An infinite Universe?

[_MeDotOrg]

In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the Word was God.

So says the book of John, and so (in their own way) say physicists, postulating from the movement of the Galaxies that there was a 'big bang' approximately 14 billion years ago.

Here's the question I have a hard time wrapping by head around. What caused the beginning to begin? If you're a physicist, what caused that big bang?

It seems to me what is being described is the beginning of causality, because everything that happens after that in the physical universe is cause and effect.

But if we live in an infinite universe, which is composed of a fabric of space/time, how can space be infinite and time NOT be infinite? How can time have a beginning? And it it DID begin, what CAUSED it to begin? And it CAUSALITY began with the beginning, what existed before, and why did causality begin? Did God exist in a non-causal universe prior to the big bang (or the 'beginning')?

Sorry if this question has been asked before, I'm new to this forum...

[_bcspace]

What caused the beginning to begin? If you're a physicist, what caused that big bang?

A collision between two branes (String Theory).

But if we live in an infinite universe, which is composed of a fabric of space/time, how can space be infinite and time NOT be infinite?

Smaller and larger infinities. For example, a number line. How many real numbers between any two numbers on a number line? Infinity.

So, between those two numbers, there is an infinity. But outside those two numbers there is a larger infinity than the one between them. Thus it can be said that God has always been God (between the two numbers on the number line) and at the same time, there was a point previous in which God was not God (to the left of the first of the two numbers on the number line).

[_Equality]

Smaller and larger infinities. For example, a number line. How many real numbers between any two numbers on a number line? Infinity.

So, between those two numbers, there is an infinity. But outside those two numbers there is a larger infinity than the one between them. Thus it can be said that God has always been God (between the two numbers on the number line) and at the same time, there was a point previous in which God was not God (to the left of the first of the two numbers on the number line).

Usually, you make my brain hurt in a bad way. This time, you made it hurt . . . in a good way.

[_Aristotle Smith]

In the beginning was the word, and the word was with God, and the Word was God.

So says the book of John, and so (in their own way) say physicists, postulating from the movement of the Galaxies that there was a 'big bang' approximately 14 billion years ago.

Here's the question I have a hard time wrapping by head around. What caused the beginning to begin? If you're a physicist, what caused that big bang?

It seems to me what is being described is the beginning of causality, because everything that happens after that in the physical universe is cause and effect.

But if we live in an infinite universe, which is composed of a fabric of space/time, how can space be infinite and time NOT be infinite? How can time have a beginning? And it it DID begin, what CAUSED it to begin? And it CAUSALITY began with the beginning, what existed before, and why did causality begin? Did God exist in a non-causal universe prior to the big bang (or the 'beginning')?

Sorry if this question has been asked before, I'm new to this forum...

It sounds like you are interested broadly in the Kalam Cosmological Argument. Whether or not you think it is a proof for the existence of God, the debate around the topic addresses the questions you are asking.

[_keithb]

What caused the beginning to begin? If you're a physicist, what caused that big bang?

A collision between two branes (String Theory).

But if we live in an infinite universe, which is composed of a fabric of space/time, how can space be infinite and time NOT be infinite?

Smaller and larger infinities. For example, a number line. How many real numbers between any two numbers on a number line? Infinity.

So, between those two numbers, there is an infinity. But outside those two numbers there is a larger infinity than the one between them. Thus it can be said that God has always been God (between the two numbers on the number line) and at the same time, there was a point previous in which God was not God (to the left of the first of the two numbers on the number line).

Actually, that's wrong BC. The size of an infinity is related to its cardinality. All segments of the real number line have the same cardinality, meaning that they're all the same size. However, any segment of the real number line has a larger cardinality than the primes, natural numbers, integers, rational numbers, and algebraic numbers. This is because the real number line is infinitely dense with no gaps, whereas the rational numbers are infinitely dense but with gaps.

It's complicated. But, I hope this helps.

[_Chap]

Can we find a way to make this thread relevant to Mormonism in some way?

If not, I wonder why the OP is on this forum.

[_bcspace]

Actually, that's wrong BC. The size of an infinity is related to its cardinality. All segments of the real number line have the same cardinality, meaning that they're all the same size. However, any segment of the real number line has a larger cardinality than the primes, natural numbers, integers, rational numbers, and algebraic numbers. This is because the real number line is infinitely dense with no gaps, whereas the rational numbers are infinitely dense but with gaps.

It's complicated. But, I hope this helps.

Actually, I was right because in my example cardinality is not a factor as I mentioned only real numbers and therefore all my infinities are the same type though of course with different numbers of elements in the set (smaller and larger). But such does help to understand mathematics yes.

Can we find a way to make this thread relevant to Mormonism in some way?

If not, I wonder why the OP is on this forum.

Has plenty to do with it. Mormons postulate a God that at one time was not a God and yet has always existed. What does that mean? It relates to the universe because when was God a God relative to that? Also, the universe is bigger than we can see which is only an expanding view (at the speed of light) limited by how old the universe is. It could be much much bigger and currently, we would never know it.

[_Doctor CamNC4Me]

Well. You know. Since matter doesn't really exist, and everything is relegated to forces (different forces assuming different characteristics which give rise to the illusion of matter) the Big Bang doesn't necessarily have to have a causality any different than when matter pops into or out of existence. In other words, the forces that be can simply cease to be or coalesce into a form which give the impression of a beginning when in reality it's the product of forces acting upon one another.

Not only is there an infinite Universe, but there are probably an infinite number of universes the nature of which is hard to fathom within our limited time and physical space.

Scale is truly relative. When we look at the universe we're in awe because it appears to be large. That's only because we're a force sub-component of its framework. That said, if we were to remove ourselves from this narrative the universe can be viewed as large or small, chaotic or ordered, depending on our observation of it.

Causality is a given. Everything has causality. It doesn't mean there is a deliberate causality behind it. Causality just happens. Whether or not we can ascertain the causality of how the forces ultimately came to be that created our reality will be determined, but assigned causality to a divine intelligence is tantamount to assigning a tornado to the Butterfly Effect. It's plausible, but ultimately as unreliable as any other explanation without scientific proof.

In other words, assigning the causality of a tornado in Western Kansas to the butterfly wing flaps of a Malaysian butterfly is as silly as assigning the creation of this universe to a god because there's no proof that either occurred.

- VRDRC

[_KevinSim]

Actually, I was right because in my example cardinality is not a factor as I mentioned only real numbers and therefore all my infinities are the same type though of course with different numbers of elements in the set (smaller and larger). But such does help to understand mathematics yes.

Bcspace, what you said was:

So, between those two numbers, there is an infinity. But outside those two numbers there is a larger infinity than the one between them.

That is not right, because it is possible to mathematically prove there are just as many real numbers between those two numbers as there are real numbers outside those two numbers. I know it doesn't intuitively make sense, but it is true. It is possible to come up with a one-two-one correspondence between real numbers between those two numbers, and between real numbers outside those two numbers, and to use up all numbers outside those two numbers first, before using up all the real numbers between the two numbers. Let me know if you want me to show you how to do it.

[_lulu]

A collision between two branes (String Theory).

They should watch where they're going. Jeesh.