If you're referring to that which begins with post 926, I've started another thread (A "Before" the Big Bang?) that deals with this more specifically.
Intelligent Design
- Thread starter codeblue
- Start date
-
- Tags
- design intelligent
logical muse
LogMu
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2005
- Messages
- 2,050
Thanks! I was concerned that this discussion was degenerating into gibberish, so I'm glad to see there are now two.
Belz...
Fiend God
Not as far as quantum fluctuations go. "within" the universe, there are such boundaries that we call "inside" and "outside". But, "beyond" the universe there is no such thing, because space itself doesn't exist.
(please forgive my use of "within" and "beyond", as there is no word in English to describe space-less things.)
As I said, itself. The universe is curved unto itself. It expands unto itself. There is no space besides the universe. There is no infinite void beyond the universe. The universe(s) is(are) all that is, per se. "beyond" the universe there is a space-less, time-less thing called the spacetime foam.
According to the theory, of course. But its implications are much better supposed by evidence than any other theory or hypothesis.
It's an attractive force. It binds the quarks together. And is responsible for keeping protons and neutrons together in the nucleus. Since protons are positively charged there's repelling force between them and they wouldn't stay together without the strong force.
I did some reading
Wow. No. Not even close. Once again, Iacchus, you are conflating "nothing" with "empty space". The two are not the same. Not at all. No. Not even close. But if I am right, and you are indeed thinking "empty space" when others are writing "nothing", that would explain your confusion. That would give you a place to start finding out, and curing your ignorance.
It's an attractive force. It binds the quarks together. And is responsible for keeping protons and neutrons together in the nucleus. Since protons are positively charged there's repelling force between them and they wouldn't stay together without the strong force.
I did some reading
Then I am wrong. Opps. 
So which is it then? Empty space or nothing? ... What is the Universe expanding into? That shouldn't be too difficult for you to answer should it? The fact that you're making such a big deal about it, tells us you must have some reasonable idea here.
Last edited:
Ok, first thing is, the way you are asking the question still presupposes that it is expanding "into" something. Get your head around the idea that asking the question in that manner will lead you to false conclusions. Then, once you get that, go back and read the previous answers. Your question has been thoroughly answered, which you will see once you better understand what your question actually is.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
It isn't expanding into anything. It's just expanding. Have a look at the balloon analogy I've posted in one of your other threads.
So, you're not going to answer the question then. Fine.
It isn't expanding into anything? I see, would you care to translate that please? I think Tricky attempted to do this once already, and basically what he came up with was no-thing.
More than that, I pointed out why. The question is phrased wrongly. Phrased properly, the question has already been answered.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Have a look at the balloon analogy. And then have a think about it.
Last edited:
Correct. The universe is "everything". There is nothing left for it to expand "into". The phrasing of your question is what is giving you problems.
Tricky did an excellent job of translating. As have a few others here. You may actually have to break down and go to a library, if these wonderful explanations are not getting through to you.
Last edited:
kmortis
Biomechanoid, Director of IDIOCY (Region 13)
<after hours of fighting off the urge to respond to Iacchus, Kmortis submits to this diabolical impulse>Maybe the whole thing's a hologram then, huh? ... Ever see the movie, The Matrix?
WTF, Iacchus? Are we Arguing by Hollywood now? Ever see One Flew Over the Cookoo's Nest or 12 Monkeys?
edited to make mo'better
Last edited:
Actually, the movie, The Matrix, would make a whole lot more sense out of what he's saying.
Belz...
Fiend God
Ridiculous. The "matrix" in the movie is still a thing.
The universe is all there is as far as space and time, as we know them, are concerned. The is no "outside" the universe and, technically, there is no "inside" as well. You could say there is a "thing" besides the universe (the "foam") and, probably, other universes as well, but there is no space "outside" the universe. Therefore, the universe cannot expand into something, only unto itself.
It's not an easy concept to grasp, for sure. But, as you said, try to think outside of the box.
kmortis
Biomechanoid, Director of IDIOCY (Region 13)
That's as maybe, but One Flew Over the Cookoo's Nest or 12 Monkeys would make perfect sense out of what you're saying.
Mojo
Mostly harmless
Yup, that's what he seems to be doing. In another thread he's waving The Truman Show around in a desperate attempt to avoid having to think about an analogy I posted.