Why can't the universe be eternal?

[Love4All]

I took a brief look at what is written there. Maybe I need a more mathematical rigor than I have now. Are you a physicist or something? What level of depth you think is necessary to understand this theory? Because I have a good read in areas of history, philosophy and logic, but neither came to study calculus. I only know some notions of differentiation and integration, but never moved forward beyond that. About complex numbers, I have a slight idea of what they are. My area of study is the biomedical, then all that kind of other thing I read on my own. If you think I do need, in fact, a greater mathematical rigor, what kind of procedure you recommend me to delve into this study until this goal is reached? For example books etc.

I am not a physicist, nor a mathematician. I think my diagram is more suggestive than it is rigorous. It was partly inspired by my coming across Stephen Hawking’s “no boundary proposal,” in which he invokes “imaginary time.” To understand this part requires only a cursory familiarity with imaginary numbers and the complex plane. Essentially, the real number line is the same as it always was, the x axis. The y axis is the imaginaries, and the co-ordinate system that arises from their combination is called complex, i.e., its values are real/imaginary ordered pairs. It is the best way I was able to make any sense whatsoever of what he said about “imaginary time” near the Big Bang.

The asymptotic curve that extends from +∞i to +∞ represents physical time, or time within the created universe. My point is that it is possible to go back in time 13.8 billion years, or forever, what have you, without necessarily contradicting Genesis. And, it is possible to go back in time, forever, without ever reaching the “beginning,” if we include an imaginary component in physical time. Essentially, what I think I have shown, at least what it was my intent to show, is that it may very well be that the curvature of time and space or the nature of time and space is such that we cannot reach the Singularity, and that the question of what was “before” the Big Bang may be physically meaningless, exactly as Hawking said, but without removing from the existence of the physical universe, the Necessity of God as First Cause. I intended to show that Hawking’s contention that his “no boundary proposal” removes the necessity of the First Cause is premature, and if you think about it a little more deeply it becomes plain that it doesn’t remove it at all.

 

[Love4All]

I would expect the universe to be eternal because matter and energy are eternal. The Greeks felt that matter was corrupt because the physical - bodies, trees, constructed objects - tend to fall apart, but this is actually pretty flawed. I find little to suggest that all the matter and energy in the universe ever did “not exist.”

There is one issue I can think of, however. The universe constantly becomes more disordered according to entropy. At some point in the past, then, the universe must have been completely ordered. This would suggest that different types of matter were separated and that the entire universe was at a temperature of absolute zero. All energy would have to be potential; no energy could have been kinetic (heat) since that is a form of disorder. This is slightly problematic, I think, because a state of complete order is impossible to imagine. In particular, all matter is attracted to other matter by gravity, which causes acceleration. If the universe is eternal, we should be able to keep going backwards and observe progressively more ordered states. But those forces would always be present and would be causing movement and kinetic energy through the dispersal of gravitational potential energy.

I don’t really know if this is a valid concern. Based on my knowledge of physics and chemistry, it might be. But I’m not a theoretical physicist. It is also highly probable that measure of disorder, as we go back, simply approaches 0 but never actually reaches it. Again, I am not sure and would hesitate to make a definitive claim.

If the scenario you paint has “always been,” how come we haven’t yet reached heat death? Given an infinite extent of time, it seems certain that whatever could have happened, would already have happened long ago. Otherwise, it seems you would need a beginning of time, which raises the question, what caused that? Also, if, as you say, originally (ignoring for the moment my previous objection), the universe was completely ordered, and different types of matter were completely separated, what made it that way? That is quite an arrangement, to say the least. It is the opposite of simplicity. Complete, utter order at the beginning of time, without an Intelligent Designer? How?

 

[Love4All]

The universe has always existed backwards into infinity and everything that has happened has happened an infinite number of times…

The latter does not follow from the former. Repetition is only necessary given a finite number of possibilities. But if the universe can be infinite in time, why can possibility not also be infinite? In such a case, there is no need for repetition.

 

[Lion_IRC]

Love4All:

Lion IRC:

The universe has always existed backwards into infinity and everything that has happened has happened an infinite number of times…

The latter does not follow from the former. Repetition is only necessary given a finite number of possibilities. But if the universe can be infinite in time, why can possibility not also be infinite? In such a case, there is no need for repetition.

No, LOL.
I think its the other ways around. Infinite/infinity/eternal/eternity does cover everything.
There is nothing that gets left off the list of an infinite number of possible events.

Everything which can happen has happened an infinite number of times.

Remember, we are working within the limitations of the premise, viz; The universe is uncaused, and past-eternal.

We are therefore (ironically) prevented from positing the notion of an all powerful, imaginative God creating new ‘‘stuff’’ which has never existed and no eye has ever seen, or events which have never happened an infinite number of times before.

 

[Lion_IRC]

Of course, in a static universe where nothing has ever happened before, THEN something new and unexpected might happen. Something ‘‘original’’.

But how is that qualitatively different to a ‘‘singularity’’?

I always rework the Kalam Cosmological Argument to change the terms…

"something which begins to exist’’ into "something which begins to MOVE’’

A thing beginning to move seems much more intuitively needing of a cause for its movement. And space/time is all about motion.

13.7 billion years of motion.

 

[Love4All]

No, LOL.
I think its the other ways around. Infinite/infinity/eternal/eternity does cover everything.
There is nothing that gets left off the list of an infinite number of possible events.

Everything which can happen has happened an infinite number of times.

I maintain, only with a finite number of things. An infinite number of things, need never repeat.

Proof: We will never re-use any symbolic expression of a natural number to represent another natural number. The digits, do in fact repeat periodically because there are only ten of them. But the expression, “17,” never names another number after naming seventeen. Continue numerating for all eternity, you will never use up the available symbols for numbers.

Remember, we are working within the limitations of the premise, viz; The universe is uncaused, and past-eternal.

We are therefore (ironically) prevented from positing the notion of an all powerful, imaginative God creating new ‘‘stuff’’ which has never existed and no eye has ever seen, or events which have never happened an infinite number of times before.

I don’t assent to an uncaused universe. Under my theory, the universe can be past-eternal and yet created.

forums.catholic-questions.org/showthread.php?t=771891

 

[Hamlet123]

Why must the universe have a beginning? Why can not we assign an infinite time to the past, admitting the eternity of the universe, that it has not been created but has always existed? Give me good arguments for such questioning, without entering a religious merit by saying something like “the universe must have a beginning because God created it.” I wish that this was the consequence of the argument, and not the cause itself, because it does not satisfy my question. We can not answer everything with faith because we have also the reason and we risk falling into the “God of the gaps”. I would like an answer strictly rational and within the philosophy.

Here is your answer:

From Robert Spitzer, SJ Ph.D “The Heavens Declare The Glory of God” you can get this in CD, DVD or the book 1-800-854-6316
One of the most intriqueing parts of this series is Spitzers explanation of how we can or if we can know for certain. He then goes in to detail of the special laws of the cosmos… to me is is THE most fantastic thing I have ever listened to.

Also a protestant: Dr. Hugh Ross a astro physicsist… google him… you will not be let down… you will thank me:thumbsup:
"

 

[Adrienne5678]

That is what science thought - a steady state universe - until they could no longer ignore the big bang and the receding universe. In addition the 2nd law of thermodynamics and entropy is increasing. Our own experience shows that unless maintained everything we built eventually crumbles.

But don’t the scientists claim who claim the universe is eternal say that the Big Bang happened, the universe expanded rapidly, then came the Big Crunch, then came the Big Bang and the universe expanded rapidly etc etc etc in one eternal cycle?

In other words, the Big Bang has happened before and will happen again…

I’m not a scientist, it’s just what I’ve heard…

 

[Evan]

But don’t the scientists claim who claim the universe is eternal say that the Big Bang happened, the universe expanded rapidly, then came the Big Crunch, then came the Big Bang and the universe expanded rapidly etc etc etc in one eternal cycle?

In other words, the Big Bang has happened before and will happen again…

I’m not a scientist, it’s just what I’ve heard…

The latest data says the universe may never go to a big crunch, instead it will go to a heat death and expand forever.

library.thinkquest.org/C0126626/fate/fate%20of%20universe.fate%20of%20universe.the%20future%20of%20open%20and%20closed%20universes.htm

 

[Cadellin]

St Augustine, I think it was, said that it is possible for the universe to have always existed yet to have been created by God. The reason is that, as God is eternal, it is possible for the universe to have been created from that eternity and therefore never to have had a beginning. The fact of being created from eternity was ‘the beginning’ referred to in the opening verse of the Bible. So there is no obligation for us Christians to believe that there was a first moment in time, only that time, whatever its extent, came to be through God.

 

[ccmnxc]

I think it is good to remember that scientists will never postulate God (nor would I want them to). Since science has a naturalistic presupposition is will look for naturalistic answers. Therefore, while there are theories out there about the origins of the universe, one needn’t accept them as dogma.

 

[garysibio]

Why must the universe have a beginning? Why can not we assign an infinite time to the past, admitting the eternity of the universe, that it has not been created but has always existed? Give me good arguments for such questioning, without entering a religious merit by saying something like “the universe must have a beginning because God created it.” I wish that this was the consequence of the argument, and not the cause itself, because it does not satisfy my question. We can not answer everything with faith because we have also the reason and we risk falling into the “God of the gaps”. I would like an answer strictly rational and within the philosophy.

Second Law of Thermodynamics. The universe will eventually released maximum entropy. If there was no beginning, it wi=ould already have done so.

 

[Hamlet123]

St Augustine, I think it was, said that it is possible for the universe to have always existed yet to have been created by God. The reason is that, as God is eternal, **it is possible for the universe to have been created from that eternity and therefore never to have had a beginning. **The fact of being created from eternity was ‘the beginning’ referred to in the opening verse of the Bible. So there is no obligation for us Christians to believe that there was a first moment in time, only that time, whatever its extent, came to be through God.

I am not following your logic. To create is to imply that there is a beginning. How can something be created from eternity? I can understand something can have always existed; but once IT is created it must have had a begining \

PovertyCure.org

 

[Adrienne5678]

I am not following your logic. To create is to imply that there is a beginning. How can something be created from eternity? I can understand something can have always existed; but once IT is created it must have had a begining \

PovertyCure.org

I agree.

 

[snarflemike]

But don’t the scientists claim who claim the universe is eternal say that the Big Bang happened, the universe expanded rapidly, then came the Big Crunch, then came the Big Bang and the universe expanded rapidly etc etc etc in one eternal cycle?

In other words, the Big Bang has happened before and will happen again…

I’m not a scientist, it’s just what I’ve heard…

I don’t know anybody still suggesting this. It was theorized some decades ago.

 

[Cadellin]

How can something be created from eternity?

I suppose it means that as God is eternal he could have created the universe infinitely long ago. This means the universe would have always existed effectively.

 

[ccmnxc]

I suppose it means that as God is eternal he could have created the universe infinitely long ago. This means the universe would have always existed effectively.

I’m not sure that works. Something being created infinitely long ago seems to be contradictory, since infinity is endless. If it is endless, we never would be able to reach back to a point of creation.

 

[Evan]

I’m not sure that works. Something being created infinitely long ago seems to be contradictory, since infinity is endless. If it is endless, we never would be able to reach back to a point of creation.

God did not create the universe at a time within the universe. Time exists only when the universe exists. God, being outside time, could ‘uncreate’ the universe and it would have never exists (as never is a time word). It’s like a book. A book is published but the first page is not published before the last page. They all come into existence with the book.

When God creates the universe, the past present and future all exist. We exist in time and experience it linearly. But even relativity admits there is no universal time.

But… to repeat an early post… if the universe exists eternally into the past, it must be unchanging at some time in the past and an outside agency (God) must have changed it from a fixed to an active state.

 

[Hamlet123]

God did not create the universe at a time within the universe. Time exists only when the universe exists. God, being outside time, could ‘uncreate’ the universe and it would have never exists (as never is a time word). It’s like a book. A book is published but the first page is not published before the last page. They all come into existence with the book.

When God creates the universe, the past present and future all exist. We exist in time and experience it linearly. But even relativity admits there is no universal time.

But… to repeat an early post… if the universe exists eternally into the past, it must be unchanging at some time in the past and an outside agency (God) must have changed it from a fixed to an active state.

Again, Evan, if something is created by definition it was not then it was; i.e, it could not have been always if it was created. Perhaps you have to find another word.

 

[Evan]

Again, Evan, if something is created by definition it was not then it was; i.e, it could not have been always if it was created. Perhaps you have to find another word.

How about, “God will’s its existence” or “conceives the universe”