big bang’s primary cause

AntonioLao · **big bang’s primary cause -** 09-26-2006, 03:03 PM

The big bang is caused by the equality of spacetime. This is a state of perfect symmetry. Once this is broken the effect is nothing more than the birth of the contact universe. Although secondary imperfection and inequalities are realized globally, at the local infinitesimal region deeper than the spacetime of quantum false vacuum fluctuations the remnant pf primary perfect symmetry still lies. The closer matter and energy approach this center the more effective is the exertion of the primary forces becoming stronger than the strong nuclear forces of quantum mechanics and standard model of elementary particles. Since every spacetime point is a center of perfection the primary forces are repulsive preventing a universal collapse. However, odd and even groups create centers of matter and energy while the remaining non-centered regions formed squares of energy as quanta of the true vacuum.

Graybeard · **Re: big bang’s primary cause -** 10-08-2006, 11:06 PM

Antonio..

Before the big bang what was there. Speculation could be that there was nothing at all.

But a very special nothing ... a 'nothing' with a non-zero potential.

Quote:

The big bang is caused by the equality of spacetime. This is a state of perfect symmetry. Once this is broken the effect is nothing more than the birth of the contact universe Antonio Lao

if the 'equality' of spacetime is in a perfect symmetrical state could this be the 'nothing-with-potential' . if the potential was realised, conversely symmetry was broken, is it possible the two sides (to break symmetry you must have at least two, and the same with equality) were MASS and ENERGY

Greg

mkirkpatrick · **Re: big bang’s primary cause -** 10-09-2006, 10:04 AM

Antonio,you gave a very interesting discription of the primary cause,but I feel you omitted the causer of the cause,that of intention and focussed will.

regards michael.

AntonioLao · **Re: big bang’s primary cause -** 10-10-2006, 03:50 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Graybeard

could be that there was nothing at all

Nothing is also meaning no interaction. However, it could also imply that forces are equal.

mkirkpatrick · **Re: big bang’s primary cause -** 10-10-2006, 06:48 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by AntonioLao

Nothing is also meaning no interaction. However, it could also imply that forces are equal.

It could also equally be the absence of intention?

regards michael.

Graybeard · **Re: big bang’s primary cause -** 10-11-2006, 12:41 AM

Quote:

Antonio Lao The big bang is caused by the equality of spacetime. This is a state of perfect symmetry. Once this is broken the effect is nothing more than the birth of the contact universe. Although secondary imperfection and inequalities are realized globally, at the local infinitesimal region deeper than the spacetime of quantum false vacuum fluctuations the remnant pf primary perfect symmetry still lies. The closer matter and energy approach this center the more effective is the exertion of the primary forces becoming stronger than the strong nuclear forces of quantum mechanics and standard model of elementary particles. Since every spacetime point is a center of perfection the primary forces are repulsive preventing a universal collapse. However, odd and even groups create centers of matter and energy while the remaining non-centered regions formed squares of energy as quanta of the true vacuum.

Does the following have the same meaning ??

The big bang is caused by (a break/split/separation) in the equality of spacetime. Prior to this split a state of perfect symmetry exists. Once this is broken the effect is nothing more than the birth of the contact universe. Although secondary imperfection and inequalities are realized globally, (ie:everything associated with the contact universe) at the local infinitesimal region deeper than the spacetime of quantum false vacuum fluctuations the remnant pf primary perfect symmetry still lies. etc... etc

Much Appreciated Antonio...... greg

Graybeard · **Re: big bang’s primary cause -** 10-11-2006, 12:58 AM

Michael ...

Do you see a (so far) hidden hand in the time prior to the big bang ... when the un-revealed was in in a state of perfect balance ...

What I mean is ....

Quote:

MKirkpatrick ... It could also equally be the absence of intention?

was the intention being used to continue this state ?? and a moments inattention resulted in the contact universe or the contact universe was the intention ?

greg

zeroca · 01:38 PM

Big bang is the first “moment” of world birth.
Was there anything before this moment? There was nothing, i.e. there wasn’t anything at all: no 3D-space and no 3D-body. Had nothing any capability to give rise to universe? I think it had. What kind of capability? I think that only possibility to receive something from nothing is splitting of latter into two opposite parts, in order to “obey to main regularity” (figurative expression), i.e. no other way...

The main rule, regularity that caused arising of the world from nothing was the "weakness" of nothing, the probability of which to remain unchangeable (undivided) equaled to 0.5 (see below):

If nothing existed before the birth of the world and the arising of the world is splitting of zero into two equal opposite parts, then

Why did a division arise within "nothing"?

It hadn't realized itself before division, had it? And even didn't "get" anything after it? It distributed within itself the opposite phenomena to the different places of the space (gravitation-to one place, and the space empty of it (empty of gravitation)-to another) and to the different moments of the time, i.e. arranged several opposite phenomena one after another during the time (for instance: spring-autumn, summer-winter etc.), i.e. this process began to last during the time.

What forced "nothing" to split into two opposite parts?

What initial impact, impulse? And what was the reason? By Then there wasn't any of them, was there? And it was easier for it to remain zero? Again the same word- regularity!!! It's more than "nothing" and more than the universe with its attributes, having been created from the same "nothing";
Probability-it's a regularity too, and the probability, that "everything" would have remained within "nothing" as it had been, or "anything" would have changed equaled to 50-50%, that's to say that the probability that zero would have remained in itself unchangeable (without division) didn't equal to 1, but equaled to 0,5. I.e. zero had two possibilities, two alternatives:
1. That "everything" would have remained as it had been-unchangeable (but the mentioned condition of it didn't last during the time, as time didn’t exist), or
2."anything" would have changed (let's call it a possibility, credibility to change), and the change definitely meant its splitting into two opposite parts (because the change of the other kind within it is impossible, and what's more: if anything is expected to happen within nothing, it's expected to happen at once, as "at this moment" time doesn't exist...
If we call the probability of something, that equals to 1- "steadfastness", (for instance, probability of falling out of six on a dice, on each side of which is inscribed six) and the above quality of zero-"weakness", we can say that the latter (the weakness) caused the birth of the world (i.e. zero included the code of the birth of the world in itself and there hadn't been necessity to force it "from the outside").

mkirkpatrick · **Re: big bang’s primary cause -** 10-11-2006, 06:46 PM

Greybeard,Greg,I will answer your question this way;The intention arose and the next
cycle began.

The primary cause of the "big bang" was the arising of a thought from absolute unity,
and exiting the eternal equilibrium to cause "waves" to arise,a "thought-wave" or if
you prefer a "creational-wave",which caused the expansion of the "idea",which in turn
produced a rather loud noise,that we have called the big-bang?

Hope that suffices Greg.

cheers mate,michael.

Graybeard · 06:02 PM

Quote:

AntonioLao .. The big bang is caused by the equality of spacetime. This is a state of perfect symmetry. Once this is broken the effect is nothing more than the birth of the contact universe.

Quote:

Zeroca ..Had nothing any capability to give rise to universe? I think it had.

Quote:

MKirkPatrick ...The primary cause of the "big bang" was the arising of a thought from absolute unity,
and exiting the eternal equilibrium

The first quote gives no reason, (and I don't believe a reason is necessary ) for the birth of the contact universe, but seems to hint that it is an illusion, at a deeper level symmetry still exists. But to me the word symmetry implies .. more than one state .. that is, to have balance there must be two equal and opposite forces.

The second quote implies a single 'nothing' that spilt into two opposite parts in order to obey 'main regularity' ..Zeroca .. you seem to imply that a split was a probablity ... a low probability but nevertheless a probability and that all probabilities eventually occur.

The third quote is similar to the first and second, and into 'absolute unity' a ripple, so so small, began a journey.

'Perfect Symmetry' .. 'Absolute Unity' .. 'Main Regularity' ... I read these as similar terms ...

We take the term 'Nothing' to mean nothing at all. But maybe there is no such thing and never was.

What if, to create a nothing, you empty everything out (this takes energy applied from the outside)... and then you reach a point where there is an amount of energy left ... but in order to remove this energy and achieve your goal.. you have to put more energy in and thereby you contaminate the nothing. You are in a 'Catch 22' situation.

Maybe all 'Nothing' has this problem. Maybe this is the true definition of 'Nothing' and always was ?? At any point this 'meta' energy could be released for any of the reasons quoted above ... or no reason at all. And the birth of the 'Contact Universe' occurs. ???

Just speculation .. greg