Total stars in Universe is rougly equal to the total number (ever) of human cells.

[Edwardo Piet]

How many alien Worlds did Jesus have to die on?

Huh. Haven't you heard the news about Jesus's true nature?

[Jehanne]

GC,

The total energy of the Universe is widely held to be zero, as if it came from nothing. Just Google it.

Dawn

[Anomalocaris]

GC,

The total energy of the Universe is widely held to be zero, as if it came from nothing.  Just Google it.

Dawn

It seems to have required no net energy input to start.  But at a deeper level i don’t think it is clear if the information it would ever contain was present before the start.

[Jehanne]

GC,

The total energy of the Universe is widely held to be zero, as if it came from nothing.  Just Google it.

Dawn

It seems to have required no net energy input to start.  But at a deeper level i don’t think it is clear if the information it would ever contain was present before the start.

There are models of eternal cosmology in The Physical Review Letters, Section E. Just take your pick.

[Godscreated]

 How can it be possible to have two infinite properties. Even if that were so it could not have been infinite since it was contained in one place.

GC

---

They do not say there was an infinite amount of energy.

GC

Why can it not have infinite properties?

You are not clear about the concept of the Big Bang.  Big Bang is not about all the stuff in one place in space and then expanding out wards in space.   If that were so, then it might seem difficult to imagine how an infinite amount of stuff in one place could expand outwards.   Big bang is about matter and their precursors were already everywhere to start with, and then everywhere itself expanded.   We only know the portion of everywhere we can observe was very small at the beginning, and pretty big now.   But We do not know how much of everywhere there is beyond where we can observe.    So we don’t know how Big the entire everywhere was before the Big Bang, we really do not know how Big the entire everywhere is now.

On the scenario about universe being infinite, space itself, or everywhere, started already being infinite.  There was already precursor to matter everywhere in it.   So even before the Big Bang there were already infinite amount of matter precursor distributed across infinite space.   Then at the moment of Big Bang, either the entire infinite space, or a portion of it much larger than our currently observable space, we don’t know, radically expanded.

 Very cute and possibly clever the way you use everywhere. I do understand what you mean but the relative size of everywhere is pre-expansion compared to post expansion puts the pre-expansion mass into a very small space. Science has for quite some time explained the pre-expansion size of the universe was as small as a walnut, their words not mine. With these things being true there could not be infinite energy.

GC

---

GC,

The total energy of the Universe is widely held to be zero, as if it came from nothing.  Just Google it.

Dawn

 Just because some think that the case doesn't make it true. But since you have brought it up, all the energy in the universe was created from nothing, read the creation account in Genesis.

GC

[Anomalocaris]

Why can it not have infinite properties?

You are not clear about the concept of the Big Bang.  Big Bang is not about all the stuff in one place in space and then expanding out wards in space.   If that were so, then it might seem difficult to imagine how an infinite amount of stuff in one place could expand outwards.   Big bang is about matter and their precursors were already everywhere to start with, and then everywhere itself expanded.   We only know the portion of everywhere we can observe was very small at the beginning, and pretty big now.   But We do not know how much of everywhere there is beyond where we can observe.    So we don’t know how Big the entire everywhere was before the Big Bang, we really do not know how Big the entire everywhere is now.

On the scenario about universe being infinite, space itself, or everywhere, started already being infinite.  There was already precursor to matter everywhere in it.   So even before the Big Bang there were already infinite amount of matter precursor distributed across infinite space.   Then at the moment of Big Bang, either the entire infinite space, or a portion of it much larger than our currently observable space, we don’t know, radically expanded.

 Very cute and possibly clever the way you use everywhere. I do understand what you mean but the relative size of everywhere is pre-expansion compared to post expansion puts the pre-expansion mass into a very small space. Science has for quite some time explained the pre-expansion size of the universe was as small as a walnut, their words not mine. With these things being true there could not be infinite energy.

GC

---

GC,

The total energy of the Universe is widely held to be zero, as if it came from nothing.  Just Google it.

Dawn

 Just because some think that the case doesn't make it true. But since you have brought it up, all the energy in the universe was created from nothing, read the creation account in Genesis.

GC

Universe was not as small as a walnut. The part of the universe we can presently observe was small as a walnut. Beyond that walnut how much more of it there was we can not say.

You conclusion that “there could not be infinite energy” is based on what exactly? other than an overconfident intuition founded upon neither familiarity with higher mathematics nor any significant experience with recent physics.

[Godscreated]

 Very cute and possibly clever the way you use everywhere. I do understand what you mean but the relative size of everywhere is pre-expansion compared to post expansion puts the pre-expansion mass into a very small space. Science has for quite some time explained the pre-expansion size of the universe was as small as a walnut, their words not mine. With these things being true there could not be infinite energy.

GC

---

 Just because some think that the case doesn't make it true. But since you have brought it up, all the energy in the universe was created from nothing, read the creation account in Genesis.

GC

Universe was not as small as a walnut.  The part of the universe we can presently observe was small as a walnut.  Beyond that walnut how much more of it there was we can not say.

You conclusion that “there could not be infinite energy” is based on what exactly?   other than an overconfident intuition founded upon neither familiarity with higher mathematics nor any significant experience with recent physics.

 So you dispute what science is still teaching and the last I heard we have now seen the light from the farthest reaches of the universe. Infinite energy would mean no little walnut universe, you know the one that prominent scientist claim to have existed.

GC

[Anomalocaris]

Universe was not as small as a walnut.  The part of the universe we can presently observe was small as a walnut.  Beyond that walnut how much more of it there was we can not say.

You conclusion that “there could not be infinite energy” is based on what exactly?   other than an overconfident intuition founded upon neither familiarity with higher mathematics nor any significant experience with recent physics.

 So you dispute what science is still teaching and the last I heard we have now seen the light from the farthest reaches of the universe. Infinite energy would mean no little walnut universe, you know the one that prominent scientist claim to have existed.

GC

No, you misunderstand the conclusion science is drawing.  We have not seen the light from the furthest reaches of the universe that exists.  We’ve seen the light from the furthest reaches of the universe whose light had Time to reach us..

Do you understand the difference?

Light takes time to travel.

Multiple lines of evidence shows the Universe is approximately 13.5 billion years old.   The very earliest light in the universe only had 13.5 billion years to travel.   Therefore we can not see any light that originated from further away than the distance light can travel in 13.5 billion years.  

Understood?

The spherical part of space with we at the center and extending outwards in every direction by a distance equal to how far light can travel in 13.5 billion years is the part of the universe that we can observe.  That is called the observable universe.  We may have seen the furthest reach of the observable universe.   Do not confuse the entire observable universe with the entire universe.

We found that the universe does not become significantly different when you get closer to the edge of observable universe.   If the entire universe is the same size as the observable universe, or if the entire universe is only somewhat bigger than the observable universe, then the furtherest parts we can see would be much closer to true edge of the universe.   Any parts of the universe that is near to any true edge would experience forces and development significantly differently from our part.  So they should look different.   But to the furthest we can see, the universe does not look different.  So if the universe has an edge, it is no where close to the furthest reaches we can see.

Understood?

We don’t know exactly how far the universe extends beyond the furthest reach we can see.  We believe evidence point to it extend quite a long ways further.  For all we know, it could spatially go on forever.  

Understood?

Now the furtherest reaches we can see, although huge by human scale, is finite in size.  That part was much smaller, the size of Walnut, at a moment very close to the beginning.  

But the Walnut is just what will become the part of the universe that will be within the distance from us that light can cover in 13.5 billion years. The entire universe is much bigger than that part whose light could reach us within 13.5 billion years.

So when our observable universe was the size of a Walnut, the entire universe was much larger proportion, just as the entire universe now is much bigger than the on]bservable universe now.

If the entire universe is infinite in spatial extent now, it was probably infinite in spatial extent back then.

Understood?

[Godscreated]

 So you dispute what science is still teaching and the last I heard we have now seen the light from the farthest reaches of the universe. Infinite energy would mean no little walnut universe, you know the one that prominent scientist claim to have existed.

GC

No, you misunderstand the conclusion science is drawing.  We have not seen the light from the furthest reaches of the universe that exists.  We’ve seen the light from the furthest reaches of the universe whose light had Time to reach us..

Do you understand the difference?

Light takes time to travel.

No I'm not misunderstanding, I've heard scientist say we have seen light from the end of the universe. I do understand light travels at 186,000 mps.

Multiple lines of evidence shows the Universe is approximately 13.5 billion years old.   The very earliest light in the universe only had 13.5 billion years to travel.   Therefore we can not see any light that originated from further away than the distance light can travel in 13.5 billion years.  

Understood?

Yes I understand quite well, light has been traveling for 13.5 billion years in a universe that's 13.5 billion years old, the light from the edge of the universe has had time to get here. However we have no real idea of our position in the universe so we could be 13.5 billion light years from some point on the edge of the universe and much less at some other point, unless you believe we are at the exact center of the universe.

The spherical part of space with we at the center and extending outwards in every direction by a distance equal to how far light can travel in 13.5 billion years is the part of the universe that we can observe.  That is called the observable universe.  We may have seen the furthest reach of the observable universe.   Do not confuse the entire observable universe with the entire universe.

Just what makes yo believe we are more than 13.5 billion light years from some edge of the universe, why can't we be much closer than that to some points on the edge of the universe. Just what would the edge look like anyhow, would we actually recognize the edge. Much of the outer reaches of the universe are speculation only, most of what scientist believe has never been observed.

We found that the universe does not become significantly different when you get closer to the edge of observable universe.   If the entire universe is the same size as the observable universe, or if the entire universe is only somewhat bigger than the observable universe, then the furtherest parts we can see would be much closer to true edge of the universe.   Any parts of the universe that is near to any true edge would experience forces and development significantly differently from our part.  So they should look different.   But to the furthest we can see, the universe does not look different.  So if the universe has an edge, it is no where close to the furthest reaches we can see.

Understood?

Like I said above it's all speculation when you get to those distances, for all we know those objects that far out do not exist, they could have been destroyed or what ever else might happen to them a billion years ago and we would have no clue, the edge of the universe could be rushing in on us and we would not even know it.

We don’t know exactly how far the universe extends beyond the furthest reach we can see.  We believe evidence point to it extend quite a long ways further.  For all we know, it could spatially go on forever.  

Understood?

It only makes sense that it never ends, just what would be on the other side of an expanding universe, nothing? Is there nothingness, I hardly think so. Besides that, if the Big Band is true the the universe can't go on forever now can it, it would have to expand until the energy runs out, unless you want to purpose that more energy can somehow be created to continue the push.

Now the furtherest reaches we can see, although huge by human scale, is finite in size.  That part was much smaller, the size of Walnut, at a moment very close to the beginning.  

But the Walnut is just what will become the part of the universe that will be within the distance from us that light can cover in 13.5 billion years.  The entire universe is much bigger than that part whose light could reach us within 13.5 billion years.

So when our observable universe was the size of a Walnut, the entire universe was much larger proportion, just as the entire universe now is much bigger than the on]bservable universe now.

If the entire universe is infinite in spatial extent now, it was probably infinite in spatial extent back then.

Understood?

 You nor anyone else can know that there was always more to the universe than what was contained in that small package of material at the moment of the beginning of the expansion. No one knows how large the universe truly is nor will we ever know. Your last statement is an impossibility, you want to have your cake and eat it too. 

Of coarse you do know I do not believe in the Big Bang and I have sever reservations on what is being observed in the outer reaches of the universe, I have many reservations about what is said about our own galaxy. I am a creationist who believes an infinite eternal God created this universe and still has full control over it and I that the universe He created is infinite. do i have proof it's infinite, no more than you have proof that the universe is 13.5 billion years old. But why would God create a universe that wasn't as infinite as He is, and because he is infinite and eternal he would need a universe to be the same to hold Him. In my opinion the only way this created universe is not infinite would be if God actually resides in another dimension. Like most things man has to speculate on those things he can not understand and the size of the universe is one of those things and God is another.

GC

[JackRussell]

In before, 'it cannot be a coincidence therefore God!!!', don't let that CD chap read this thread.

And cosmos man, we only can observe our local universe.