Modern science states that at one point, the universe was a singularity. (feel free to prove that statement wrong too, by the way.) So, my question is, if everything in the universe was one object, would that object be considered "perfect"?
Also, if your planning on saying "define perfect" then, can you?
No, no I'm not sure how I would define perfect. I mean, we got an okay universe. Sure it would have been nicer if it wasn't quite so empty and generally hostile to living creatures based on carbon and water, but I'm not complaining.
Oh, and if I had to do it again I'd include a way around thermodynamics just in case someone wants more energy.
The more you complain, the less I care about your problems.
Seems to me that if all that existed, all matter, space and time, were contained in a single point called the singularity, it would be neither perfect or imperfect, since nothing else would exist by which to compare it.
The Forum Rules
Too often we enjoy the comfort of opinion without the discomfort of thought.
[John F. Kennedy]
The principal value of debate lies in the development of logical thought processes, and the ability to articulate your positions publicly.
[Senator Dick Clark of Iowa]
The presence of those seeking the truth is infinitely to be preferred to the presence of those who think they've found it.
[Terry Pratchett]
Good question. What is meant by "perfect" in this context?
It seems that the today's universe is due to quantum fluctuations from when the universe was younger, smaller, and hotter, which could be considered "imperfections," though I don't know if they manifested themselves at the "time" when the universe was a singularity.
Can't be considered whole OR perfect as it is no longer what it was. If it WAS perfect why did it change? Something was lacking.
If the terrain and the map do not agree, follow the terrain.
When motherhood becomes the fruit of a deep yearning, not the result of ignorance or accident, its children will become a new race.
If by 'perfect' we mean that a thing is 'complete' then the 'singularity' that the universe came from must be perfect.
The 'singularity' is the essence of everything that makes this universe what it is.
To say that it is lacking is to imply that the universe that we exist within is not what it should be.
How does a being that only exists because the universe is precisely the way it is then question what the universe should be?
If it was any different then we would not be here to question the perfection of it all in the first place.
Quote by: Jesus of Nazareth
So is the change that we experience mean that the universe is no longer 'complete', no longer 'perfect?' What does the obviousness of change bring to the debate? Is it irrelevant?
If the terrain and the map do not agree, follow the terrain.
When motherhood becomes the fruit of a deep yearning, not the result of ignorance or accident, its children will become a new race.
Don't know whether this will help; Whether or not a thing is complete or perfect is subject to the purpose is it not?
If we observe a singularity, does it exist for the purpose of being a singularity? or does it continue to be perfect as it realises its purpose as a universe?
Purpose? Are you implying intent, which in turn can lead to 'willed' as a descriptive here? I can observe a thing without considering its actions as purposeful, I'm pretty sure. To aid in understanding a thing and its actions I can inject purpose and intent.
If we would observe something called a singularity other than the Cosmic Egg, such as a black hole that is at times seen compared to a singularity, then maybe a purpose or intent phenomena might be observed given sufficient time. As it is though, Georges Lemaître's primeval atom is a deduced discovery and has, though widely accepted, a somewhat tenuous place in my own category of "direct empirical knowledge."If we observe a singularity, does it exist for the purpose of being a singularity? or does it continue to be perfect as it realizes its purpose as a universe?
I can speculate that because we cannot observe the Cosmic Egg directly, that this perfection being assumed in the OP can still include a roiling of change within. This, as our own ontology of physics is but barely over a century escaped from Newton's mechanical determinism. Our physics is not yet complete.
If the terrain and the map do not agree, follow the terrain.
When motherhood becomes the fruit of a deep yearning, not the result of ignorance or accident, its children will become a new race.
So, where did this "singularity" come from?
I upped my income, up yours.
Same place you did. Parents.
If the terrain and the map do not agree, follow the terrain.
When motherhood becomes the fruit of a deep yearning, not the result of ignorance or accident, its children will become a new race.
Then we should be discussing the two singularities that came before.
I upped my income, up yours.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks