Brainlet here. What happened before the Big Bang?

Physicists are mathematicians, not scientists.

god is a scientist, it's just people accept quantum magic theories but somehow have a problem with a god creating things in a way that accept multiple interpretations that are really just a piece of the whole truth

How seriois of a Problem are quantum mechanics for traditional physics? Doesn't quantum uncertainity undermine determinist causality?

Quantum uncertainity implies that, for example, there is a probability that my iPad might explode in my face, without outer causes.

abyss.uoregon.edu/~js/ast123/lectures/lec17.html

Modern science sees (assumes) reality as having a mechanically causative and deterministic nature. But it will never find an answer, the search will go on to infinity.

Things that work on a macro level stop working on a micro level, not to mention light, gravity and time are still not clear, not sure how can they pull a straight face while saying "so this works until it kinda doesn't"

Then why all this smugness against alternative theories, if the existing theories barely work?

If you assume that our space-time exists on a 5th dimensional level that can come into contact with other discrete 5th dimensional objects all existing in at least 6 dimensions then that contact could have caused a local pocket of energetic 4 dimensional space-time, i.e. the big bang.

god is an explanation stupid people cling to because its easy to grasp.

Try looking into the principles of Taoism.

At least they partially work, alternative theories (depending on which ones you're talking about) most of the time are an embarrassing mess and the only reason someone would believe in them is specifically to try and fight the status quo

Physicists condemn everything transcendental (all religion and spirituality, metaphysics) as implausible, yet they themselves arrived at “invisible singularities” and “probabilistic quantum vacuums”, which can only ever be assumed and never perceived.

Science supposedly prides itself on not being faith based, it's seen as direct opposition to religion, but it's turned exactly into a religion. Religious people also have that same smugness, they have complete faith what they've been told and there's no room for an alternative. Religion has its scripture in the form of holy books, and scientists have their scripture in the form of theories/equations.

The cosmic inflation, that is the most accepted theory (I don't remember if it is theory or hypothesis xD) between scientifics.

Nothing

Cute anime girls

The two are not as different as they appear. In science we use variables to represent distinct phenomena in the observable world. These are related to other variables and quantities in equations. Religious texts and myths use gods and goddesses to represent unique qualities and ideas. These are related to one another through the use of complex hierarchies and stories. However, the two differ wildly in their scope. Science is concerned only with what can be observed and measured while religion mainly deals with the imperceivable first causes. Ignorance of the latter limits the understanding of the former.

second this, at the point of atrophic singularity, i think the quantum field collapses towards a single point and we get like a great inversion that restarts it all again..

If you want to bake your noodle think about this, if the universe does restart from a singularity, then all its inanimate matter likely ends up in exactly the same place, the Milky way forms again, the sun forms, Earth forms again, and thus, we form again..
Have we lived before in the last universe? How would, or will, we ever know? heh

>Science is concerned only with what can be observed and measured

Real science is like that, modern science is not. The big bang for example is not observable, testable or repeatable. It's pseudo-science parading as real science. It's just as faith based as religion, the theory is the scripture.

Yeah, but without explaining first causes, science would be an unfinished draft. It would be merely useful for applications, like engineering or medicine, but useless for shaping our final understanding of the wor

That's a complicated question. It depends on what you mean by "God". I believe that that we are here implies to some degree that there are forces larger than us. The very notion of belief itself can be rhetorically whittled to the bare nub of its meaning.

>It's just as faith based as religion

this is the thing religious people tell themselves to make their magic sky daddy stories sound credible

I agree with this, sort of.
I just think the formation of a black hole generates more energy than is collected within it, creating a new universe much like this one, perhaps even more energetic than this one, that would help explain how a tiny spark could create all of it.

I'm not necessarily subscribed to this one imploding on itself as a end point.

>le magic spagehtti monster xDD
>>>/reddit/

Science should only be useful for practical purposes, that's what it's best at, that's what advances us. Getting stuck in metaphysical theories of first causes is a waste of time.

I'm not religious, it's another form of control.

That's after the big bang.

There's no rigorous scientific theory about what happened before the big bang, as all math breaks down at the singularity - and yer kinda boned at the planck level, before you even get that far.

There's also no observational way to test such ideas, due to this big nasty field of plasma radiating from our past - though there has been some work regarding measuring gravity waves from behind the CMB - not that it'd tell you a whole lot, but it could rule out various cosmological theories.

Cuz the accepted theories can be observationally tested, and are often used daily, while the alternative theories are either even more broken, or can never be observationally tested.

Not that there isn't constantly a plethora of theories in progress - gotta be a million quantum gravity theories competing with each other right now, and various other GUT's, that don't currently mesh with observation, but may yet one day with continued tweaking and new observations. So it isn't as if alternative theories are being ignored - there's a constant battle of unnatural selection among them - it's just the one's the creationists tend to like are shit.

It's not like the accepted theories have been set in stone for millennia or anything - even the standard model's been turned on its head at least four times in the last hundred years. The Hubble Telescope changed pretty much everything less than two decades ago, with that whole accelerating expansion thing.

>science is a religion

See
Approach these ideas with an open mind. One can be intelligent and not wise. There are many parallels between science and religion.

Just so you know, by "alternative theories" I didn't necessarily mean theist creationism, but, say, using alternative measurements or alternative concepts of time to get to the core of stuff. Perhaps the current framework hit its limits with quantum uncertainity and the big bang.

Yeah, there's millions of those in progress, just none have meshed yet... Discounting the ones that can't be tested, and thus aren't really science, but creative math. (Not that good things don't come out of creative math.)

Physicists, regularly, explore even the theories that they know are broken for that very reason. Some guys spend their whole lives going down the rabbit hole of some endless math, knowing full well that the whole concept is fundamentally flawed, and still manage to dredge up something. Exploration of the one-electron universe model, for example, lead to Feynman's path integral formulation, which was quite useful in itself, and got him a Nobel prize.

So even broken theories are explored. It's just, generally, when someone on Veeky Forums posts an "alternate theory" it's either something they've made up themselves without understanding the subject, because they don't like how the universe appears to work and think they're smarter than the whole world put together, or it's some religious crap that's utterly broken, even mathematically, masked by complexity, that they picked up from a blog, like electric universe, and taken a liking to.

Let me clarify. I meant the philosophies of some religions. Many religions are based on the wrong principles and blind themselves.

>Nobel prize

The Nobel prize was created by Alfred Nobel who "discovered" dynamite and owned an arms manufacturer. He was also awarded the Nobel peace prize. These people have a good sense of humor, albeit a little twisted.

Also, physicists wasting their lives on broken theories is silly. Do something useful.

>Also, physicists wasting their lives on broken theories is silly. Do something useful.
There's enough physicists to go around, and Feynman's results were quite useful, being core to cosmology today. Granted, *moist* applied mathematicians and physicists just explore such broken theories on the side, rather than dedicating all their time to them.

>*moist*
*most*... clearly my mind is elsewhere.

What has cosmology helped us with on earth?

Does your smartphone know where you are? Well, that, among a great number of other things, some of which the Internet depends on to function. The discipline has more spin-off techs than the space program itself.

astronomy.ohio-state.edu/~pogge/Ast162/Unit5/gps.html

Ultimately speaking, GOD, Absolute awareness without name or a clue of what it is and what its purpose is.
It's pretty much intimate, because God is you: it is your Absolute self!
scribd.com/document/81663974/I-AM-THE-ABSOLUTE

GPS uses cell phone towers/triangulation. I haven't seen any convincing evidence to show that satellites are even real. I don't want to sound like a conspiracy nut but it's true.

...

Does GPS use cell phone towers or not?

dude, search crrow777 on youtube...You will like that:
* the moon and the sun are both plasmagrams, holograms
* the ball lightning phenomenon is very tied to the nature of both the sun and the moon

Nietzsche and may others were right. We are fucked for all eternity.

the death of the prior universe.

The long wait to the big bang.

Am theist. Don't believe in Biblical evolution. Have no opinion on the physics of the Big Bang because I'm not a physicist.

This is the definition of hell.

Not starting this "conversation" again. No amount of evidence I could possibly present via the internet, or direct you to with a telescope, will break you of your infowars generated paranoid delusions.

There's skepticism, and then there's deliberate ignorance - don't equate the two.

Accelerated universal expansion killed the big bounce theory for all time awhile ago. Though, some variants of big rip do allow for the possibility of a quantum vacuum event in the near infinite future creating a new universe, but uncertainty tells us it'll be nothing like this one.

I'm suspicious of any claims about what the moon and sun are by people who haven't been to them. It's all just theory/faith.

>flat earther creationist in /sci telling people science is a religion

ok it goes like this
universe was created -> some time passed -> massive inflation -> all of the rest of time passed
didn't happen all at once

Vishnu

>Have no opinion on the physics of the Big Bang because I'm not a physicist
Have you heard about such concepts as "self-taught physicist" and "diy"?

People say '[template] because i'm not an expert'. Well, nobody is a fucking expert!
We are all just self-trapped in a game of subjectifying things inside to make them seem like they are outside.

user, no one's been to the sun.

Before the Big Bang there was nothing.

Then came God called forward the words and the words were good.

"Brexit means Brexit"

God saw that it was good and called the word again to create all the world and the ocean on it and the firmament.

As above so below

>infowars

No thanks.

>There's skepticism, and then there's deliberate ignorance - don't equate the two.

Have you observed a satellite with your own eyes?

Yes. As has most anyone who lives in the boonies or owns a telescope. ...enough.

yes, it looked like a very faint fast moving star

Probably not, but I don't believe it's made of mainly hydrogen and helium either.

Seriously, why do you folks keep coming here?

what about spectroscopic evidence?

Same reason all the anti-alien/ghosts/magic folks keep coming to /x/, I assume.

So you know for a fact what you saw was a satellite? They beam light do they?

ok, then try to see for yourself:
pastebin_com/Te3VmEpG

>not forgetting about "Diminished Reality" technology and the fact that military could have similar technology far more advanced than that though: all of my evidence could be 50/50 fake now!...

>and bitch, i can say the same thing about this reality: It's all just theory/faith.

well I can't know for sure it was a satellite but I was told it was and I believed them

I'm graduating tomorrow with a degree in [spoiler]CS[/spoiler]. I say I'm not a physicist because the only thing I was proficient at in college physics was the digital part after dealing with transformers.

>As above so below
i see that you didn't put meaning into this phrase/principle, and you just used it without questioning what it could mean.
>for me, it means self-replication, self-recursion or fractality

search 'crrow777' on youtube. He talks about this stuff in deails.

I am sadly aware. I hope he either gets psychiatric help or decides to stop trolling stoners.

If the sun is a hologram then it's a useful one. The military are not as advanced as you think, we wouldn't have the internet if they were, it'd be gone by now.

Then I cannot accept that as convincing evidence.

>I am sadly aware. I hope he either gets psychiatric help or decides to stop trolling stoners.
wtf is this?! You are a shill, disnfo agent aren't you!

Instead of just calling crrow a crazy piece of shit, why not research his work more deeper or whatnot? He does have some good stuff on his channel.

>crrow777

The fucker is making money off of people. That's all I need to know.

I unironically became a Christian the further I got into studying physics and astrophysics.
And it’s not the “oh I don’t understand something so it must be God teehee” thing. That’s not even related.
It’s the patterns. The order and the chaos all in one. The complicated things that do something simple and vice versa.
Something fuckin weird is goin on basically

forget about money. Just listen to the info he's sharing
AND why not just try to convince few of the people who he's being ripping off that it's wrong?

The Big Crunch

If you actually cared about sharing what you considered to be true, you wouldn't put a financial barrier on it. He's just a fear mongerer profiting off of paranoia like Alex Jones.

>666
>Something fuckin weird is goin on basically
indeed

2 atoms.

Life is a game where we have some billions of years of reincarnation before universe resets itself

Exactly. The patterns are everything.

"The Tao gives birth to One.
One gives birth to Two.
Two gives birth to Three.
Three gives birth to all things."

>t. the universe

>666
Ahh, the odds of this on a post about a Christian finding patterns in the universe
Really makes u thonk

>before the Big Bang

the big Bonka Donk

Followed by a 33...

>I haven't seen any convincing evidence to show that satellites are even real.
Buy a telescope and look at the ISS

The Initial Singularity was in an equilibrium state waiting for someone to knock it out of an equilibrium state. The only existing being that could do that is God.

>god of the gaps: the thread
neck yourself

Your mom's vag filled with air.

It's travelling at 17,000mph and someone got a perfect shot of it like that? Do you see why I'm sceptical? I want a 4k livestream of an astronaut being sent up to dock with it at 17,000mph please. There's new people on that thing all the time so it doesn't seem dangerous.

I am Christian. Creationism is at odds with more than one school of science, but if you look at things more abstractly I would argue that God as a manifestation of unknown power (in this case, the Big Bang) is pretty much ubiquitous throughout the whole of human history.
The short answer is no, but I don't think that it matters. The Bible is not a scientific text to begin with.