[ 3 / biz / cgl / ck / diy / fa / ic / jp / lit / sci / vr / vt ] [ index / top / reports ] [ become a patron ] [ status ]
2023-11: Warosu is now out of extended maintenance.

/sci/ - Science & Math

View post   
File: 37 KB, 363x359, evil incarnate.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
3373813 No.3373813 [Reply] [Original]

Wouldn't the Big Bang need something/someone to create it?

If not, why?

>> No.3373820

no consensus on answer

>> No.3373822

The universe, as a sentient being, created itself. QED.

>> No.3373824

>something

I don't know. It's not a logical necessity, at least. Ask Stephen Hawking.

>someone

why.jpg

>> No.3373823

0/10
it's like you guys are trolling yourselves. it's so fucking unoriginal, the levels of depression required to find this amusing are tragic.

>> No.3373832

The universe is a cross section of the multiverse which always existed. you're a flatlander. deal with it.

>> No.3373841

>>3373813

Your question is backwards. It should be:

"Wouldn't the Big Bang need something/someone to create it?

If so, why?"

Nobody needs to answer a 'why not' for whatever crazy bullshit someone thinks up, The first person needs to prove why.

>> No.3373842

>>3373832

There is absolutely no proof of this or even the slightest evidence or hint. It's a stupid theory subscribed to by try-hard failures.

>> No.3373856

I have always thought that the big bang was caused but unused energy, since energy can't be created or destroyed i figure it cultivated over time till such a cataclysmic event happened.
If i am not mistaken this is the theory behind the Higgs Boson.

>> No.3373863

i dont think its possible for a time before the big bang since time is proportional (or interwoven or whatever) with space and space didnt obviously expand and all until the bang occured but i dont know

>> No.3373868

trolls trolling... themselves.
end your life.

>> No.3373892

>>3373813
@OP:
You Sir, are using unfair debating techniques.

By phrasing your first sentence as a question you hope to confuse the reader to forget that it is in fact not a question but a positive statement. Ipso facto your first sentence should be. "The Big Bang needs something/one to create it".

Your second statement should be a motivation to the first. A support to explain why the BB needs a creator.

Because since you Sir, are the one making an unfounded statement. The burden of evidence becomes yours to field. To do as you just tried to do (phrase your statement as a question and reversing the burden of evidence). Just is not permissible.

So kindly go fuck a cactus, and then please provide some form of support to your statement that the BB needs a source or creator.

>> No.3373903

>>3373892
insult doesn't work unless you're a girl
which nobody is
moron

>> No.3373936

>>3373903
I am pretty certain a fag like you could come up with some way to fuck a cactus.

>> No.3373942

>>3373936
fail bail

>> No.3374056

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Bvpv2VfRIaE

>> No.3374073

Wouldn't a rock need something/someone to create it?

If not, why?

>> No.3374095

Why would it?

>> No.3374188

People asking this question have to be too dumb to understand the answer, because if they would understand, they would not ask.
Everyone who is truly interested will do the research. Reading Hawking would be the least to do.

>> No.3374308

stupid people itt

>> No.3374404

>>3373813
the big bang says the universe has been expanding, how exactly can someone create it?

>> No.3374421

yes, thats the general idea. The big bang is an event implying it had a cause. But what caused the cause? Science will go there too, if it can.

>> No.3374434

>>3373813
No.
Because all the conditions for a big bang were in place, therefore, it happened. It's like life, nothing "made" it happen.

>> No.3374449

>>3374188

>People asking this question have to be too dumb to understand the answer, because if they would understand, they would not ask.
>Everyone who is truly interested will do the research. Reading Hawking would be the least to do.

>ask=not research
>ask=dumb
>not ask=not dumb
>hawking

Fullretard.jpg

>> No.3374458

yes

and

no


Agnostics win again, Fuck Yeah ! ! !

>> No.3374461

>>3374434

>Because all the conditions for a big bang were in place, therefore, it happened. It's like life, nothing "made" it happen.

>conditions were in place
>nothing "made" it happen

Fullretard.jpg

>> No.3374471

Why do you assume that in an entropy-less environment cause-effect works in the same way, or order?

>> No.3374485

>>3374461

those conditions always existed, we are still in a big bang

it never starts or ends, it just transforms

the singularity always exists, it is everything,

>> No.3374490

>>3374461
conditions were in place =/= something made it happen

>> No.3374494

ITT monkeys flinging poo at each other

>> No.3374501

This is copy pasta'd:
If in the beginning of all space and time there was absolute nothingness, then doesn't that mean that it's very possible for something (the Big Bang) to be created out of nothingness? Since nothing exists, that means even the laws of physics, space, and time don't even exist, meaning literally ANYTHING is possible.

>> No.3374511

>>3374490

>conditions were in place
>therefore, it happened
>nothing "made" it happen

I was lazy, sue me.

>> No.3374533

>>3374501

>nothing exists
>Emptiness

>Since nothing exists, that means even the laws of physics, space, and time don't even exist, meaning literally ANYTHING is possible.
>empty box, since it is empty, you can, with little luck, find a DRAGON IN IT!

>> No.3374563

>>3374533
Empty space is not nothing.
As space is something.

>> No.3374587

Wouldn't the something/someone that created the Big Bang need something to create it?

If not, why would the Big Bang?

>> No.3374593

>>3374563

Prove empirically that emptiness and nothingness are not the same.

>> No.3374615

>>3374593
>Asking me to prove a negative
Lol no.

>> No.3374719

>>3374615

>implying you can quantify a nothing

hurr dur nope

>> No.3374744

>>3374719
How exactly does saying "I can't prove a negative"
imply "you can quantify a nothing"?