Quote:
Originally Posted by lucifer_sam
I've formed hypotheses in regards to the origin of the universe, more specifically the origin of time, but I dunno if I'd be able to convey them properly...
My basic premise is there is no such thing as time, or at least time as a dimension which could be considered disparate from spatial dimensions. In layman's terms, the only way we've ever been able to prove the existence of time is to say that things happen.
|
You might find this interesting .. According to Einstein, things that move very fast move slower through time. His theories are consistent with our observations and for example satellites which travel around the earth at orbit at high speed are affected by this so much that this effect has to be corrected for when syncing their clocks to clocks close to the earth's surface.
Also, the general predicted scenario for our universe does not include a big crunch. Observations have indicated that such a scenario will never take place and that was one of the important observations that kickstarted the whole anti-matter thing.
Quote:
Originally Posted by RVCA
You're correct, but even if the universe is in an endless series of big-bang-big-crunches, they still had to start with something. There will still be an "event number one" which, by definition, could not have been preceded by anything at all.
|
I don't necessarily believe that our universe is infinite, but how can you say it isn't?