How could first big-bang explode?

[Ingledsva]

thought the Big Bang was a TV show

I love that show.


*

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Besides, if a God created a universe from nothing, then we'd have the exact same problem. Inside what did God create the universe? Nothing? If the universe can't expand into nothing, then why can suddenly a universe be created inside nothing?

The universe is actually very weird. It's weird at the cosmological scale and even weirder at the sub-atomic scale. Sunday school ideas like "God did it" simply aren't weird enough to be credible. These ideas stem from our human experience at the everyday level, but the rules we take for granted break down at the cosmological and sub-atomic levels.

 

[Desert Snake]

There must be some expanse for it to explode. How did this expanse come to exist?

Regards

Didn't happen.

 

[Altfish]

The theory has to do with me in the sense I see it as similar to a lie...an untruth....and therefore do not waste time on it. I have no objection to anyone believing in it though, but if they expect me to accept it as a credible theory...than I draw the line..

God is an indivisible one...there is nothing that is not God. The physical universe that science deals with is the manifestation of God... The manifested things have beginnings and ending...but God is timeless and infinite.... Already there is an indication of the evolution of big bang theory to an infinite multiverse theory...due to the behaviour of dark energy gravitational evidence...

There is no nothing in existence, never was, never will be...there is no science that is able to replicate a state of nothingness...the vacuum is full of energy...infinitely dense..

More special pleading.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

The universe is actually very weird. It's weird at the cosmological scale and even weirder at the sub-atomic scale. Sunday school ideas like "God did it" simply aren't weird enough to be credible.

Well true in the context of present physical scientific understanding....and I must admit to being surprised that Ouroboros thinks religious folk have the Sunday school view of a dualistic God...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

More special pleading.

Oh another one liner debater..

Please explain your credible understanding of the cosmic existence in the context of concepts such as eternity and infinity on the one hand, and concepts such as beginnings and endings of Cosmic material forms on the other

 

[Rick O'Shez]

Well true in the context of present physical scientific understanding....and I must admit to being surprised that Ouroboros thinks religious folk have the Sunday school view of a dualistic God...

The problem is that all these conceptions of God are human constructions based on experience of the everyday world. As such they are extremely limited in scope.

 

[NewGuyOnTheBlock]

I'm posting a little blind here; reading just a few of the first posts; but I'd like to chime in with this:

"Explode" is really not a correct term. It did not "explode" as much as it "expanded".

With that aside -- we don't know.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

The problem is that all these conceptions of God are human constructions based on experience of the everyday world. As such they are extremely limited in scope.

Well not really, speaking for myself...the conception part only arises when trying to convey non-duality using dualistic medium (concepts).

So listen up...I am using conceptual language to explain to you that the concept of God is meant to represent the actual non-conceptual reality behind the word, and can never in all eternity be comprehended. How can you know this...learn to cease thinking and interpreting reality through time space conceptualization...

 

[Bunyip]

Well not really, speaking for myself...the conception part only arises when trying to convey non-duality using dualistic medium (concepts).

So listen up...I am using conceptual language to explain to you that the concept of God is meant to represent the actual non-conceptual reality behind the word, and can never in all eternity be comprehended. How can you know this...learn to cease thinking and interpreting reality through time space conceptualization...

Why? That is how we are supposed to perceive reality. That is why we have senses isn't it? And that is what our senses percieve.

 

[Rick O'Shez]

How can you know this...learn to cease thinking and interpreting reality through time space conceptualization...

I meditate regularly so I'm familiar with not thinking. But I don't think that's the issue, it's actually that we inhabit space-time and cannot experience anything beyond it. We can conceive and imagine and indulge in wishful thinking, but that's all we can do.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Why? That is how we are supposed to perceive reality. That is why we have senses isn't it? And that is what our senses percieve.

Indeed...but the real religious goal is not of this world, so during the journey, the difficult thing to achieve is detachment from the perceptual and conceptual sense of reality...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I meditate regularly so I'm familiar with not thinking. But I don't think that's the issue, it's actually that we inhabit space-time and cannot experience anything beyond it. We can conceive and imagine and indulge in wishful thinking, but that's all we can do.

No...it hasn't apparently dawned on you yet that when the mind is still...there is no I to arise to perceive or conceive anything...the I and the Cosmos are one, not two... The I has to be present in the mind for there to be an experience, for perception. for conception, etc....but when the mind is not in the dualistic state, no experience can be expected...

 

[Bunyip]

Indeed...but the real religious goal is not of this world, so during the journey, the difficult thing to achieve is detachment from the perceptual and conceptual sense of reality...

Like dreams, imagination, meditation, contemplation, creativity etc?

 

[Rick O'Shez]

No...it hasn't apparently dawned on you yet that when the mind is still...there is no I to arise to perceive or conceive anything...the I and the Cosmos are one... The I has to be present in the mind for there to be an experience, for perception. for conception, etc....but when the mind is not in the dualistic state so no experience can be expected...

I think you are taking a meditative experience of non-duality and making a whole load of unwarranted assumptions about what it means.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Like dreams, imagination, meditation, contemplation, creativity etc?

Lots of that on the journey...but always turns out to be vanity...later that passes...except for the ongoing dispassionate observation of the flights of fancy on the mind....

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I think you are taking a meditative experience of non-duality and making a whole load of unwarranted assumptions about what it means.

Sir...it is you who are imagining in your dualistic mind what you think I am trying to convey, but I have failed and whether it is because of my faulty language or your faulty comprehension, it doesn't matter....the long and the short of it is that you have not realized the state of union yet...otherwise we would not have had this conversation..

 

[paarsurrey]

That might be, but the theory is what the theory is.

The Big Bang theory says that the universe expanded into nothing. ...

Besides, if a God created a universe from nothing, then we'd have the exact same problem. Inside what did God create the universe? Nothing? If the universe can't expand into nothing, then why can suddenly a universe be created inside nothing?

So, the real issue is who created "nothing" to allow big-bang to expand fast or explode.
Is it so?

Regards

 

[paarsurrey]

Comment on Post # 39 above.

Singularity

So it is ONE creating "nothing" to start with.
Is it?

Regards

 

[ImmortalFlame]

So, the real issue is who created "nothing" to allow big-bang to expand fast or explode.

No, because there is no reason to assume that it was a "who", and nor is there reason to assume "nothing" needs to be "created" in the first place.