energy. Remember "An object at rest remains at rest." An entropic dead end cannot regain it's energy once spent.
>bonus points if you don't use an imaginary value (force, particle, field etc) that has yet to be physically tested and observed in real time.

>>16554975
Big crunches? Hawking used to be on the anti-matter train, but eventually admitted in "infinite universal inflation" as a victory of quantum mechanics over relativity. If the universe will expand forever, then where did the matter that built it come from?

My personal observation is that we have yet to discover a firm scientific understanding to which we can reliably confirm the origin or end of our universe. What we can permanently define is the objective reality that spacetime is expanding, that is all. Anything else is speculation, as worthwhile as saying God did it.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 18:51:33 UTC No. 16555402

>>16554890
From God. Read the Bible.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 18:52:45 UTC No. 16555407

>>16554890
>christfags need not apply
I, too, hate religious people so much! I just hate them!!!
Anyways, nothingness is highly explosive, and spontaneously turns into galaxies with mud that turns into shape-shifting dinosaurs.
Religion is so stupid. Glad we non-religious superiors have the real answer!

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 18:55:45 UTC No. 16555412

>>16555407
>turns into galaxies with mud that turns into shape-shifting dinosaurs.
merely the laws of the universe. it's like being absolutely floored when you mix few ingredients together you get cake.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 18:56:25 UTC No. 16555413

>>16555402
why would you even bother going on this board lmao

me and jesus eiffel towered your mom last night and you're next

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 19:10:49 UTC No. 16555426

>>16555402
yeah and mark twain wrote in huckleberry finn that there was a big black guy named nigger jim. does that make that true? are orcs real because tolkien wrote about them in lord of the rings? if i write down that you're a fucking retard on a piece of paper does that also come true?

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 20:00:22 UTC No. 16555463

>>16555413
>>16555426
delicious seething

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 20:17:40 UTC No. 16555495

>>16555407
Reminder that one of the grandfathers of your whole field Issac Newton believed in science, God, and conspiracies.
And so do the illuminati currently running the world. And magick. I bet they've figured out the intricate details of the brain and soul and how to take it and just keep it secret to weaponize. I bet they used that weapon in the shot, which will become the mark of the beast once they put a few more systems in place, with trump and elon. I bet deepfakes and AI were invented a long time ago and in use before they were revealed to us.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 20:26:33 UTC No. 16555500

>it was muh skydaddy or something, idk

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 20:41:02 UTC No. 16555512

>>16555412
I often mix zero ingredients and a cake spontaneously appears.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 20:54:27 UTC No. 16555523

>>16554890
>and Gods said "let there be Light"
well holy shit, Christfags were right all along

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 21:08:47 UTC No. 16555542

>>16554890
I'm a Christian and I have the answer to this but we are told not to cast pearls before swine, so I'll leave it there.

Anonymous at Sat, 18 Jan 2025 21:17:55 UTC No. 16555561

Why are Christcucks so easily triggered?