• nothacking@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    17
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    5 months ago

    It’s not so much that we know there was nothing before it, but that we can’t figure out what was before it.

    • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      5 months ago

      No, in our current best-supported model of the universe (Lambda-CDM) the concept of “before” the Big Bang is meaningless. It is the apex of the spacetime “bell” from which everything emerged.

      • rimjob_rainer@discuss.tchncs.de
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        5 months ago

        But something must have triggered the big bang. The model might not support this, but this only means the model is insufficient to describe what goes beyond our known universe.

        • WhatTrees@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          8
          ·
          edit-2
          5 months ago

          But something must have triggered the big bang.

          That’s a separate claim you’d have to prove. We have no evidence of something triggering it, we don’t even know that it would need to be triggered. All of our observations occur inside this universe, therefore we have no idea at all if cause-and-effect even applies to the universe as a whole. The short answer is: we don’t know and have no reason to posit the need for something else.

          What does it mean for something to be “beyond” everywhere or before time?

        • chonglibloodsport@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          2
          ·
          5 months ago

          That’s a philosophical question, not a scientific one, since it’s by definition beyond the ability of science to answer. It suffers from the infinite regress problem which many people invoke God to solve (the uncaused cause) but that’s not very satisfying, is it?

      • interdimensionalmeme@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        5 months ago

        It is incoherent that sonething could suddenly exist out of nothingness.

        Clearly the universe does not exist, this is all an elaborate statistical artifact.

    • orbitz@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      5 months ago

      Seems like a distinction without a difference, I sort of assumed the OP meant that is all I mean. We don’t know anything before the beginning after all. Like you said.