The Origin

[Go_Oilers_Go]

Re: The Origin

Is this topic really a Critical Thinking topic? After all, our opinions on the origins of the universe are purely speculation up to this point, despite any "scientific" evidence that "proves" otherwise. But if you want my take, I simply believe that God created everything in 7... err... 6 days just as the Bible says.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

Re: The Origin

If you think about it, then yeah, this could be a pretty debatable topic. One line statements really don't provide much thought though. =/

I simply believe that God created everything in 7... err... 6 days just as the Bible says.

Any critical thinking topic can be made simple in one way or another. =/

[Reach]

Re: The Origin

The universe we see around us arose some 14 billion years ago from what we model as the Big Bang Theory, which is well supported. Nobody really questions whether or not it happened anymore if they're educated on the matter, but vehement debate still rages over the why questions the theory does not address and is incapable of addressing, such as what caused the Big Bang? Or where did the energy necessary to cause the Big Bang come from? You also have to deal with difficult fine tuning problems - why are there Strong CP and hierarchy problems? How do we address constant specificity and the tiny value of the cosmological constant?

Saying God did it is a terrible explanation, specifically because it doesn't explain anything at all. It creates more problems than we already experience. For example, the word God in itself is an empty word - what is God specifically and how did God come about? In what way was God capable of creating the universe and how did it do it? We're left with no explanation and more problems (in particular, the word is often used directly to fill gaps in our understanding), so let's throw that out for the moment.

I prefer to think about ways the universe could have arisen from things that we already know about our own universe. The Big Bang was a rapid expansion of energy - where did the energy come from? From thermodynamics, we know we can't create or destroy the energy in a system. There is reason to believe that you cannot rid the ability to do work at some level from any spatial system, so the fundamental foundation of what we see around us may not require an origin if it was always there.

This still doesn't address a cause of the Big Bang though. Now things become a bit more complicated. A collision between already existing universes could potentially generate a Big Bang, but where did the first universe come from then? Where did the first anything come from? There has to be another explanation capable of generating a single universe or single something from a system of vacuum energy. It might be possible to search quantum mechanics for the answer - if quantum mechanics governs every system that exists, then it would govern our system of energy before there were any universes. If quantum mechanics governs this system at some level, the vacuum energy it contains should be subject to unpredictable fluctuations. If enough time passed (who knows, let's say 500 trillion years as an example) it doesn't seem unreasonable to suggest that a vacuum fluctuation large enough to cause the big bang could occur (remember, the Big Bang was only a rapid expansion of energy). It's a long shot though. However, if correct it would mean the universe is a self creating, sustaining and manifesting system.

Honestly, I have no idea what caused the Big Bang, so I like to leave these possibilities open, among many others. Regardless, if the universe is self creating, there would have to be another mechanism to drive the fine tuning of created universes. Otherwise it would be hard to imagine the creation of anything other than random expansions of energy occasionally that would quickly collapse or generate nothing.

One explanation for the specificity of our universe I've thought of involves Evolution. Evolution is a change in time in information that can be passed on between 'generations'. If you think of the entire universe as analogous to a living organism, it's possible to imagine that like us, it might be the product of some higher level of evolution across the birth and death of universes. One question that this leaves unanswered however is how universes create other universes and pass on information to them. Life on earth does it through DNA, but universes? I have no idea. It could have something to do with black holes, which has been discussed quite a bit here. Use your imagination, I guess :P I'm too tired to continue this right now, and it's difficult to deal with. We haven't even properly explained the mechanisms behind driving the creation of life on wee little earth, let alone on the universal scale.

[Izzy]

Re: The Origin

I am interested to know what other evidence of the big bang theory there are other then the patterns of heat left over and how stars are moving away from us showing that the universe is expanding. Someone probably knows here.

[JonXia]

Re: The Origin

Is the universe expanding or are he stars and glaxies just getting farther into space that is already there?

That is what goes through my head

[Izzy]

Re: The Origin

It's something about the light waves getting shorter or longer that shows that the star is getting farther and closer. Why that automatically means the universe is expanding I'm not sure. Which is what i was saying earlier about how it could be evidence for something else and we just aren't looking for it.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

Re: The Origin

The Doppler Effect is the phenomenon used to explain the expansion and acceleration of the expansion of the universe today. The substances of various stars in their various stages are discreet. The substances radiate what is known as an emission spectrum. Every element has its own spectrum, and this spectrum under normal circumstances are always the same (the spectrum is caused by the discharge of energy of electrons as they go from excited to ground state. Planck's constant is a constant, so the amount of energy released based on the type of element is always the same).

An exception to this spectrum would be the Doppler's Effect, which is caused by relative motion between the source and the observant. If we take a daily example, when firetrucks pass us at relatively fast speeds, we can notice a difference in the pitch of the siren as it was coming towards, and as it was moving away from us. This is caused because the frequency of sonar radiation stays the same, but the apparent frequency is changed by the motion of the source. As the firetruck moves closer to us, the sound waves are compressed, and the pitch is higher. As the firetruck moves away, the sound waves are expanded, and the pitch is lower.

If we observe the Doppler Effect on light, it would look something like this. The numbers represent the visible spectrum's frequency. Bold represents the recognized frequency emitted from Element X.

Normal emission spectrum: 6 5 4 3 2 1

If Element X is constantly moving away from us, the emission spectrum experiences a red shift.

Red shifted emission spectrum: 6 5 4 3 2 1

If Element X is constantly moving towards us, the emission spectrum experiences a blue shift: 6 5 4 3 2 1

Blue has a larger frequency than red. Red has a larger wavelength than blue. As the wavelength increases, the spectrum becomes "redder" and vice versa.

As stars move away from us, the entire emission spectrum of the substances radiating energy from the star "shifts red" which means the wavelength increases. Scientists observed this red shift and recognized that the stars were moving away from us. This is a definite fact. Every year, the red shift becomes more and more severe, which means the velocity at which the stars are moving away from us is increasing, hence the universe is expanding its acceleration even further.

That is the modern proof of the expansion of the universe. =) Accurate and definite evidence.

[Izzy]

Re: The Origin

You explained all that stuff to come to same conclusion that since the stars are moving away from us it automatically means the universe is expanding.

[Reach]

Re: The Origin

I am interested to know what other evidence of the big bang theory there are other then the patterns of heat left over and how stars are moving away from us showing that the universe is expanding. Someone probably knows here.

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/bb_tests.html

You can find some good information here. In 2006 the results of WMAP left little to doubt with regards to whether or not the Big Bang happened, but it is still an incomplete theory.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

Re: The Origin

You explained all that stuff to come to same conclusion that since the stars are moving away from us it automatically means the universe is expanding.

The Cosmic Background Radiation, also known as the boundary between space and void (the edge of the universe), also shows red-shifting under the Doppler Effect. =)

[ballaw hare]

Re: The Origin

The Cosmic Background Radiation, also known as the boundary between space and void (the edge of the universe), also shows red-shifting under the Doppler Effect. =)

Well for one I always thought the background radiation was uniform throughout the universe (at like something like 1.2 degrees above absolute zero), and hence why it was discovered. Not just at the edge of the universe.

Second off it's kinda assumed that the universe is expanding because matter can't just start expanding (that we know of) just out of our universe and into somewhere else, and the reason why it's expanding is the initial thrust of the big bang. Now, the universe could be A LOT bigger than we think it is (which is pretty damn big), and that matter is still condensed toward the center and just expanding into a vacuum.

If I'm wrong in any of that feel free to correct me.

[Xx{Midday}xX]

Re: The Origin

Well for one I always thought the background radiation was uniform throughout the universe (at like something like 1.2 degrees above absolute zero), and hence why it was discovered. Not just at the edge of the universe.

Note: the reason why it's called background radiation is because nothing can be detected behind it. As in nothing that's not antimatter in origin. Therefore, it is assumed that this is the edge of the universe.

Second off it's kinda assumed that the universe is expanding because matter can't just start expanding (that we know of) just out of our universe and into somewhere else, and the reason why it's expanding is the initial thrust of the big bang. Now, the universe could be A LOT bigger than we think it is (which is pretty damn big), and that matter is still condensed toward the center and just expanding into a vacuum.

The Big Bang explains the initial expansion, but it fails to explain the current acceleration of the expansion. The Big Bang was an instantaneous process. The Big Bang does not provide evidence for the acceleration of the expansion that is happening now. If the universe's expansion was decelrating (as in slowing down), then there would be no controversy, but it's not. Gravity should be pulling all of the space in the universe together to cause one of the theorized ends of the universe, the Big Crunch. However, this won't happen because the expansion of the universe is getting faster. Recent physcists say that dark energy, named alpha, produced by dark exotic matter, causes this acceleration. It is now inferred that the universe will cease to be active when the last star burns out.

The red-shift of the cosmic background radiation provides the evidence of this current acceleration. As explained below. =/

Searching for the cause of the Big Bang will only result in a moebius ring. It's basically impossible to do anything but guess. If something caused the Big Bang, then something must've caused that something. Which means something must have caused that something too, and so on. It's impossible to reach a conclusion.