[B0ycey]

One explanation is that the total net energy in the universe is zero. Take gravity for example. It consumes energy to throw a bal in the air. It is given back as the ball falls to earth.

From Einstien we know about an equivalence that ties mass and energy together. If the total energy is zero it could have come from zero mass.
Not something from nothing. Nothing from nothing.

Gravity doesn't consume energy. It displaces it and converts it into low value energy. The energy doesn't disappear so cannot be consumed. But ignoring this little fact, lets look at Einstein's theory E=MC2 with basic logic to show you that you have just written nonsense. Energy equals mass times the speed of light squared. So if you are saying there is no energy in the universe (or ever was) you are also saying there cannot or ever was mass or matter. Well without matter you cannot exist to write your nonesense on PoFo. Bit of a fuck up from you there I'm afraid. But because you're an Atheist you can't be wrong. So I'm sure you'll give me more nonsense again to prove you are right.

[B0ycey]

The big bang is not a theory of cosmic origins. A "big bang" occurs any time enough matter is compressed under enough pressure, and this is the case within the center of every black hole. Our own, observable universe is the product of one such event.

As black holes twist the fabric of space-time so much that even light cannot escape the gravity of one when passing it, we cannot know what is occuring in the centre of every black hole. A new universe coming from within it sounds plausble I suppose, but you would need the equations to go with such a theory. It certainly isn't a fact or has scientific consensus. The Wormhole concept has a greater acceptance to it. As for a big bang occuring every time under such conditions, there is no evidence of this. But there is a multiverse theory I suppose.

[Potemkin]

The big bang is not a theory of cosmic origins. A "big bang" occurs any time enough matter is compressed under enough pressure, and this is the case within the center of every black hole. Our own, observable universe is the product of one such event.

Oh really? And you know this how exactly?

Hmm?

[jakell]

If the Universe were known to have always existed, then there would be no problem, logically speaking. That which has always existed requires no creator. This is why Schopenhauer insisted that the Universe must be eternal and cannot have had a beginning - it was the only logical way to dispense with the need for a creator-God, which he very much wanted to do. However, the Universe did indeed have a definite beginning, and given the fact that causality cannot be extended part the point of the Big Bang, this makes the fact that there is something rather than nothing rather mysterious, on the face of it. Wouldn't you agree?

When I try to think about this, which isn't straightforward, I tend to conclude that this is a matter of perspective.

We locate this 'beginning' by extrapolating our present timeline back until we locate it however, at that period, time would have had a different meaning via which that 'beginning' might never be found. so yes, the Universe had a beginning using our present perspectives and yardsticks.

Trying to find other perspectives, I've been looking at Roger Penrose's stuff regarding conformal cyclic cosmology, which does go beyond this 'beginning', it's very hard though. I also like the fact that I came across him via an unexpected route ie Stuart Hammerof's stuff on understanding consciousness via quantum events (which is also hard)

[Besoeker]

Gravity doesn't consume energy. It displaces it and converts it into low value energy.

Do you know how Dinorwig works?

[B0ycey]

Do you know how Dinorwig works?

Can't say I had heard of the place until I looked online to see what you were on about. Now I know it is a hydro plant, I know exactly what type of energy it uses to power it. But I am interested in reading your nonsense, so please enlighten me with your wealth of non existent energy knowledge or that gravity consumes energy knowledge. I am interested with what you have to say as it goes against science. But before you start typing, I have a few little riddles or teasers to ask you. What type of energy does a elastic band use that has been stretched but hasn't been realised? Second, if a battery is not being used, does it hold energy or does it not? Learn the forms of energy there are before trying to act cleaver.

[Besoeker]

Can't say I had heard of the place until I looked online to see what you were on about. Now I know it is a hydro plant, I know exactly what type of energy it uses to power it. But I am interested in reading your nonsense, so please enlighten me with your wealth of non existent energy knowledge or that gravity consumes energy knowledge. I am interested with what you have to say as it goes against science. But before you start typing, I have a few little riddles or teasers to ask you. What type of energy does a elastic band use that has been stretched but hasn't been realised? Second, if a battery is not being used, does it hold energy or does it not? Learn the forms of energy there are before trying to act cleaver.

It's actually a hydro storage facility.
It takes energy from the National Grid to pump water from a lower level to a higher level against gravity. The energy (most of it)* when gravity sends the water back to the lower lever is returned to the grid.

*If you care to do the calcs, the efficiency comes out at a bit over 70% which is pretty good for a double energy conversion especially when the motors and pumps have to be designed to also act as generators and turbines respectively.

[B0ycey]

It's actually a hydro storage facility.
It takes energy from the National Grid to pump water from a lower level to a higher level against gravity. The energy (most of it)* when gravity sends the water back to the lower lever is returned to the grid.

*If you care to do the calcs, the efficiency comes out at a bit over 70% which is pretty good for a double energy conversion especially when the motors and pumps have to be designed to also act as generators and turbines respectively.

Well that is very interesting. But I don't really know why you have published this interesting fact in an 'Agora' thread. Surely this great advancement in hydro storage information needs to go in the Science or Environment forums.

[Besoeker]

Well that is very interesting. But I don't really know why you have published this interesting fact in an 'Agora' thread. Surely this great advancement in hydro storage information needs to go in the Science or Environment forums.

It goes back to the "something from nothing" notion.

[B0ycey]

It goes back to the "something from nothing" notion.

or perhaps the potential energy in the water is greater than the energy pumping it up from the National Grid...

[Agent Steel]

Hmm?

I'm not saying it's a known fact, but it's no more speculative than what you propose, that a personal mind magically willed the universe into existence. My claim is a viable alternative to yours. It's also more plausible. Just think about it. Where does all the matter and energy inside a black hole go? Surely it most go somewhere. It can't just disappear into nothingness can it? The truth is, neither of us really know, because the current big bang model is incomplete. Science does NOT say that the Universe began at the big bang. There is a limit to how far back our equations can go. It's called Planck's Wall, and it's 10^-43 seconds after the apparent bang. But prior to that point? It's anyone's guess. For all we know the Universe oscillates between expansion and contraction, and prior to the big bang space expands in the opposite direction. That may very well be the case.

[Potemkin]

I'm not saying it's a known fact, but it's no more speculative than what you propose, that a personal mind magically willed the universe into existence.

I proposed no such thing. I am, in fact, an atheist.

My claim is a viable alternative to yours. It's also more plausible.

A plausible alternative to what? All I stated is that Being - the fact that there is something rather than nothing - has a mysterious quality to it. The fact that you are going through mental gymnastics, with compressed time and oscillating universes and whatnot, to try to account for it rather suggests that the statement is a correct one.

Just think about it. Where does all the matter and energy inside a black hole go? Surely it most go somewhere. It can't just disappear into nothingness can it? The truth is, neither of us really know, because the current big bang model is incomplete. Science does NOT say that the Universe began at the big bang. There is a limit to how far back our equations can go. It's called Planck's Wall, and it's 10^-43 seconds after the apparent bang. But prior to that point? It's anyone's guess. For all we know the Universe oscillates between expansion and contraction, and prior to the big bang space expands in the opposite direction. That may very well be the case.

Indeed it may. And it may very well not be the case.

[One Degree]

I'm not saying it's a known fact, but it's no more speculative than what you propose, that a personal mind magically willed the universe into existence. My claim is a viable alternative to yours. It's also more plausible. Just think about it. Where does all the matter and energy inside a black hole go? Surely it most go somewhere. It can't just disappear into nothingness can it? The truth is, neither of us really know, because the current big bang model is incomplete. Science does NOT say that the Universe began at the big bang. There is a limit to how far back our equations can go. It's called Planck's Wall, and it's 10^-43 seconds after the apparent bang. But prior to that point? It's anyone's guess. For all we know the Universe oscillates between expansion and contraction, and prior to the big bang space expands in the opposite direction. That may very well be the case.

It appears you already know more about the subject than myself and therefore already know one explanation for this ^. The faster than light expanding universe dissipates the matter and energy just beyond our horizon.
It is there, but we are incapable of seeing it.

[Besoeker]

or perhaps the potential energy in the water is greater than the energy pumping it up from the National Grid...

Now how that be possible?

[B0ycey]

Now how that be possible?

By technology. You are assuming that the energy from the national grid should equal the potential energy from the water. If the only form of energy was from the national grid then that would be true. But technology will use other forms of energy to create an effect to make another form of energy. For example, how does a roller coaster work? Does it need fuel all the way round the track or just enough to get the cart to the top of the first drop? Your ignorance is you think energy takes one form. It can take many forms. But to be honest, you either know and understand this kind of stuff or you don't. I'm not going to write an essay on it for you.

[Nonsense]

If the Universe were known to have always existed, then there would be no problem, logically speaking. That which has always existed requires no creator. This is why Schopenhauer insisted that the Universe must be eternal and cannot have had a beginning - it was the only logical way to dispense with the need for a creator-God, which he very much wanted to do. However, the Universe did indeed have a definite beginning, and given the fact that causality cannot be extended part the point of the Big Bang, this makes the fact that there is something rather than nothing rather mysterious, on the face of it. Wouldn't you agree?

"If the Universe were known to have always existed, then there would be no problem, logically speaking".

There is no 'problem' as the 'universe' has NOT 'always' existed, it is a scientifically accepted FACT, that the universe 'began' with a 'Big Bang', the physics of that event are written into the very fabric of the universe.

Every single atom in your body arises from that singular event.

"That which has always existed requires no creator. This is why Schopenhauer insisted that the Universe must be eternal and cannot have had a beginning - it was the only logical way to dispense with the need for a creator-God, which he very much wanted to do".

"That which has always existed requires no creator".
In the context of the Big Bang, this is totally a fallacious argument, it is also illogical.

"This is why Schopenhauer insisted that the Universe must be eternal and cannot have had a beginning - it was the only logical way to dispense with the need for a creator-God, which he very much wanted to do".

Schopenhauer was WRONG & it was NOT the 'only' way to dispense with a 'creator'-'god'.

The 'universe' was 'created' in that event we call 'The BIG BANG', no fairy holding a magic wand needed.

Arguably Albert Einstein was a little wiser on this, though both men had minds that were 'muddled' in one way or another, though not knowingly intentional:- “Two things are infinite: the universe and human stupidity; and I’m not sure about the universe.”
Einstein might have spoken more truly had he acknowledged that it's all 'relative'(the infinity - that is)

[Besoeker]

By technology. You are assuming that the energy from the national grid should equal the potential energy from the water.
If the only form of energy was from the national grid then that would be true. But technology will use other forms of energy to create an effect to make another form of energy.

For the case in point, Dinorwig, grid energy is used to pump the water up the mountain that's so that's where it comes from.

For example, how does a roller coaster work? Does it need fuel all the way round the track or just enough to get the cart to the top of the first drop?

It coasts down from the top. Why do you think it is called a roller COASTER?

Your ignorance is you think energy takes one form.

That's just nonsense. Ever heard of Urenco? Wavegen? Eaton UPS systems? Tesla Cars?

[B0ycey]

For the case in point, Dinorwig, grid energy is used to pump the water up the mountain that's so that's where it comes from.

It coasts down from the top. Why do you think it is called a roller COASTER?


That's just nonsense. Ever heard of Urenco? Wavegen? Eaton UPS systems? Tesla Cars?

These replies confirm what I already knew. You don't know what I am talking about because you don't know the different forms of energy. So natually you think energy can come from nothing. But I am afraid that goes against science. Energy changes form and more importantly cannot be created from nothing. But I can't be arsed to educate you further. As I said, you either know and understand these things or you don't. I will ignore you now. There is no point discussing something you know nothing about.

[Nonsense]

It goes back to the "something from nothing" notion.

It's NOT a 'notion' at all & it's NOT a case of, "something for nothing".

It's about E=MC2 coupled with a variation or violation of charge parity.

There was no 'matter', 'gravity' or 'space' at that instant when time began, it was pure energy being created from that violation at the Planck size, accompanied by 'inflation' which expanded for milliseconds at light-speed, within the first seconds the temperature had greatly reduced, particles were forming quark-gluon plasma, followed by atoms.

It took something like 275 thousand years to grow to the size of the Andromeda galaxy before first light, when photons appeared after the ionization.

As temperatures cooled, with atoms appearing, parts or humongous clumps of matter rapidly formed massive stars or 'black holes'.

The idea that many cosmologist hold, of 'vacuum' energy, is, to my mind, not proven, though it may have contributed in some measure to the formation of these first generation stars & black holes.

Logically , nothing could stop the expansion, this is because there was nothing to stop it, 'space' was being made as part of the process of expansion, this process is opposite to requirements for 'vacuum energy'.

The Big Bang theory has long been backed up by observation, experiment & evidence.
With the above, it requires a little 'imagination' rather than 'knowledge' to picture the conditions at that period of the universe's history.

I can of course give a logical reason why no 'creator' was possible, but, that will not stop those of 'blind' 'faith' or 'prejudice' from pursuing their claim of some 'fairy' waving their 'magic' wand, after all, they do need to 'make-a-living', right?

[Besoeker]

These replies confirm what I already knew. You don't know what I am talking about because you don't know the different forms of energy.

I have you examples of different forms of energy.
Do you know what it was at Urenco?