@kellyjay saidWhy have you crept in the word 'static' to accompany 'finite size'? Do you think the Quantum scientists concerned are advocating a static universe? Have you perhaps not understood what they said about quantum corrections?
The universe is not at a finite size or static, it is expanding. Even Einstein saw this when he looked through Hubble’s telescope, when he then acknowledged the error you are trying to justify.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidIt is changing by expansion, moving through time and if we flipped time would it shrink? Static suggested it could stay the way it is, on its face no.
Why have you crept in the word 'static' to accompany 'finite size'? Do you think the Quantum scientists concerned are advocating a static universe? Have you perhaps not understood what they said about quantum corrections?
@kellyjay saidWhich is why 'your' introduction of the word 'static' was erroneous.
It is changing by expansion, moving through time and if we flipped time would it shrink? Static suggested it could stay the way it is, on its face no.
Yes, the universe is expanding.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidCovering all the bases nothing more.
Which is why 'your' introduction of the word 'static' was erroneous.
Yes, the universe is expanding.
@kellyjay saidDoes covering all the bases lead to a home run? I'm not very good at baseball.
Covering all the bases nothing more.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidHitting the ball over the fence (in "fair" territory) leads to a home run.
Does covering all the bases lead to a home run? I'm not very good at baseball.
However, for it to count, the batter must step on all 4 bases.
@bigdoggproblem saidIn the proper order. 🙂
Hitting the ball over the fence (in "fair" territory) leads to a home run.
However, for it to count, the batter must step on all 4 bases.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidNo, "covering all the bases" leads to quicker "outs", since the bases are guarded by a player, and thus just needs the ball thrown to him to cause an out (usually only when the bases are "loaded" ).
Does covering all the bases lead to a home run? I'm not very good at baseball.
@ghost-of-a-duke saidLike all things we can only comprehend some, and what I still don't see you saying is how a universe could eternally expand, have sunlight eternally, have all the things we see today and be all the things we see today? If it took an eternity of time to even reach this point? Why would this point even be here if there was endless time before now?
A finite mind can never comprehend the infinite. You know that Kelly. All we can do is apply logic.
I have done that.
@bigdoggproblem saidThanks Joe.
Hitting the ball over the fence (in "fair" territory) leads to a home run.
However, for it to count, the batter must step on all 4 bases.
My post: 'I propose that the universe has always existed, in one form or another.'
Your reply: 'The universe has always existed in SOME form, you say. Okay, I got that.'
I didn't 'say that'. You didn't 'get it'.
Okay. that is annoying.
The universes has always existed in one form or another.
Do I get it now ?
'I propose that the universe has always existed, in one form or another.'
Close I think.
You propose that the universe has always existed, in one form or another.
Whew! Where do you get such faith ? Everything about the Second Law of Thermodynamics says the universe is running DOWN into colder, motionless, falling apart, accumulated entropy, expanding into the void.
But you think it has been doing this and somehow bouncing back or tunneling through to some other dimension and virtually (now) "re-creating" it self in another form ? ... "one form or another" ?
This is easier or more logical then "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth" (Gen. 1:1) ?
Given the accepted tremendous finely calibrated constants so that this entirely unique thing called life on earth could be permitted to exist, I think it requires less of a leap of faith to believe God transcending the whole creation, deliberately created it.
@sonship
As above:
'The universe may have existed forever, according to a new model that applies quantum correction terms to complement Einstein's theory of general relativity. The model may also account for dark matter and dark energy, resolving multiple problems at once... In cosmological terms, the scientists explain that the quantum corrections can be thought of as a cosmological constant term (without the need for dark energy) and a radiation term. These terms keep the universe at a finite size, and therefore give it an infinite age. The terms also make predictions that agree closely with current observations of the cosmological constant and density of the universe...'
Read more at: https://phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation-universe.html