Sorry I went out of range for a while...
I did not say there was nothing.
Nor can you or I say there was something, and if there was it would obey the mathematical laws as we understand and symbolized our own human observed naturally occurring physical patterns.
The BB does not say there was nothing
True but it does say the original universe started as a singularity . And yes, there maybe other singularities, baby universes or old universes within the permittive condition. But that going way out, IMO.
Our hot dense something could have been, in fact must have been, infinite in my view although possibly localised to a region that contained our current observable universe.
I'm sorry, I cannot visualize that. But I believe there are actual images of the finite universal plasma.
The Big Bang model accounts for observations such as the correlation of distance and
redshift of galaxies, the ratio of the number of hydrogen to helium atoms, and the microwave radiation background.
In this diagram, time passes from left to right, so at any given time, the Universe is represented by a disk-shaped "slice" of the diagram.
The initial hot, dense state is called the
Planck epoch, a brief period extending from time zero to one
Planck time unit of approximately 10−43 seconds.
During the Planck epoch, all types of matter and all types of energy were concentrated into a dense state, and
gravity - currently the weakest by far of the
four known forces - is believed to have been as strong as the other fundamental forces, and all the forces may have been
unified.
Since the Planck epoch, space has been
expanding to its present scale, with a very short but intense period of
cosmic inflation believed to have occurred within the first
10−32 seconds.
[39]
This was a kind of expansion different from those we can see around us today. Objects in space did not physically move;
instead the metric that defines space itself changed. Although objects in spacetime cannot move faster than the speed of light, this limitation does not apply to the metric governing spacetime itself. This initial period of inflation is believed to explain why space appears to be very flat, and much larger than light could travel since the start of the universe.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Universe
And I can visualize a small extremely hot object emerging from some metaphysical tensor, but an infinitely large extremely hot condition from which bubbles form which are then identified as THE Infinite Universe. Doesn't quite feel right. We'd be a bubble in an infinite universe, no?
But what does this infinite condition contain? Or is it just a metaphysical condition, from which Universes emerge? In any case, if it does so consistently and these phenomena form a metaphysical pattern, we're back to mathematics.
We can only observe a bubble which is our observable universe and even if there is more outside our bubble wind it all back and we can only feal with that bubble..
But that bubble could have been but one of infinite bubbles...do you get what I am driving at?
Yes and it does not negate mathematics , but rather does negate any notions of ID, no? It is indicative of a probabilistic phenomenon in a chaotic condition and we're back to mathematics.
Why is the universe infinite you may ask.
I think it can only be infinite because there can be no condition of nothing ..
If there is nothing you can only find something.
I can get into the metaphysics of that...
Since the universe is overwhelmingly made up of plasma, Alfvén reasoned that plasma phenomena, the phenomena of electricity and magnetism, not just gravity, must be dominant in shaping the evolution of the universe. He demonstrated in concrete theories how vast currents and magnetic fields shaped the solar system and the galaxies. As space-based telescopes and sensors revealed this plasma universe, ideas that he pioneered became more and more accepted. Yet even today, his broadest conceptions of cosmology remain those of a controversial minority. But his idea of an infinite, evolving universe is the only one that corresponds to what we know of evolution on the physical, biological and social level.
http://www.bigbangneverhappened.org/p13.htm
IMO, even Alfven cannot deny that all these natural phenomena are mathematical in the way they function and that all aspects of these natural phenomena can be addressed and translated into our symbolic mathematical values functions.
If, as Tegmark proposes, you take the term
mathematics in a broad perspective, everything we can possibly imagine as existing has a mathematical nature to it.
An infinite universe is eternal and therefore requires no creator and as clearly there is no creator evidenced or established in all human history ( other than unsupported wishful thinking) its very absence means the universe can only be eternal and infinite.
Alex
Is an Infinite Universe eternal or is Nothing eternal?
I totally agree with the rest....
