Infinite number of planets with life

[Annik]

yeah, but its everything "as we know now" few years ago we believed that the planet was flat, or the centre of the universe...
and how the universe can have a start in time? was there something before? what is this "nothing"? any gases? every thing just started, where the gases game from?
thanks

Before the Big Bang, there was not even time. Time began once the universe began its glorious expansion!

[Hovik]

yeah, but its everything "as we know now" few years ago we believed that the planet was flat, or the centre of the universe...
and how the universe can have a start in time? was there something before? what is this "nothing"? any gases? every thing just started, where the gases game from?
thanks

A man by the name of Pythagoras determined not only that the Earth was round but a very close approximation of its circumference in the 6th century BCE. The belief that the earth is flat hasn't been around for a very long time.

The geocentric model of the universe persisted for as long as it did due to the church enforcing its theologically-inspired model of the cosmos.

The universe didn't have a start point because time didn't exist before the universe existed. Time is something that only applies to things within the universe itself, so it's useless to use it as a frame of reference for what was "before" the universe--the short answer is that there wasn't anything before the universe, neither space nor time.

When the universe expanded, basic particles developed into elements which were further synthesized into other elements in the crucibles of stars. Gasses are just a state of matter, so these also didn't exist before the universe.

[rafa360]

If you don't proceed from what we know, then you might as make up any shit you want.

sorry man, I'm just saying that what we know (or we think we know) can change as it changed in the past, and there is a lot of questions that can not be answered yet... I'm not saying its wrong or false, is one probability but is certain not sure..

[Cyberman]

yeah, but its everything "as we know now" few years ago we believed that the planet was flat, or the centre of the universe...
and how the universe can have a start in time? was there something before? what is this "nothing"? any gases? every thing just started, where the gases game from?
thanks

The question of how the Universe can have a start in time is meaningless, since time began with the start of the Universe. The same thing goes for what was there before time and the Universe existed. It's like asking what's north of the North Pole, or what's colder than Absolute Zero. The questions cannot be answered since they simply do not compute.

[Annik]

If you don't proceed from what we know, then you might as make up any shit you want.

sorry man, I'm just saying that what we know (or we think we know) can change as it changed in the past, and there is a lot of questions that can not be answered yet... I'm not saying its wrong or false, is one probability but is certain not sure..

That is the best thing about science. It changes its views based on evidence.

[Hovik]

If you don't proceed from what we know, then you might as make up any shit you want.

sorry man, I'm just saying that what we know (or we think we know) can change as it changed in the past, and there is a lot of questions that can not be answered yet... I'm not saying its wrong or false, is one probability but is certain not sure..

When we know something in a scientific sense, there is a lot of good evidence to back it up. Things that we "knew" in the past that have been since changed weren't based on scientific reasoning, and are therefore meaningless. For example, we know that the Earth orbits the sun, and we know that because of a more advanced understanding the cosmos. We're not going to determine in the future that this is incorrect because the fact of the matter is, the Earth does orbit the sun. We know this.

Science adjusts its views based on new evidence from observation.

[rafa360]

sorry man, I'm just saying that what we know (or we think we know) can change as it changed in the past, and there is a lot of questions that can not be answered yet... I'm not saying its wrong or false, is one probability but is certain not sure..

When we know something in a scientific sense, there is a lot of good evidence to back it up. Things that we "knew" in the past that have been since changed weren't based on scientific reasoning, and are therefore meaningless. For example, we know that the Earth orbits the sun, and we know that because of a more advanced understanding the cosmos. We're not going to determine in the future that this is incorrect because the fact of the matter is, the Earth does orbit the sun. We know this.

Science adjusts its views based on new evidence from observation.

yeah, in the future the earth is not going to turn up to be a cube... we know that, but we don't know if the universe is infinite, if before there was something, we suppose that there was anything, but no one was there, no one saw the universe from another universe, or found a wall or edge.

[Hovik]

When we know something in a scientific sense, there is a lot of good evidence to back it up. Things that we "knew" in the past that have been since changed weren't based on scientific reasoning, and are therefore meaningless. For example, we know that the Earth orbits the sun, and we know that because of a more advanced understanding the cosmos. We're not going to determine in the future that this is incorrect because the fact of the matter is, the Earth does orbit the sun. We know this.

Science adjusts its views based on new evidence from observation.

yeah, in the future the earth is not going to turn up to be a cube... we know that, but we don't know if the universe is infinite, if before there was something, we suppose that there was anything, but no one was there, no one saw the universe from another universe, or found a wall or edge.

However, that isn't to say that we won't one day find out the answers to these questions. That's the beauty of science: it's pretty darn good at finding answers to big questions. Just like we determined the Earth orbits the Sun, we can and will one day determine the rest of the nature. Even now we have very compelling observations and experiments that suggest profound insights into the nature of the universe, and our understanding can only get better.

[popeyespappy]

but no one was there

Galan of Taa was! So were the Watchers.

I know it's true because I read it in a book. It even had pretty pictures.

[Anomalocaris]

Actually, we are not certain time began with the big bang. We are also not certain that time has only one dimension. Modern physics postulate the universe can have many more physical dimensions than we can see. The reason we can only see three is because all of the senses we currently have access to, whether given by nature or by instruments we've thus far invented, ultimately relies on what physics call messenger particles that are constrained to move in our three dimensions.

It may be that time has several dimensions, and like physical dimensions we can only perceive a subset of them. In this case, perhaps the dimension we sense started with big bang, but other orthagonal to ours can't be said to have started at any point along our time.