Scientific ideas & theories on the universe

[guitar george]

Does anyone have any scientific ideas or theories as to how the universe and the earth and the world could have come into existence? I have no idea. It's beyond me.

[robj144]

Look up the Big Bang for the universe. The Solar System and the Earth were created basically due to gravity.

[guitar george]

Originally Posted by robj144

Look up the Big Bang for the universe. The Solar System and the Earth were created basically due to gravity.

I've heard of the "Big Bang Theory", but, where did the huge amount of material for the Big Bang come from?

[robj144]

Originally Posted by guitar george

I've heard of the "Big Bang Theory", but, where did the huge amount of material for the Big Bang come from?

Possibly another universe.

[Tico]

While I understand curiosity and respect the scientific method, I'm also okay with unanswered questions.

Just because my mind can generate a question doesn't mean there is an answer.
Or maybe in 2, 200, 2000 or 2 million years sufficient evidence will be known to support an answer.

Sometimes the answer is, at this time nobody knows for sure.

[CMEkneurauter]

The answer is crack a beer, play guitar and be nice to eachother! You'll be much happier and better off!

[Nyghthawk]

No one knows. I suspect the answer is unknowable. It is worthwhile to explore the (fill in the blank) for knowledge. Chasing the unknowable is more dubious in its worth. No insult intended.

[sdelsolray]

Originally Posted by guitar george

Does anyone have any ideas or theories as to how the universe could have been created and the earth and the world could have come into existence? I have no idea. It's beyond me.

Current scientific theories covering this can be put into two groups:

1) Origin of the observable universe and
2) Evolution/emergence of the various components of the observable universe.

There is less evidence and less certainty regarding #1. Most inquiries are somewhat speculative or perhaps hypotheses. Two scientific theories (although some still consider them only strong hypotheses) concerning emergence of the observable universe are (i) Big Bang Theory and (ii) Inflationary Theory. Feel free to spend time researching them. Plenty of quality resources are available on the internet, but there are also many disingenuous anti-science sources also, so be careful if all you want to do is learn about the actual science involved, and are not interested in personal agendas.

As to group #2, the evidence is more abundant and the theories have a higher probability of correctness. Still, there are many areas where the current status is a collection of competing/overlapping hypotheses and no scientific theory has yet developed, e.g., the various abiogenesis hypotheses, dark energy and dark matter. Application of the known laws of physics, chemistry and biology are the basis of these hypotheses and theories, e.g., Accretion Theory, Biological Theory of Evolution, Germ Theory of Disease, Atomic Theory.

[Trevor B.]

According to the link below the universe has had no beginning. It has always existed but in different stages of expansion and contraction.
https://www.express.co.uk/news/scien...existed-before
I personally believe that in the beginning there was a GREAT GUITAR and from that GREAT GUITAR all music worth playing and listening to flowed forth in a cosmic revelation that continues to this day. This theory has no scientific or religious basis whatsoever but feeds into my somewhat esoteric and ultimately subjective worldview. And it's more fun than the other theories, to me at least.

[sdelsolray]

Originally Posted by guitar george

I've heard of the "Big Bang Theory", but, where did the huge amount of material for the Big Bang come from?

Most suggest that the "huge amount of material" was already in existence, albeit without space or time.

[fazool]

Current thinking in quantaum physics is that there is actually no such thing as mass. That which we call "mass" is actually made up of energy. As you get smaller and smaller (materials to elements to chemicals to atoms to suabtomic particles and smaller and smaller, the smallest is believed to not be "mass" but actually be concentrated energy.

Energy is not a "thing" and one theory is that energy is the manifestation of thought.

[sdelsolray]

Originally Posted by fazool

...
Energy is not a "thing" and one theory is that energy is the manifestation of thought.

Correction...one speculation is that energy is the manifestation of thought..

[Trevor B.]

Originally Posted by fazool

Current thinking in quantaum physics is that there is actually no such thing as mass. That which we call "mass" is actually made up of energy. As you get smaller and smaller (materials to elements to chemicals to atoms to suabtomic particles and smaller and smaller, the smallest is believed to not be "mass" but actually be concentrated energy.

Energy is not a "thing" and one theory is that energy is the manifestation of thought.

So, if in the beginning there was just energy and energy is, hypothetically, a manifestation of thought the obvious question is, "Whose thought?"
BTW-I still think my theory is the most fun.

[muscmp]

petrie dish.

play music!

[srick]

All - note that the original post has been re-phrased. We have a strict, no-religion rule here on AGF. Please respect our rules.
Thanks.

On behalf of the moderators,

Rick