- #1
yrreg
- 34
- 1
Please be patient with me, and forgive me for my ignorance, but I do think according to logic and take into account the facts established by science.
Here is my take on how we come to know that the universe has a beginning.
The universe is expanding, so scientists by mathematics infer backward to the very point beyond which point they would fall off into nothingness: so, they stop their mathematics at that point which is still into something instead of literally nothing.
Now, this point is a very dense hot point of energy: it is something, it is not nothing.
From this point onward we say that it is the beginning of the universe, and it has expanded from that beginning toward the present state which is the expanded universe as we can observe it now, and it is still expanding.
Is that idea okay as coming from a thinking person, thinking according to logic and based upon the facts established by science?
Yrreg
Here is my take on how we come to know that the universe has a beginning.
The universe is expanding, so scientists by mathematics infer backward to the very point beyond which point they would fall off into nothingness: so, they stop their mathematics at that point which is still into something instead of literally nothing.
Now, this point is a very dense hot point of energy: it is something, it is not nothing.
From this point onward we say that it is the beginning of the universe, and it has expanded from that beginning toward the present state which is the expanded universe as we can observe it now, and it is still expanding.
Is that idea okay as coming from a thinking person, thinking according to logic and based upon the facts established by science?
Yrreg