Unraveling the Mystery of the Universe's Origin

  • Thread starter Thread starter Vaid
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Origin
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the concept of the "first cause" of the universe and the philosophical implications of causality. Participants question whether the first cause itself requires an origin, leading to an infinite regression of causes. The conversation also touches on abstract concepts like the existence of numbers, specifically the number 3, and whether they need a cause to exist. There is a distinction made between scientific inquiry and philosophical debate, with the assertion that science cannot address questions of eternal existence as they are unfalsifiable. Ultimately, the dialogue highlights the intersection of science and philosophy in understanding the universe's origin.
Vaid
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi all,

Suppose we find the first cause that created the universe. What about the origin of this very first cause? Suppose it is X. What about the origin of X? Suppose it is Y. What about Y? And so on...

Can we ever find the origin of this universe?
 
Space news on Phys.org
Why do you expect that the "first cause" has to be caused by something? Causality is a statement about processes in our universe.

A related, tricky question: Do you think the number 3 exists? Does it need a cause to exist?
Let's say we find some way to relate our universe to the number 3 in a mathematical way. Does our universe need a cause to "exist"? Does it exist at all?
 
mfb said:
Why do you expect that the "first cause" has to be caused by something? Causality is a statement about processes in our universe.

Are we talking about science or 'magic' where things happen without any cause.

If the 'first cause' happened without any cause, what is the surety or proof of its existence?
 
Vaid said:
Are we talking about science or 'magic' where things happen without any cause.
Neither. You are discussing a well-traveled topic in philosophy. Science cannot address the question of eternal existence because it is an unfalsifiable proposal.
 
Sorry. This is Philosophy, and we don't discuss that on PF.
 

Thread 'Matter density right after the decoupling'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Recombination_(cosmology) Was a matter density right after the decoupling low enough to consider the vacuum as the actual vacuum, and not the medium through which the light propagates with the speed lower than ##({\epsilon_0\mu_0})^{-1/2}##? I'm asking this in context of the calculation of the observable universe radius, where the time integral of the inverse of the scale factor is multiplied by the constant speed of light ##c##.
View full post »

Thread 'Hubble Constant, Dark Energy and the Expanding Universe'

Why was the Hubble constant assumed to be decreasing and slowing down (decelerating) the expansion rate of the Universe, while at the same time Dark Energy is presumably accelerating the expansion? And to thicken the plot. recent news from NASA indicates that the Hubble constant is now increasing. Can you clarify this enigma? Also., if the Hubble constant eventually decreases, why is there a lower limit to its value?
View full post »

Similar threads

I What Are the Origins of the Universe?
Replies
17
Views
3K
B Conflict between the conservation of matter and the rapid expansion of our universe
Replies
18
Views
729
I Why didn't the Big Bang form a Black Hole?
Replies
7
Views
3K
B Did Georges Lemaître Think the Universe Began from a Point?
Replies
16
Views
3K
I Bubble universes and physical constants
Replies
8
Views
2K
On the origin and the evolution of information in the Universe
Replies
1
Views
2K
B If the Universe has a cause, what caused that cause?
Replies
11
Views
1K
B Does the CMB itself tell us that it started at 3000K?
Replies
23
Views
2K
B Cosmological Redshift in Simulated Universe
Replies
39
Views
5K
B Estimates — True Size of the Universe?
Replies
17
Views
3K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top