Broken Circle

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
One can see why you might prefer to not address the issue. But I suggest yur answer is not an answer but an attempt to make the question vanish. That is not science, it is defeatest.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

I thought I did address the issue, you just don't like my conclusion. Making questions vanish IS the point of science Mac, it is defeatist to assume that big issues are beyond our ability to comprehend.

LB,

I think your interpretation is quite close. I would differ only in that I believe once 0

---

>(+n)+(-n) is understood then there can be NO First Cause for Nothing.


Jeremy,

I thought I did address the issue, you just don't like my conclusion. Making questions vanish IS the point of science Mac, it is defeatist to assume that big issues are beyond our ability to comprehend.[unquote]

I have not concluded it is unknowable only that it is currently unknown. At least I am still looking and have not settled for an answer that is incomplete in understanding origin of existance.

If something always came from something, the question of origin
will never be resolved. No, that is like saying you have counted to infinity. The only answer that can stop the question of origin from slipping into ad infinitum is : everything came from nothing since it is the only thing that doesn't come from anything.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
"Pure Energy"(which is ETERNAL) exist, without cause, outside of time.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

So energy can be eternal and without cause but the universe can't. I thought that you had been exerting prodigious effort to slamming the notion of something existing forever without cause. I have no idea what "outside of time" means, you are applying a spatial term to a temporal concept, that doesn't have meaning to me.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
"Mass"(forms which are temporary/FINITE) exist, require cause, and since they are finite they are subject to time.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Anything that exists is subject to time, including energy. Energy is defined as E=mc^2. I see velocity in there, velocity requires both space and time for any energy to be present.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Time is "created" when the energy is converted into mass. The mass, which is finite in duration, will eventually convert itself back into energy.(m=E/c^2)
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Creation requires a minimum of a state of nonexistence AND THEN (note the temporality) a state of existence. A change of state always requires time. Time is not a physical thing like chocolate or alcohol that can be "created". Without the initial presence of time no physics is possible.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
"Pure Energy" is "Eternal" and there is a "Finite" quantity of it. With multiplication by division you could theoretically have an "infinite" <u>number</u> of "forms" on an "infinite" <u>scale</u> for a very, very, very long time within this energy however, eventually they will all convert back to "Pure Energy".
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

I would agree that energy is eternal but it is eternal because the universe happens to be eternal. I disagree that there is a finite quantity of it but I cannot prove that.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>
Oh Yeah, I mentioned Time but also space is created when mass is created. Otherwise, "Pure Energy" exists outside of Space and Time.
<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

I have the same problem here, velocity and mass must exist first in order to be able to define what energy means to begin with. Also, the initial creation of your space and time from the eternal energy outside of time again has no explanation as for what is causing it to do that.

To summarize my view.

The Big Bang may have invoked time-space and energy which cooled to form mass, all from a "Singularity" "NOTHINGNESS"

Black Holes are stuffing mass, energy and indeed a bit of time-space back into a "Singularity" back to "NOTHINGNESS".

Solve the meaning of a singularity and you solve the origin of the Universe.

<BLOCKQUOTE id=quote><font size=2 face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id=quote>quote:<hr height=1 noshade id=quote>[Mac]: Solve the meaning of a singularity and you solve the origin of the Universe.<hr height=1 noshade id=quote></BLOCKQUOTE id=quote></font id=quote><font face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" size=2 id=quote>

Singularities are well-studied and well-understood by mathematicians, and also by celestial mechanicians. Their "meaning" is not in any doubt. However, the math of infinities is again essential background to understand them.

But how ironic for Mac. A singularity is a point in space where density, force, and speed have all become infinite -- something Mac claims to eschew. Moreover, this is an example of a bad use of infinity, the kind forbidden by MM. A singularity requires the finite to become infinite, which is another process requiring a miracle. No matter how many forms or how much "energy" is added to a point, it can never reach infinity in reality. But singularities require a true mathematical infinity, not just a very large, finite value. They blow off the logical constraints of the principles of physics. -|Tom|-