Because the universe is everything, including time.
Is The Universe Eternal or Not?
- Thread starter SetiAlpha6
- Start date
Because the universe is everything, including time.
There is no such thing as empty space.
I accept that what you define as the universe above must be eternal. Perhaps we are in agreement on this.
I guess I am really trying to understand either the eternal existence of, or the creation of, the actual physical energy/matter universe as it now exists within an eternal universe framework.
Sorry if I am not communicating very well.
Thanks for your patience!
Last edited:
so every single part of the universe is occupied by some kind of matter?. take a cubic meter of space infront of you, howmuch of that cubic meter is occupied by energy/matter?. and the parts that are not occupied what is that then?.
peace.
Potentially occupied. Even a particular point in solid rock is only a probable location of matter/energy. The uncertainty principle means that it's impossible to determine the exact location of a particle at any one time.
I would expect that new stars do not just spring into existence from nothing but are ultimately caused by pre-existing energy/matter interactions which again will eventually all suffer a heat death along with the rest of the physical universe. Would not entropy still eventually bring all things to the Big Freeze?
What can escape the grasp of entropy for an eternal length of time?
Can anything you know of in our physical universe do this?
Thanks
it does not make sense, so 1 cubic meter of space is fully occupied by particles? it doesent matter if its impossible to pinpoint a single particles exact position, that is way besides the point of my argument as you already know.
1. within 1 cubic meter of space, half of it is occupied by floating darting particles. what does the other half consist of?.
2. considering only 1-2% of the universe is made up of energy and matter, what is the other 99-98% made up of?.
3. what are you waving your hand through if you swipe it infront of your face?.
4. what does a particle travel through getting from point A, to point B?
peace.
Any point in space is potentially occupied by a particle, I think that's what makes it space. Even in solid matter, the existence of a particle is only a matter of probability.
4. It's not clear that every particle needs to travel at all, they pop up anywhere. Space isn't empty, it's like carbonated water with bubbles coming into existence and popping out of existence.
4. It's not clear that every particle needs to travel at all, they pop up anywhere. Space isn't empty, it's like carbonated water with bubbles coming into existence and popping out of existence.
yeah exactly, stars are made and consist of energy that already existed. so aslong as energy exists stars can be born. and as energy cannot be destroyed only transformed, that concludes we have a source of energy that just cannot burn out. entropy cannot bring everything to a total big freeze, because energy is constantly being transformed into other forms and functions. it is a cycle that does not stop. heat is the outcome of many energy transformations, and aslong as stars die there will be heat. when a super nova occurs heat is produced, when a star is born heat is produced. heat is always being produced all over the universe.
it is a cycle that wont stop, a big freeze will not happen because stars will always be born. i dont think we have ever seen entropy in action to even test its theory. all we can do is simple mathematics, and as far as i know energy can constantly transform into different states for eternity. which shows us heat will continue.
peace.
im not talking about potential, im talking about actual. and what happened to 1,2, and 3?. when a particle is not occupying a certain section of space what is that space if not empty?. because in your theory everything is already occupied because it has the potential to be.
i have the potential to be the prime minister but im not am i.
peace.
peace.
There is no such thing as actual.
come on now... heat death?
that could only happen if the universe had an end, but space has no end.
there is no such thing as matter, because matter is made of 100% empty space.
that could only happen if the universe had an end, but space has no end.
there is no such thing as matter, because matter is made of 100% empty space.
Yorda
and where do these carbonated particles pop up into? saying a particle does travel from point A to point B, lets just say a ball to make it easy for us (you mostly
),you have got the ball, you are standing 10 ft away from me. you inturn throw the ball and i catch it.Q. what is that ball traveling through?
A. (insert direct answer here)
actual is a word and is an abstract if thats what your talking about. but an actual planet is a real thing.
peace.
A. It travels through zones where it's location is more probable.
your worse than he is :bugeye:. first there is no empty space, everything is just a probability (which exists somewhere other than empty space). and now matter doesent even exist either.
this thread is all in your imagination, or maybe we are all gods imagination, and that is what the universe is. we are in the mind of god, his brain is so incredible that it can lucid dream anything broken down into billions of seperate minds inside of minds, he is just a huge brain that exists surrounded by void nothingness. the almighty brain god, everything is just gods imagination, all of us are just different part of gods experience, he gets to sense everything through billions of seperate conscious minds through the vast infinite universe. he can be a simple butterfly, a philosopher, an eagle, he is every animal, plant, human, rock, star etc simultaniously forever.
nothing exists as anything more than thoughts, except the super brain that is in the real universe wich is nothing atall.
what about that?. se anything could be true stop acting like you know the universe, god even gets to be people who smoke too much weed and think they have figured out the universe. its one of gods fav imagination personalities.
peace.
Enmos
Valued Senior Member
Well there was no time before there was time right, so how could there be a 'before time'. 'Before' requires time.
Also, you seem to separate the universe from time as if they were two unassociated things, time is a property of the universe.
A position relative to something else.
Contrary to popular understanding, outer space is not completely empty (i.e. a perfect vacuum) but contains a low density of particles, predominantly hydrogen plasma, as well as electromagnetic radiation, dark matter and dark energy. [wikipedia]
Think about it this way, some planets and suns give off powerful radio signals that can be detected almost anywhere in space. If space is nothingness, how could we detect radio signals there? For that matter, is there somewhere in space where you can't see stars? If you can see stars from there, there must be at least photons travelling through.
Last edited:
There is only one thing that seems certain - there is or must have been something that had an infinite past. Since the future has not yet occurred then it would be premature to say anything about that direction.
The proof is simple - if there was a point somewhere in the past where nothing existed then there could never have been a cause for anything to follow and we would not be here.
In this light the actuality of infinity is a necessity.
Entropy: A much maligned and misunderstood concept. The correct definition is very specific and constrained to a closed system. I.e. something that has specific boundaries. Anything infinite by definition is something specifically without boundaries so the concept of entropy cannot be applied to the universe.
The observation of physics indicates that nothing is either created or destroyed, so this is indeed a strong position for an infinite universe.
Perpetual motion is usally considered impossible because external influences are always present and introduce some form of friction and hence the cycle is inherrently finite, however, there is nothing external to the universe so there is nothing to prevent a perpetual cycle. In this case an infinite bang/crunch sequence appears logically possible.
Expansion versus steady state: The theory of an expanding universe has still not been verified. Big bang theory is curently broken with several key factors causing the math to not work. Meanwhile other scientists offer alternative steady state theories that do not require expansion or contraction, e.g. plasma theory.
Where does that leave us and our understanding of universe origin? The best we have is that it appears impossible to create something new or destroy it. How the dynamics of that matter form into a steady state active universe is not yet understood. But at the very least there is nothing to suggest anything supernatural need be invented to explain what we don't know.
The proof is simple - if there was a point somewhere in the past where nothing existed then there could never have been a cause for anything to follow and we would not be here.
In this light the actuality of infinity is a necessity.
Entropy: A much maligned and misunderstood concept. The correct definition is very specific and constrained to a closed system. I.e. something that has specific boundaries. Anything infinite by definition is something specifically without boundaries so the concept of entropy cannot be applied to the universe.
The observation of physics indicates that nothing is either created or destroyed, so this is indeed a strong position for an infinite universe.
Perpetual motion is usally considered impossible because external influences are always present and introduce some form of friction and hence the cycle is inherrently finite, however, there is nothing external to the universe so there is nothing to prevent a perpetual cycle. In this case an infinite bang/crunch sequence appears logically possible.
Expansion versus steady state: The theory of an expanding universe has still not been verified. Big bang theory is curently broken with several key factors causing the math to not work. Meanwhile other scientists offer alternative steady state theories that do not require expansion or contraction, e.g. plasma theory.
Where does that leave us and our understanding of universe origin? The best we have is that it appears impossible to create something new or destroy it. How the dynamics of that matter form into a steady state active universe is not yet understood. But at the very least there is nothing to suggest anything supernatural need be invented to explain what we don't know.