Age old question?

Question

Some on here have stated that energy was "in the beginning". Fair enough. However, what nudged that energy making it kinetic? Knowing that energy cannot move itself, it needs a catalyst...what was that catalyst?

Answer 1

no one knows. To say that you do know is arrogant. Evidence does point to a higher power, but then the question is where did he come from. It's a tough question and we probably won't know until we're dead.

Answer 2

I have no idea what this means, but here is what it says in Wikipedia:

The early universe was filled homogeneously and isotropically with an incredibly high energy density and concomitantly huge temperatures and pressures. Approximately 10−35 seconds after the Planck epoch a phase transition caused a cosmic inflation, when the universe grew exponentially.

After inflation stopped, the universe consisted of a quark-gluon plasma, perhaps experimentally produced recently as a quark-gluon liquid in which the constituent particles were all moving relativistically -- as well as all other elementary particles.[15] At some point a reaction (as yet unknown) which violated conservation of baryon number led to a very small excess of quarks and leptons over antiquarks and anti-leptons (of the order of 1 part in 1010) - this unknown process is called baryogenesis.

*****

From what I understand, energy and dark matter combined can become a catalyst in and of itself. When it moves faster and faster, as energy does, it can combust.

Answer 3

Anything piled up in one place will spread out. This is why electricity moves down a wire instead of sticking at one end. This answers your question , however your question makes invalid assumptions about what energy is.

Let us not forget that the net energy of the universe is zero. No energy was present at the beginning and none is present now. The universe does not contain energy, it contains potential difference. This is caused by the simultaneous generation of matter and anti-matter.

Mathematically you can consider matter to have positive energy and antimatter to have negative energy. (I know this is an appalingly lacking definition but it serves this limited purpose)

An antiparticle will have an energy of -1, a particle the energy of +1. The difference in energy is 2.

Answer 4

When you go into first causes you get yourself trapped. The bible solution is to propose a humanoid creator which was not created based on no evidence. (the for ever and ever part is to avoid the what created the creator creature infinite regression trap)
Physics traces backwards from evidence to the idea of a singularity at the beginning of time. The laws of physics break down in a singularity, nobody can say what is on the other side of it.
So, God or physics. Flip a coin.
Physics is much more useful from a practical point of view.
God is more satisfying if you want a Sky Daddy.

Answer 5

Read up on the ekpyrotic model. I think the question of the origins of our specific universe are already explained. What is not answered is the origins of the structures and forces that created those structures and forces that collided to produce our universe, if indeed the concept of origin is really fundamental to all existence.

We often get into the debate of "who caused your first cause if a cause is required for existence?" I believe the parallel universes and bubble dimensions of M-theory are revealing the same infinite regression challenge we have with the notion of a creator. In fact it's two sides of the same coin isn't it? Theists attribute a human personality (a rather deranged and megalomaniac one at that) and motives to the causative agent while Empiricists do not have evidence of such, but we are both left with the apparent never-ending regression of causes and inability to isolate an original event.

Answer 6

Hmm... The catalyst?

You want to say it is God, right?

What if it was the collision between two celestial bodies? We only know what happened after the bang started. Not what caused the bang.

In some religions the universe started in an act of copulation between 2 deities. Seems to fit a collision, right.

Answer 7

Speaking for myself, not being a particle physicist, I don't know.

What I do know is that throughout history every attempt to close gaps in our knowledge with the assumption that "God did it" have failed. Rainbows - once attributed to God. Disease - once attributed to God. Harvest - God again. Creation of life - you're getting the picture. Every single claim for "God did it" has died an ignominious and ugly death in the dirt (with nothing imaginable less dignified than the death of Creationism).

So you'd think that trying to answer a question about gaps in our knowledge with "God did it" was a bit redundant in itself. Surely the better answer is, we keep running into these answers if we look hard enough - let's keep looking for this one too!

Answer 8

when God spoke that realeased the energy reading the beginning in Genesis God was spirit with no form everything He spoke released energy and was made by Him

Answer 9

Take a look at a volcano. When energy overcomes resistance...stuff happens.

Answer 10

Love

Answer 11

Energy follows thought.
That thought is our *will*

If you know what quantum dynamic, energy healing, qi-gong is, you'll know what I'm trying to say.