How did the Big Bang happen?

[Spirit of Light]

Science is only hypothesising about the Big Bang's origins.
But your "...If there is no creator or God or intelligent being that put it in motion..." does not help because the next question is...

Where did your creator or god come from?

I do not know where the Gods first appear, but in my understanding, it was long before time known to man. ( in Buddhism it is said that Sakyamuni saw 81 universes before this current one) so that's a long time.

 

[King Phenomenon]

There was no space. Space is a quality of the universe and didn't exist before it.
Of course, there was no time either, so there was no before before the universe, either.

Confusing, ain't it? That's physics for you. Your mind is not configured to grok reality. It's configured to assist survival. Physics long ago abandoned commonsense or 'the obvious.'

That actually sounds really spiritual to me.

 

[chinu]

If we look at the Big Bang theory. ( not the Tv series)
Most of the science community say everything started with the bang.

But what made it go Bang? If there is no creator or God or intelligent being that put it in motion.
If there was nothing before the big bang. What made it go bang?
What was in the space we today know as the universe?

Can there be a nothing or a void if there was nothing there before?

The word "Happened" refers to something that has ended.
But, Big-bang has NOT ended yet. Its still happening.., its still going on..

Therefore, the smarter question is.. How to quit-out of this Bang which is currently going on ?
isn't it ?

 

[Spirit of Light]

The word "Happened" refers to something that has ended.
But, Big-bang has NOT ended yet. Its still happening.., its still going on..

Therefore, the smarter question is.. How to quit-out of this Bang which is currently going on ?
isn't it ?

That is actually a good question yes

 

[exchemist]

So you do not know, but you keep believing in what science tell to be true? Hmmm that sounded like a personal belief to me. But personal belief needed proof? Right?

The proof is "dunno"
You can not prove science answers any better then religious people can prove God exist.
It is a personal understanding, isn't it?

There is no proper scientific theory of the start of the universe. There are some speculations, but as we can't make any observation to substantiate them, they remain speculation only.

The observations we can make are consistent with an initial expansion from a small dense state. That is as far as proper scientific theory can go.

Your statement about "what science tells to be true" misrepresents the function of science. The Big Bang model is just that, a model, consistent with the available evidence. In science, we accept the current best models until such time as they are replaced by better ones. If, for you, that qualifies as "belief", then that is up to you.

 

[ratiocinator]

If we look at the Big Bang theory. ( not the Tv series)
Most of the science community say everything started with the bang.

Not really, the big bang theory is actually about what happened between when the universe was in a very hot dense state about 13.5 billion years ago until now.

But what made it go Bang?

Don't know, and it may not be a meaningful question.

If there was nothing before the big bang. What made it go bang?
What was in the space we today know as the universe?

You have a quaintly Newtonian view of space and time. The theory (general relativity) tells us that they are not a permanent, constant background but are combined into the space-time manifold that can distort and may actually be finite in the past direction.

There need be nothing outside of that (either in the space or time sense) - and I don't mean nothing in the sense that there was some state of "nothingness" before the big bang, I mean that "before the big bang" simply may not refer to a time - it would be a nonsense phrase, like "north of the north pole".

 

[Spirit of Light]

There is no proper scientific theory of the start of the universe. There are some speculations, but as we can't make any observation to substantiate them, they remain speculation only.

The observations we can make are consistent with an initial expansion from a small dense state. That is as far as proper scientific theory can go.

Your statement about "what science tells to be true" misrepresents the function of science. The Big Bang model is just that, a model, consistent with the available evidence. In science, we accept the current best models until such time as they are replaced by better ones. If, for you, that qualifies as "belief", then that is up to you.

The reason for my OP is actually close to your reply, science do not know, they make theory. But they rule out the " theory" that Gods might be the one who made everything possible in this universe, and started it all

You have to take both science and spiritual teaching in to the equations both can exist simultaneously and both can be correct up to a certain point. Where the answers will diviate because science can no longer show "proof"

 

[Spirit of Light]

Not really, the big bang theory is actually about what happened between when the universe was in a very hot dense state about 13.5 billion years ago until now.



Don't know, and it may not be a meaningful question.



You have a quaintly Newtonian view of space and time. The theory (general relativity) tells us that they are not a permanent, constant background but are combined into the space-time manifold that can distort and may actually be finite in the past direction.

There need be nothing outside of that (either in the space or time sense) - and I don't mean nothing in the sense that there was some state of "nothingness" before the big bang, I mean that "before the big bang" simply may not refer to a time - it would be a nonsense phrase, like "north of the north pole".

All the questions I ask in this thread does not reflect my personal views, because I ask questions to let the science dudes and dudetes see that science does not hold the truth, they hold a theory about what might be a truth.

 

[chinu]

That is actually a good question yes

Searching the cause of big-bang is equal to.. being the part of this big-bang.
More the energy one invest in this search, more the bangs-big.

Stupid search this is actually.

That's why all the true spiritual masters/gurus suggests to keep quiet and meditate.
Trying to meditate is equal to trying quit this bang.

Further, as soon as one quits this bang, as soon as one come to knows who's working behind this bang . Enlightenment happens.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Searching the cause of big-bang is equal to.. being the part of this big-bang.
More the energy one invest in this search, more bangs-big.

Stupid search this is actually.

That's why all the true spiritual masters/gurus suggests to keep quiet and meditate.
Trying to meditate is equal to trying quit this bang.

Further, as soon as one quit this bang, as soon as one knows who's working behind this bang

This Guru likes to ask questions
Just kidding, I am very far from being a guru

 

[HonestJoe]

If we look at the Big Bang theory. ( not the Tv series)
Most of the science community say everything started with the bang.

A couple of basic points; The Big Bang is a misnomer (it was arguably coined to mock the theory but stuck anyway). It has never been proposed as any kind of explosion but a rapid expansion from a single point.

Also, most of the "science community" doesn't have the slightest thing to say about early universe cosmology. It is a very specific sub-set of one scientific field and one that has pretty much zero impact on most others. This idea of presenting "big science" as some faceless monolith pushing ideas on us is all too common rhetoric to try to subtly discredit ideas people don't like.

But what made it go Bang? If there is no creator or God or intelligent being that put it in motion.

There will be loads of material out there written by experts about the theory, including much specifically written for laymen. If you really want to know the answers to these questions, you'd be able to easily find them.

All you'll get here will be a mass of amateurs, fools and trolls poorly explaining the ideas with all sorts of gaps and inconsistencies for you to pick at. Was that the point?

 

[chinu]

This Guru likes to ask questions
Just kidding, I am very far from being a guru

Question deleted

 

[Spirit of Light]

A couple of basic points; The Big Bang is a misnomer (it was arguably coined to mock the theory but stuck anyway). It has never been proposed as any kind of explosion but a rapid expansion from a single point.

Also, most of the "science community" doesn't have the slightest thing to say about early universe cosmology. It is a very specific sub-set of one scientific field and one that has pretty much zero impact on most others. This idea of presenting "big science" as some faceless monolith pushing ideas on us is all too common rhetoric to try to subtly discredit ideas people don't like.

There will be loads of material out there written by experts about the theory, including much specifically written for laymen. If you really want to know the answers to these questions, you'd be able to easily find them.

All you'll get here will be a mass of amateurs, fools and trolls poorly explaining the ideas with all sorts of gaps and inconsistencies for you to pick at. Was that the point?

No I do not need to know the science behind big bang theory I don't believe the science theory to be true. I just want science believers to realize that just because they can not see a God does not mean it is not there. What this OP is all about

 

[ratiocinator]

All the questions I ask in this thread does not reflect my personal views, because I ask questions to let the science dudes and dudetes see that science does not hold the truth, they hold a theory about what might be a truth.

If they know anything about science, they know that already. The theories, however, are supported by evidence and are falsifiable, which means it tends towards better and better models of the universe we find ourselves, and is what makes it different from religions.

 

[Spirit of Light]

No you are NOT kidding.
You are afraid of your own ego to take place in yourself, are you ?

Nope

 

[chinu]

Nope

Okay, then am deleting this question

 

[ratiocinator]

I just want science believers to realize that just because they can not see a God does not mean it is not there.

Of course not. What is missing, however, is any reason at all to think that any of the thousands of gods humans have and do believe in, should be taken seriously.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Okay, then am deleting this question

No problem

 

[exchemist]

The reason for my OP is actually close to your reply, science do not know, they make theory. But they rule out the " theory" that Gods might be the one who made everything possible in this universe, and started it all

You have to take both science and spiritual teaching in to the equations both can exist simultaneously and both can be correct up to a certain point. Where the answers will diviate because science can no longer show "proof"

Well, sort of. Science seeks evidence-based, natural explanations for what we see in nature. That means, by definition, that supernatural ideas, or ideas for which there is no objective evidence, are outside science.

But I think you should be careful in making statements like science "rules out" God. Science has no opinion on God, any more than it does on politics or music. You do not have to be an atheist to be a scientist. Plenty of scientists have always been, and continue to be, religious believers.

Finally, to make the point again that I have done so often before, please do not talk of "proof" in science. Science never deals in proof of anything.

 

[mikkel_the_dane]

If they know anything about science, they know that already. The theories, however, are supported by evidence and are falsifiable, which means it tends towards better and better models of the universe we find ourselves, and is what makes it different from religions.

The theoretical physics hypotheses beyond a certain point back in time are not supported by evidence. That is why it is theoretical physics. The hypotheses are not supported by evidence and none of them has been tested, because they can't be tested based on current abilities.