Time didn't start at the big bang. There is actually 0 reason to believe that

Time didn't start at the big bang. There is actually 0 reason to believe that

CRIME Shirt $21.68

Ape Out Shirt $21.68

CRIME Shirt $21.68

  1. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    If time went faster the closer you get to 0 then it is effectively possible to have an eternal universe, is just Zeno's paradox in reverse.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      that's what i'm thinking
      we're just lucky enough to inhabit the comfy zone between particle soup and heat death

  2. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    There's a growing consensus it was the beginning of spacetime so it probably was unless you wanna posit a super spacetime

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >a super spacetime
      Would just be at least 1 event outside of the big bang.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >There's a growing consensus it was the beginning of spacetime
      I'm sure the cosmic fabric of reality cares about consensus of some lowly scientists who live paycheck to paycheck.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        It's okay you'll start believing it once your popsci feeding tube catches up to it.

  3. 1 month ago
    AIFag

    the big bang is just a creationist theory popularized by pedo Hawking. there isn't a reason to believe it's more true or more scientific than any other schizo theory out there.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >pedo Hawking
      wasn't his thing to watch nude midgets doing math on a chalkboard to tall for the to reach?

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        Yeah but only because he wasn't willing to risk buying actual children. The pedo market wasn't as readily accessible back then as it is today so hired midgets were his safe alternative. The tripgay is right though, the big bang theory is a bunch of nonsense.

  4. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    nothing started, things always were

  5. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Physicists are spergs and don't know how to communicate. When they say that time began at the Big Bang, what they really mean is "whatever occurred before the Big Bang is outside our reach, so for all practical purposes, time began at the Big Bang."
    >surely physicists can't mean that
    They do. Check out the replies here:
    https://physics.stackexchange.com/questions/239280/how-can-we-say-time-began-at-big-bang

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      That's a reasonable take. I just hate how when someone even mentions pre-big bang cosmology someone will sperg out about how it's a meaningless question and that time didn't start before that.

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        I found an archived copy of the source I originally wanted to post:

        http://web.archive.org/web/20200203112814/https://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html

        >Since events before the Big Bang have no observational consequences, one may as well cut them out of the theory, and say that time began at the Big Bang. Events before the Big Bang, are simply not defined, because there's no way one could measure what happened at them.

        • 1 month ago
          Anonymous

          events before the Big Bang have no observational consequences, one may as well cut them out of the theory, and say that time began at the Big Bang. Events before the Big Bang, are simply not defined, because there's no way one could measure what happened at them.
          "Let's just create a widespread misconception that even some grads succumb to, for our convenience."

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >whatever occurred before the Big Bang
      >dat time before time

      • 1 month ago
        Anonymous

        See the Hawking quote in

        I found an archived copy of the source I originally wanted to post:

        http://web.archive.org/web/20200203112814/https://www.hawking.org.uk/the-beginning-of-time.html

        >Since events before the Big Bang have no observational consequences, one may as well cut them out of the theory, and say that time began at the Big Bang. Events before the Big Bang, are simply not defined, because there's no way one could measure what happened at them.

        .
        You seem to have a misunderstanding of what physicists mean, which wouldn't be your fault, tbh.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >whatever occurred before the Big Bang
      >dat time before time

      Actually it's not out of our reach. It would require a theory of quantum gravity to know exactly what the pre big bang universe looked like, though.

      There's a growing consensus it was the beginning of spacetime so it probably was unless you wanna posit a super spacetime

      We KNOW time didn't begin at the big bang. We see it in the cosmic microwave background radiation, that's how we know there was a big bang in the first place. When people say big bang, they just mean that the universe underwent an incredibly rapid expansion early on which stretched out the "cosmic fingerprint" of the CMB. The CMB, by definition, existed before the big bang, that is 100% indisputable.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      most of my theoretical physics buddies think that before the big bang probably looked like what models say the end of our universe will look like. that is, an even spread of very low density radiation.

      my personal theory is that once that state is reached the universe will start to collapse.

  6. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    i believe they say "meaningful time" started at the big bang

  7. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    A significant portion of people on this board hold to a view of time (a subset of the spacetime view) which actually, literally, absolutely does hold that time *began* with the big bang.

  8. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    What existed before the Big Bang?
    >Nothing
    I thought energy(mass) can't be created or destroyed, but you are saying it was created from nothing and created by nothing....because of no reason at all?
    >Yes, I'm smart anon. Shut up and do as I say.
    Can you prove any of this?
    >No it's unfalsifiable
    I thought you said things can't be unfalsifiable, isn't that your main issue with simulation theory?
    >Simulation theory is fake and gay because it's unfalsifiable anon!
    But I thought the Big Bang was unfalsifiable, is it also fake and gay?
    >No it's 100% true and beyond question
    Can you prove any of that, even a little bit?
    >No, GOD YOU'RE STUPID!

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >Can you prove any of this?
      Its mathematically proven by 0!=100%, that everything is simply a function of nothing.

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      What existed before the Big Bang?
      >dunno.
      I thought energy(mass) can't be created or destroyed, but you are saying it was created from nothing and created by nothing....because of no reason at all?
      >didn't claim something came frome nothing. just dunno what came before.
      Can you prove any of this?
      >that we don't know what came before the big bang? yes. that the big bang 100% happened? all evidence corrobates yhe theory and no evidence (that i know of) is counter to it. (the bible is not evidence)
      I thought you said things can't be unfalsifiable, isn't that your main issue with simulation theory?
      >that's not how any of this works.
      But I thought the Big Bang was unfalsifiable, is it also fake and gay?
      >it's like. . . 99% verifiably true and 1% extrapolation that follows that true data.
      Can you prove any of that, even a little bit?
      >yeah, want me to provide sources?

    • 1 month ago
      Anonymous

      >What existed before the Big Bang?
      max entropy
      >I thought energy(mass) can't be created or destroyed, but you are saying it was created from nothing and created by nothing.
      The big bang is just a (literal) astronomically large fluctuation in spacetime foam and will go back to "nothingness"
      >Can you prove any of this?
      The inherent mechanism (entropy, the uncertainty of particle behavior) of the universe and quantum foam point to this.
      >But I thought the Big Bang was unfalsifiable, is it also fake and gay?
      You're fighting your own strawman at this point. The universe exists because the very state of "nothingness" is against the fact that you can't prove anything with 100% certainty, it is the most fundamental law of our reality.

  9. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    >Cosmology
    Your first mistake.
    Cosmology is just the modern take on creationism; one extrapolated through known local physics and intellectual overreach.
    It's as scientifically valid as the Bible.

  10. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    There is actually 0 reason to believe the big bang, but you do, so why not accept all the jesuit crap since you're at it?

  11. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    Prove your assertions mathematically.

  12. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    >We can't know nuthin!
    Lament of the philosoBlack person

  13. 1 month ago
    Anonymous

    [...]

    Except OP is the one saying that scientists don't actually know what happened at the beginning and you are the one getting butthurt that there are very obvious gaps in their knowledge.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *