peanut:
Your question makes the assumption that matter "must" come from somewhere.
That axiom is not demonstrable and contradicts what we know about matter, namely that matter and energy are interchangeable.
It is in fact more likely than matter being created ex-Nil that the "big-bang" represented some sort of cosmic phase transition which converted matter/energy from an initial state to the state we know it today.
It was most likely a quantum fluctuation that sucked up some energy to stabilize it self.
Speaking philosophically, nothing you see in the universe today is ever "created". Things we build or "create" do not come out of nothing but involve the movement of matter from one form or shape to another.
Even thoughts and dreams are representations of the electrochemical system called our brain.
2007-05-04 02:11:21
·
answer #1
·
answered by DrSean 4
·
1⤊
0⤋
evaluate this. Einstein theorized that any count speeded as much as the cost of sunshine might shed its mass and grow to be organic power. my addition to this theory is that the alternative can be actual. that mild or power slowed in its velocity, for the time of the suitable vacuum of empty area, could have gained mass. and that there wasn't an excellent bang yet a series of smaller bangs at countless factors in area.yet this leaves the question, how does power, on the cost of sunshine, sluggish its self in a frictionless ecosystem?
2016-12-10 18:54:07
·
answer #2
·
answered by cegla 4
·
0⤊
0⤋
The big bang was the moment of creation of everything in our universe.
We don't have any information about what might have been 'before' that. We can guess that there might have been other universes, other big bangs, perhaps entirely different to ours. But it can only be speculation. Whether there are no others or billions, it would make no odds to us and we can make predictions about it anyway. It's interesting to consider what other kind of universes could exist / have existed, however!
2007-05-03 19:06:55
·
answer #3
·
answered by Anonymous
·
0⤊
1⤋
I don't think there really was a 'first.' The only reason we have to believe in one, is our desire to know everything, which would require a limit on the data. If matter doesn't have that 'first,' then knowing everything without circumstantial calculation is impossible.
2007-05-03 18:27:23
·
answer #4
·
answered by atmtarzy 2
·
0⤊
1⤋
Matter is believed to come into existence the same time as time started. Which is..... very far back.
2007-05-03 20:11:34
·
answer #5
·
answered by Tsuki 2
·
1⤊
0⤋
Science has no answer. And you wouldn't believe the conjectures being tossed around just to come up with something.
2007-05-03 19:08:22
·
answer #6
·
answered by Frank N 7
·
0⤊
1⤋
God
2007-05-03 18:25:43
·
answer #7
·
answered by Kristenite’s Back! 7
·
0⤊
1⤋