What was there before everything came to existence?

  • I
  • Thread starter Veer Vardhan Singh
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Existence
In summary: I would say that the language of cosmology has painted itself into a corner. If the universe is infinitely old then it is unreasonable to assign any time period as early or late. That's all.Just thinking out loud...if the current thinking is that the universe is infinite, do terms like "early universe" and "what happened" even make sense?It makes sense in the context of our understanding of the expansion of the universe. As we look further and further back in time, we can see that the universe was much denser and hotter. So, we can define a point at which the universe was much denser and hotter than it is now as "early universe". However, the
  • #36
DaveC426913 said:
By extension it applies to the 3-dimensional universe. The universe can be wrapped around upon itself so that, if you travel in one direction long enough, you will (in theory) arrive back at your destination.
This is true if the observer begins and ends his/her trip inside our universe. Beyond being philosophical, what would an observer outside our universe observe about our universe? -- assuming some sense can be made of such a question.
 
Space news on Phys.org
  • #37
Hugh de Launay said:
This is true if the observer begins and ends his/her trip inside our universe. Beyond being philosophical, what would an observer outside our universe observe about our universe? -- assuming some sense can be made of such a question.
It is philosophical. There need be no outside. Any speculation about an outside is just that.
 
  • #38
jbriggs444 said:
It is philosophical. There need be no outside. Any speculation about an outside is just that.
I disagree that it is philosophical. I think it is nonsensical. "Universe" is, by definition, all there is. It is one thing to say that there might be a part of the universe that has different characteristics than the rest (and there is not at present any inkling that there is such a place) but even if there were, it would STILL be part of the universe, not "outside" it.
 
  • Like
Likes m4r35n357
  • #39
Hugh de Launay said:
Is such an abstraction applied to the "edge" (if any) of our universe?
Since no edge is required and no evidence for an edge is found, no edge is assumed. Instead, we use Occam's razor and take the simple background assumption that, on the largest scales, the universe is the same everywhere. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_principle. A universe with an edge would violate this principle. A universe that is finite but which wraps around on itself would not.

The abstract ideas of a finite but unbounded space or of an infinite and unbounded space give us confidence that we are not building our cosmological models on a self-contradictory foundation. Both possibilities are consistent with the evidence so far. There is no need to choose.
 
  • #40
Thread closed for Moderation...
 

Similar threads

Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
38
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
1K
Back
Top