NationStates Jolt Archive

In the beginning, before the "Big Bang," before "Genesis," what was there?

In the beginning, before the "Big Bang," before "Genesis," what was there?

Cthulu.

In the beginning, before the "Big Bang," before "Genesis," what was there?

There is no "before" before Big Bang. That's like asking about what's lying north of the northpole...

Cthulu.

I was going to say 'cheese', but nothing can beat that answer, lol.

There is no "before" before Big Bang. That's like asking about what's lying north of the northpole...

I think you may be overlooking something. :)

very easy answer, for me at least. if u read Genesis 1, u find that God was always there. also, John 1 helps too: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through the Word all things were created; nothing that has been created was created without Him."

I think you may be overlooking something. :)
Time began with the big bang. There is no "before" without time. Therefore only Azathoth existed.

The Big Bang happened in 'no time' so as soon as the primodial 'atom' came into existance (don't ask me how) the Universe came into existance. There was no time and space before that. Maybe there was another Universe and we pushed it out of the way. No-one knows.

very easy answer, for me at least. if u read Genesis 1, u find that God was always there. also, John 1 helps too: "In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was with God in the beginning. Through the Word all things were created; nothing that has been created was created without Him."

Very good. Now, discard the biblical language and keep the core meaning here, what does this say from a scientific perspective?

Time began with the big bang. There is no "before" without time. Therefore only Azathoth existed.

But what about the before time, in the long, long ago? :p

There is no "before" before Big Bang. That's like asking about what's lying north of the northpole...

If you went far enough, I suppose, the South Pole?

There was nothing before the 'big bang' because there is no before the 'big bang.' No time, no space, no matter, no dimensions, nothing. It's a difficult concept to grasp.

"The".

This seems like a place where our human language can not fully contain a concept. We can move words around, but they can not truly explain it.

But what about the before time, in the long, long ago? :p

What long, long ago?

The Big Bang happened in 'no time' so as soon as the primodial 'atom' came into existance (don't ask me how) the Universe came into existance. There was no time and space before that. Maybe there was another Universe and we pushed it out of the way. No-one knows.

Yet you still overlook something substantial? :confused:

The Big Bang happened in 'no time' so as soon as the primodial 'atom' came into existance (don't ask me how) the Universe came into existance. There was no time and space before that. Maybe there was another Universe and we pushed it out of the way. No-one knows.I suspect so. Fifteen point two billion years ago, a universe died and the time in between lasted no time by human perspectives or all time by same perspectives. Then a new universe was born, ours.

In the beginning, before the "Big Bang," before "Genesis," what was there?
Everything

What long, long ago?

Beg pardon for the South Park referance. It wasn't related.

In the beginning, before the "Big Bang," before "Genesis," what was there?Before "Genesis" is the table of contents listing all the books of the Bible. :D

Yet you still overlook something substantial? :confused:

Which is?!?

Before "Genesis" is the table of contents listing all the books of the Bible. :D

I like this answer. :p

I suspect so. Fifteen point two billion years ago, a universe died and the time in between lasted no time by human perspectives or all time by same perspectives. Then a new universe was born, ours.

Suports the Big Bang - Big Crunch closed loop Universe theory

Very good. Now, discard the biblical language and keep the core meaning here, what does this say from a scientific perspective?
from a scientific perspective, there was wutever it is u want to call it that created everything. i call Him "God". my closest guess as to what we could call Him in scientific terms is a bunch of photons, but i doubt if that's true. this is the part where i like to remember that i'm not supposed to understand who or what God is, lol.

Beg pardon for the South Park referance. It wasn't related. It speaks ill of our cultural awareness when people start forgetting the true origin of famous lines. (To those who don't know, that line is acutally a reference to "Mad Max: Beyond Thunderdome", South Park merely made a comical reference to it.)

I suspect so. Fifteen point two billion years ago, a universe died and the time in between lasted no time by human perspectives or all time by same perspectives. Then a new universe was born, ours.

Actually, the energy released in a rapidly contracting Universe could be responsible for providing energy to cause a new Universe to expand, so I think it's really no time passed between contraction and expansion

This seems like a place where our human language can not fully contain a concept. We can move words around, but they can not truly explain it.

Nonsense.

Short answer: Stuff

Long answer: Really weird stuff

"In the beginning was the Word and the Word was with God and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God. All things were made through Him and with out Him nothing was made that was made." John 1: 1-3

Which is?!?

Physics, Thermodynamics, etc, etc, etc...

The Laws that we can see the effects of daily, can't account for their existence beyond what we perceive of them, and that have existed within (or beyond) and controlled the Universe since and potentially before what we know as the Big Bang. The all powerful Force that binds the universe together. The "Word" John 1:1 may well have been referring to.

from a scientific perspective, there was wutever it is u want to call it that created everything. i call Him "God". my closest guess as to what we could call Him in scientific terms is a bunch of photons, but i doubt if that's true. this is the part where i like to remember that i'm not supposed to understand who or what God is, lol.

Photons? So God is a laser pointing device? Interesting...

In the beginning, before the "Big Bang," before "Genesis," what was there?

I maintain that my answer is correct.

"The" is before the "Big Bang". Right?

Physics, Thermodynamics, etc, etc, etc...

The Laws that we can see the effects of daily, can't account for their existence beyond what we perceive of them, and that have existed within (or beyond) and controlled the Universe since and potentially before what we know as the Big Bang. The all powerful Force that binds the universe together. The "Word" John 1:1 may well have been referring to.

These laws didn't exist until the Universe had been created. The laws of physics are Universal, but Universal confines them to within our own Universe, not beyond, before or after

These laws didn't exist until the Universe had been created. The laws of physics are Universal, but Universal confines them to within our own Universe, not beyond, before or after

I use "beyond" in the sense that everything within the Universe is subjected to them, "below" them so to speak. Plus the "Big Bang" is not the beginning of the Universe per say, only the explosion that we may still "see" the "echo" of today. The Big Bang was subjected to these Laws.

Photons? So God is a laser pointing device? Interesting...
lol, not quite, but so far that's my best guess. if u have photons u can make almost anything, and photons appear to be simply very bright light, which is usually either blinding or deadly. so far it fits.

I use "beyond" in the sense that everything within the Universe is subjected to them, "below" them so to speak. Plus the "Big Bang" is not the beginning of the Universe per say, only the explosion that we may still "see" the "echo" of today.

Within the Universe yes. We can't really see an echo of the Big Bang. We can speculate the the Big Bang happened from the occurance of hot spot in the CMBR and from the current expansion of the Universe. We can 'see' back in time to about 15 billion years (it's taken that long for the light from the Big Bang to reach us) but beyond that everything is opaque, so we know that the Universe was very hot and awash with protons and electrons at one point, which suggests that the Universe was much smaller and so matter was much more concentrated 15 billion years ago. And I wouldn't really call the Big Bang an explosion, just a rapid expansion, like someone blowing up a balloon, just much quicker

lol, not quite, but so far that's my best guess. if u have photons u can make almost anything, and photons appear to be simply very bright light, which is usually either blinding or deadly. so far it fits.

Actually, photons are 'pockets' of energy at specific wavelengths, and billions hit your retinas every second. It's the wave-matter dual nature of light. (I did my final year thesis in Physics on a photon counting experiment, really interesting, but a total bitch of an experiment to get right)

Within the Universe yes. We can't really see an echo of the Big Bang. We can speculate the the Big Bang happened from the occurance of hot spot in the CMBR and from the current expansion of the Universe. We can 'see' back in time to about 15 billion years (it's taken that long for the light from the Big Bang to reach us) but beyond that everything is opaque, so we know that the Universe was very hot and awash with protons and electrons at one point, which suggests that the Universe was much smaller and so matter was much more concentrated 15 billion years ago. And I wouldn't really call the Big Bang an explosion, just a rapid expansion, like someone blowing up a balloon, just much quicker

A very brief background on the "echo" to which I refer. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2580261.stm)

Actually, photons are 'pockets' of energy at specific wavelengths, and billions hit your retinas every second. It's the wave-matter dual nature of light. (I did my final year thesis in Physics on a photon counting experiment, really interesting, but a total bitch of an experiment to get right)
sorry, i'm not getting my thoughts out quite straight. i'm not thinking everyday photons. i can't remember wut it was, or where it was, but scientists found a way to manipulate photons, and then they take on the characteristics i talked of earlier. sorry, but things make alot more sense in my head than anywhere else, lol.

I use "beyond" in the sense that everything within the Universe is subjected to them, "below" them so to speak. Plus the "Big Bang" is not the beginning of the Universe per say, only the explosion that we may still "see" the "echo" of today. The Big Bang was subjected to these Laws.
I'm under the impression that the big bang produced these laws, they didn't exist "before".

I think it was a big vaccum

I'm under the impression that the big bang produced these laws, they didn't exist "before".

I would prefer that you elaborate on this before I discard it as nonsense. How exactly do you propose a explosion of energy, something in and of itself universally subject to these Laws, created these Laws?

A very brief background on the "echo" to which I refer. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/sci/tech/2580261.stm)

OK, "echo" but only in quotes. The CMBR is a map of regions of hot spots or regions of higher levels of microwave radiation, and these regions are where galaxies tended to pop up.

Take a look at this:

http://www.astr.ua.edu/keel/galaxies/cmbr.html

(BTW, that telescope in Antarctica, my Alma Mater built some of the equipment used on it...)

I would prefer that you elaborate on this before I discard it as nonsense. How exactly do you propose a explosion of energy, something in and of itself universally subject to these Laws, created these Laws?

It wasn't an explosion, Drunk Commies Reborn is quite right

It wasn't an explosion, Drunk Commies Reborn is quite right

He may very well be. I would still like him to elaborate.

I think it was a big vaccum
But which brand of vaccum, Dyson or another one?

Hmmm... read about "Superstring theroy". At the moment there are some cool ideas going around about "'branes" (short for membranes) on which our universe could actually "live". Oh yeah and they have eleven dimensions. And it sounds like bollocks but in fact has quite a bit of practical experimentation to back it up from "quantum pyhsics"

Right. The strings make up every constituent of the unerverse and they are about the "Plank length" long, (which means they are really, really, titchy). The strings are themselves are made of pure energy. Each string which forms a constituant of the universe e.g a photon, or a gluon or charm quark and so on... vibrates in a different way, like strings on a stringed instrument, except, these strings are circular (like doughnut shaped - although recently it is thought that there might be some which are like literal pieces of string.)

These strings are so small that they can move aorund the eleven dimensons we think they might need to do there job properly; that is, ten spacial dimensions and the time dimension. We recognise three spacial dimensions already, but there is no reason why htere can't be more. Theory goes that these dimensions are curled up and around themselves and are slightly larger then the plank length (plank length being roughly the distance at which quantum effects start warping spacetime). The idea is that some strings if they gain energy could actually grow to be massive.... say universe size, and our universe might be on one of those strings. created when two of these "branes" colided.

It's a massivly more complicated theory than the little bit I've said and I'm sure many people will assume it's bollocks just because they've read this and it's made no sense, however I would encourage you to look into it if you are serious about your physics.... In fact if you're serious about physics it's likely that you already know all this and can correct me where I've gone wrong...

Anyway.... We don't know how many big bangs there might have been before we got a viable universe anyway becasue - obviously - there was no-one there to count. Big bangs might be very common indeed, it's just so happened that there was this weird anomally where the amount of matter created and the force of gravity happened to be at such at level that the newly formed universe didn't immediately collapse back in on itself.

Anyway.
enough said. Either way, I don't think it was 'god'. Does god exist if no-one believes in him? Because no-one was around at the time of the BB. And if he dosn't have to have anyone believe in him then he must exist somewhere and before the big bang the was no "some-where". Either way, I'm not a believer...

Before the Big Bang there was...

The UPS Guy

http://www.users.on.net/~nodez0rs/Bud/Orig/guy-ups.JPG

This seems like a place where our human language can not fully contain a concept. We can move words around, but they can not truly explain it.

couldnt have said it better or mayb i could or no but well spoken

and just to quote peter griffin: (peter)this is the new province of petoria i call it joehio
(joe) what you cant just come over here and annex my pool!
(peter) oh yeah?! according to paragraf 6 sentence 3 word eight of the geneve convention "the" ... so tough luck swanson...

I agree.... Sometimes there are concepts which simply will not fit into the human mind because the human brain has simply not evolved to fit these things in... Generally becasue they are not important to our exsistance at an everyday level.

Before our current Universe there was the old universe.

But it was destroyed by the "Creeping Plague". Which englufed the whole universe. It was a form of radiation, some sort of cosmic power. Which caused the entire old universe to die.

There is only one survivor from the old universe. I know him well. His name is Galan from the planet of Taa. The most advanced planet from the Old Universe. When the Creeping Plague was upon planet Taa, he and some of his colleagues managed to escape, but eventually was englufed by the plague. All died except Galan.

In which the cosmic powers imbued him becoming the devourer of worlds with his trusty sidekick/herald from the planet of Zenn La, Norrin Radd. They both travel the universe.

There is 2 reasons they travel around the universe. Some say it is to satisfy his continual hunger for energy by consuming worlds. Others say it is to eradicate of the Celestials seed, that destroyed the old Universe.

I agree with the String Theory. It's very complicated, don't understand much of it myself. Doesn't it allow for multiple Universes occupying the same space but on different dimensional planes? I think I remember watching a program about it years ago, but it's gone a bit fuzzy in my head...

Anyway.
enough said. Either way, I don't think it was 'god'. Does god exist if no-one believes in him? Because no-one was around at the time of the BB. And if he dosn't have to have anyone believe in him then he must exist somewhere and before the big bang the was no "some-where". Either way, I'm not a believer...


I have an interesting theory on God. I believe God exists because people believe in him. I believe that God is an entity borne from the collective conciousness of everyone on this planet. God didn't exist 100,000,000 years ago, otherwise, why did simpler brained species rule the planet for so long?

(I'm now preparing to be torn apart from rampant religious nuts)

I have an interesting theory on God. I believe God exists because people believe in him. I believe that God is an entity borne from the collective conciousness of everyone on this planet. God didn't exist 100,000,000 years ago, otherwise, why did simpler brained species rule the planet for so long?

(I'm now preparing to be torn apart from rampant religious nuts)
i'm not rampant, and i although i amy be a religious nut, i'm not gonna tear u apart. that's a rather interesting theory, but i do have an answer for your question. we ruled the earth for so long because God gave it to us and told us to rule over it, if u read genisis. if u think we created God, then where do u think we came from?

i'm not rampant, and i although i amy be a religious nut, i'm not gonna tear u apart. that's a rather interesting theory, but i do have an answer for your question. we ruled the earth for so long because God gave it to us and told us to rule over it, if u read genisis. if u think we created God, then where do u think we came from?


I'm most strongly a Darwinian. I believe we evolved by chance, our big brains came about through diet and need to outsmart our predators. Every species on this planet has some defense, we are the only species who have no hard shells, big teeth, claws, can't run fast, can't climb fast, can't burrow, can't fly, can't swim underwater for long periods. Our method of defense was intelligence, and we moulded the world to suit ourselves in ignorance of the fact that we do not rule the planet, in an attempt to provide a safer environment for ourselves, but are simply travellers, like all other creatures.

We haven't ruled the Earth for very long. I think it was stated that, if you place the Earths life span up to the current day on a 24 hour clock, humans have only been around for the last three seconds. A billion or so years ago, we were almost wiped out by what evolved to become insects. During the last ice age, there were fewer than 10,000 humans world wide. I don't think that at that time, we considered ourselves rulers of the planet and of all creatures.

As a Biology graduate myself I think that Darwin was pretty much right. Although I'd be carefull what terms you/we use. We didn't evolve "by chance"; we evolved through natural selection and genetic mixing to produce variations within what was to become the human race. There is really no chance involved when you are taking the evolving species as a whole. At an individual level obviously chance comes into it, but the agregation of these chances over time, an "average chance" if you like, eventually leads to those animals who are slightly better genetically, surviving more often than those who are slightly worse. Of course, all this happens over a couple of million years; evolution ain't quick.

The other thing is, it's dangerous to say the type of things like "such and such a creature developed sharper claws to kill prey easier". There is an inherrent wrongness with this statement in that it happened the other way round. Those animals with sharper claws would have killed prey easier, been more likely to survive and produce offspring and thus pass on their "sharp claw genes" to the next generation, thus leading to the proliferation of "sharp claw genes" throuhout the species as a whole. The animals didn't think "sharper claws would really help me get my next meal". It's a subtle point but a necessary one for a pedantic to make :)

I don't know how you'd say it properly without it being long winded but maybe we should put it italics or something....

btw - I know you didn't really say it in that exact way, but it's almost a dead certthat some one else will if they start discussing it...

There is no "before" before Big Bang. That's like asking about what's lying north of the northpole...

Chances are, there was a Big Crunch before the Big Bang. A one-time linear approach is highly unlikely - astrophysical projections indicate that the universe will eventually contract and even implode (like a black hole), and expand and explode yet again due to the energetic and kinetic build-up of energies. So, it's a "movement" that will continue indefinitely. Time is also affected by this, since it is affected by energy - a black hole, for instance, has highly slowed time, almost to the point where it does not seem to continue.
This universal movement IS, in fact, a (the?) perpetuum mobile, since there is no loss of energy to an "outside factor", like friction. Contraction and expansion are base material building stones of energy and energetic mass (like everything in existence). Hence, it would be more than logical to see the expansion-contraction happening on a universal scale. And no, I don't think a "god" made those physical laws, I'm sorry. Although it is possible, depending on how one defines "god". But that's a whole other discussion, isn't it?

if u think we created God, then where do u think we came from?

Does it matter? We don't "come from" some place, and we're not "going somewhere" either. That teleological approach is not a common factor in the whole of humanity (or history). Maybe we just "are". I can live with that. And no, I'm not a nihillist.

Before our current Universe there was the old universe.

But it was destroyed by the "Creeping Plague". Which englufed the whole universe. It was a form of radiation, some sort of cosmic power. Which caused the entire old universe to die.

Not far from the truth. The nature of existence is cyclic. The Universe is expanding as it has been since the current big bang. However, eventually tiny amounts of friction from tiny, far between particles will cause the universe to stop expanding, and celestial bodies gravity on eachother will pull the universe back into a central point. Since you can only fit so much matter into a point, once the 'matter ball' 's gravity acting on itself has pulled all the matter into it so tightly it can no longer sustain its existence, it will explode or another big bang will occur. This process will happen again. This process always has been happening. The universe recycles itself.

As we all know, matter cannot be created or destroyed, so it would be fallacious to think that anything other than the afformentioned 'matter ball' could have existed before the matter ball exploded. So we must assume that the matter ball got there by being gravitationaly drawn in from an existing universe that was created by a previously exploded matter ball. This process of the life of the universe is as I said, cyclic and it doesn't matter where we are. Why this matter is here is irrevevant and it would be impossible to find out if anything ever has or will exist outside of this cycle.

Its like what some religions beleive of rencarnation: No beginning, no end, and that life itself is and end, not a means to something else. Fittingly it is those religions that recognize time as a cycle.

sorry for saying the same thing as ' Druidvale ' i didnt read what ppl said after the guy I quoted about the disease thing

sorry for saying the same thing as ' Druidvale ' i didnt read what ppl said after the guy I quoted about the disease thing

No prob, I know the feeling :p And besides, you pulled in "the matter aspect", so we complement nicely.

Cthulu.

Hasteur... Hasteur... Hast... :D

In the beginning, before the "Big Bang," before "Genesis," what was there?
That's hardly what I would call "a simple question." It's also rather like asking "how high is up?" If anyone has the answer to this one, I have yet to read of it.

Proponents of M-Theory would probably posit that, prior to the creation of our universe by an interaction of the membranes of two or more other, preexisting universes, the only thing that existed were the other universes.