right-track

This is a good point.

Freebase Dali

Well if you agree with the principle of the law of conservation of energy then it's reasonable to assume that energy was always present in some form, and simply coalesced or cataclysm[ed] at some point or another (the big bang being a result of that) and changed form into what we recognize today as subatomic matter.

I personally don't believe there was nothing, then something. It's easier for me to believe that energy itself, in a primal form, is a natural state of existence in all contexts, in the same sense that we tend to think of nothingness as being a natural state of existence without an influencing factor. If this is the case, there would be no need for it to have been created... there would only have been a need for it to have changed form.

The force that could have caused that change would then be the real question. I would tend to just chalk it up to potential given enough time.



Adding to this, when people speak about the outer boundaries of the universe, I wouldn't think it so hard to believe that it's simply the zone where this change is still happening further and wider into an infinite area of primal energy, which would pretty much be creating more space for our universe to expand into.

MoonlitSunshine

Interesting theory, it does wrap up everything quite nicely.

there are many theories regarding the big bang and how it started, many involve the idea of matter and anti-matter; that the total sum of the two is zero, and that whatever cause them to split caused two separate universes in the process, one of matter and one of anti-matter. one theory goes on to extrapolate that we now have two universes acting in tandem, each going through an endless cycle. As one goes from Big Bang to a death caused by over-expansion, leading to everything freezing over from a lack of energy (Heat Death), the other goes from this head death all the way to a Reverse big bang, known as the Monobloc, in which all matter gets crushed into a point... from which it explodes again. The two work in tandem, always taking up the same amount of space (in total).

Problem with that theory is that while it avoids the "what are we expanding into" infinite problem, it has the added problem of a "how the hell did this cycle start" infinite problem.

@RT: Theoretically speaking, the Universe has to have finite volume, as without infinite time something cannot increase to infinity, just to a very, very large number.

__________________
"I found it eventually, at the bottom of a locker in a disused laboratory, with a sign on the door saying "Beware of the Leopard". Ever thought of going into Advertising?"

- Arthur Dent

adidasss

Yeah, but on both accounts, time and space, you come to the conclusion that there was an infinite something which came out of the infinite something. And it's been there forever. My time and space bound brain can't really rap around it, I need an end and a begging to make sense of anything and there doesn't appear to be one logically.

__________________
“Think of what a paradise this world would be if men were kind and wise.” - Kurt Vonnegut, Cat's Cradle.

Last.fm

someonecompletelyrandom

Anything outside our plain of existence (i.e our universe or the fabric of it) may not follow the rules or laws of this reality that we're accustomed to. Outside of our universe Space and Time may not be as inseparable as they are here, so could time exist seperetly from space? Do time or space exist at all? To say infinity is impossible is to simply say within this plain, in which most everything has a beginning and ultimately an ending.

Toao

Well if it does, what's after that?

GuitarBizarre

Infinity is a pretty cool guy. Eh recurs forever and doesn't afraid of anything.

__________________

Freebase Dali

No, I was trying to say that there could be an infinite state being composed of primal energy/potential that didn't have to come from anywhere at all... that just "is" and exists that way in its natural state, and has infinite spacial dimensions. It couldn't be contained in anything because there is nothing outside it.... so it would have to be infinite. Think of it in terms of this "state of energy" being infinity itself. And think of infinity as being the point at which our 3 dimensional understanding of space becomes irrelevant.
You would have to assume that since something can't come from nothing, that "nothing" is actually something that simply changed form in a lot of fundamental ways. And there can't be an ultimate "outside". So somewhere in this infinite state of potential matter, a change happens at some tiny point, giving birth to a finite, but expanding change of physical state which we know as our spatially constructed universe and containing matter that built the stuff inside it. For as long as the universe would be contained inside this infinite state, the universe could not be infinite in terms of our dimensional constraints, regardless of how long or wide the expansion became. It would only get larger in relation to ourselves. The paradox to this is that would only be true if you were able to somehow fly to the edge of the universe and catch up with the expansion... so effectively, to us, the universe may as well be infinite.

Of course, these are all simply ideas I'm jamming off the top of my head, but I'm really interested in this stuff and it's something I constantly think about. I'm definitely down for refining ideas.