[ 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: 258 KB, 780x438, 1483585789593.png [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8699587 No.8699587 [Reply] [Original]

When there was nothing in the universe there were no universal laws established. The law that says matter can't come from nothing didn't exist.

So from nothing came matter because nothing wasn't bound by univeral laws. Once matter existed it defined the law that matter could only come from matter.

>> No.8699599

>matter
>defined a law
Matter can come from net nothing as long as antimatter is created equally.

>> No.8699636

>>8699599
That's just splitting hairs

>> No.8699654

>>8699599
yet there is a surplus of matter
really makes you think

>> No.8699679

Not sure if being genuine or cunt. Please advise on appropriate response.

>> No.8699690

genuine, teach me senpai

>> No.8699692

>>8699679
>>8699679
Genuine. It's how I've made sense of the universe for a few years, but I'm open to being confused again.

>> No.8699695

>>8699587
It doesn't address the problem of qualia, which isn't really a problem except for atheists.

>> No.8699700

>>8699695
Qualia: an integral part of consciousness, a hard problem we can't solve at the moment.

>> No.8699713

The biggest issue is you can't measure anti matter in any way so the only way to know of its existence is via observation of its interaction with normal matter. As such, anywhere there appears to be large spaces of nothing there could be anti matter. It would likely just form a galaxy similar to any other.

>> No.8699719

>>8699713
are you maybe conflating antimatter with dark matter? antimatter has all the same properties as matter, just different signs on all charges. you could observe it just like normal matter.

>> No.8699735

>>8699719
When antimatter and matter collide they annihilate each other. So no. But I should clarify further that the reason you don't seen the interaction of antimatter with matter in the observable universe is that vast majority of reactions have taken place. In all likelihood there is a distant galaxy made of antimatter with limited matter interaction. The biggest problem is the scale of the universe compared to the observable universe and the probability of any interaction between antimatter and matter already having occurred.

>> No.8699742

You see law is like order. Order isn't something that exist in one place it's relative even if something or nothing is there. For example in a pile of dirt it may seem very random that dirt is there but the moments leading up to that dirt being there and it being created so it would be there is astounding by itself. Now true the universal laws didn't exist before the universe did but the basic physics and quantum mechanics are order. So eventhough it may seem that the universe is ruleless there's actually a hidden law governing it.

>> No.8699744

>>8699735
observation via EM radiation would work just the same. there are no hidden antimatter-galaxies in "large spaces of nothing".

>> No.8699749

>>8699742
I can't see why invisible laws would exist before anything existed. Why would anything 'know' what laws apply before creation? They'd have to determine them after the fact. Unless the first thing created was law and not any form of matter.

Like first there was nothing, then there were laws, then the big bang.

>> No.8699757

>>8699654
Is there? How can you be sure that the antimatter isn't just in other places in space where it hasn't collided with matter?

>> No.8699759
File: 319 KB, 1000x792, swiss_cheese.jpg [View same] [iqdb] [saucenao] [google]
8699759

>>8699587
after how many holes does a theory cease to be a theory and becomes hole with theories?

>> No.8699764

>>8699587
>When there was nothing in the universe there were no universal laws established.

By Occam's razor I'd argue that all universal laws were always established. I don't see why anybody would be adamant either way, as there is no way of knowing this anyway.

Why do people argue that the universal laws and fundamental forces didn't exist before the big bang? Am I missing something?

>> No.8699768

>>8699764
>>before the big bang

ayy lmao

>> No.8699776

>>8699764
Use occams razor to justify why a law would exist before anything else existed

Why would rules be predefined? What were they defining? Nothingness in the off chance something existed? Where did the rules come from?

It's much easier to use occams razor and assume the laws didnt exist

>> No.8699783

>>8699768
Before the big bang there was only uniform energy. Since E = mc^2. The energy condensed itself until all of the universe was contained in a single point. What we refer to as energy/matter or basically as existing is really just the lack of not existing. What causes a lack of energy is the real question. The answer? After the universe condensed into itself, mass and by extension gravity became infinite. This caused a literal tear in space and time at any distance from the point of infinite mass. As such all the energy of previous points in time was pulled towards the single point in space and time and after all time and space had collapsed the dark matter took it's place. One sec I need a drink.