[ 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: 2.39 MB, 278x166, 1318648847448.gif [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4001942 No.4001942 [Reply] [Original]

what existed before the big bang?

>> No.4001950

A particle. A single particle, and nothing else.

i think

>> No.4001947

There is no such thing as before the big bang.

>> No.4001958

>>4001947

this actually.

existence was undefined, so no need to bother wondering what it was.

>> No.4001975

Time is cyclical. Before the big bang there was another universe.

>> No.4001979

>>4001975
You do not know that for certain.

>> No.4001984

We dont know. Anyone telling you something different is a faggot.

>> No.4001985

>>4001979
Thanks for the update, captain obvious. I also don't know for certain that Thor doesn't exist and the universe started last Thursday. Any other ground breaking news for us? Maybe that the sky is blue?

>> No.4001993

>>4001979

I love you Harriet.

>> No.4002002

>>4001942
The components of the big bang.

>> No.4002003
File: 27 KB, 600x202, 1311636064208.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4002003

>>4001985

>> No.4002006

>>4001985
Then do not say them.

>> No.4002007

>>4002006
>then do not say them

What?

>> No.4002032

>>4001985
>JRR toldien

Anyway, there wasn't anything before the big bang, OP. You're dumb for thinking there was.

>> No.4002050

>>4002007
Do not state it as a fact when you do not know.
You could say that "maybe the universe is cyclical"

>> No.4002058

>>4002050
Do you put maybe in front of everything you say because nothing is 100%?

>> No.4002060

What existed before things started existing?

>> No.4002064

>>4002058

I think, maybe, she definitely does, some of the time.

>> No.4002066

>>4002060

That's not even hard. Non-existence.

The logic checks out.

>> No.4002079

>>4002058
Obviously not, but the origin of the universe is something that we are still very much uncertain about, and there are many many different theories. It is appropriate to use the word 'maybe'
For simpler things in life, you can almost certainly know them as fact, and you know it is completely true other than for the almost impossible scenario of some kind of magic that could change the reality you know.

>> No.4002096

>>4002079
>almost certainly know

Um, that's not 100%, so you have to technically put maybe there as well. Please stay consistent.

>> No.4002103

>>4002066
How can something that doesn't exist, exist?

How can a contradiction be logical?

>> No.4002111

what's the origin of reality?

>> No.4002107

>>4002066
How can non-existance exist before existance exists?
Before existance exists there exists no existance so nothing, including non-existance, can exist before existance exists.

>> No.4002114

>>4002096
She didn't say it need to be 100%. 100% certainty is impossible to reach. For things that are predominantly uncertain, we say maybe. For things predominantly certain, we don't. it's a very simple distinction. Harriet is right.

>> No.4002117

>>4002096
Very funny.
I would say that 'maybe' is only needed to statements that we are significantly unsure about.
The big bounce theory definitely counts.

>> No.4002118

>>4002111
More reality.

>> No.4002121

>>4002118
Really?

>> No.4002122

>>4002117
I'm starting to think that someone cracked Harriet's trip...
She's been posting way more frequently, and with relevant accurate information... something's off...

>> No.4002131

>>4002122
The questions aren't difficult. She just answers them with clarity and authoritative style.

>> No.4002138

>>4002131
I'm not just talking about this thread, dickhead.

>> No.4002145

>>4002114
Even if I grant you that, every answer to this thread should have started with maybe.

>>4002121
Maybe.

>>4002131
>answering easy question with clarity and authoritative style
>see: autism

>> No.4002153

>>4001958
You do not know that for certain.

>>4001950
You do not know that for certain.

>>4001947
You do not know that for certain.

>>4002002
You do not know that for certain.

>> No.4002159

>>4002153
>dat agnosticism

>> No.4002180

>>4002153
you do not know that for certain

>> No.4002188

>>4002153
>>4002159
>>4002180

you do not know that for certain. You can't know for certain, that you don't know for certain. You have to remain agnostic about your agnosticism, because maybe you know it, you just don't know that you know it.

>> No.4002197

>>4002138
Neither am I, faggot.

>> No.4002198

>>4002188
You'll never know for certain whether you're agnostic or not.

>> No.4002201

>>4002145
>every answer to this thread should have started with maybe.

For this subject, yes.

>> No.4002202
File: 73 KB, 300x301, 1280163251763.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4002202

It is completely futile to argue about what existed before things started existing.

Our human mind is barely capable to understand the things that are existing.

>> No.4002205

>>4002198
You don't know that for certain

>> No.4002214
File: 13 KB, 160x160, 1313686428915.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
4002214

>>4002153
>>4002159
>>4002180
>>4002188
>>4002198
>>4002205

>mfw I realized no one can know anything for certain

>> No.4002355

There was nothing. It is pointless to ask what was before, because the time started when big bang started, as well as the other dimensions. So there was nothing, not even time "before" big bang. You cannot even ask what was before, because time didn't exist. It was not vaccuum, it was nothing.

>> No.4002397

>>4002214

>can't know for certain

certainty is a state of mind, you can be certain about a lot of things

you just might be wrong

>> No.4002638

>>4001942

The only theories of physics I know that posit a b4 with regard to the Big Bang are multidimensional theories such as M-brane wherein our universe is not actually all there is but a structure of finite dimensionality within a higher dimensional expanse. In many such theories the Big Bang is equated with a collision of two universes moving through this expanse so there would have been a b4 but probably quite boring and lacking in free energy.

>> No.4002732

>>4002397
You can't know that for certain.