Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site brl-tgr.ARPA
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!bonnie!akgua!whuxlm!harpo!decvax!genrad!panda!talcott!harvard!seismo!brl-tgr!gwyn
From: gwyn@brl-tgr.ARPA (Doug Gwyn )
Newsgroups: net.physics
Subject: Re: White Holes?
Message-ID: <779@brl-tgr.ARPA>
Date: Sun, 18-Aug-85 15:52:03 EDT
Article-I.D.: brl-tgr.779
Posted: Sun Aug 18 15:52:03 1985
Date-Received: Sat, 24-Aug-85 01:39:26 EDT
References: <3656@decwrl.UUCP> <166@prometheus.UUCP> <490@talcott.UUCP>
Organization: Ballistic Research Lab
Lines: 25

> Finally, the object of physics simply cannot be to find out the
> 'cause' for the existence of the universe. By definition, the creation
> of the universe took place outside the realm of the physical laws that
> govern our universe. Therefore, physics is just not applicable to
> what happened before the universe existed.

One possibility, though, is that physics can clarify whether the concept
of "before the universe existed" has any meaning.  In some cosmologies,
time (by any reasonable definition) runs infinitely backward and forward
so there can be no "before the universe existed".

A lot of the popularizations of "the first few seconds after the big
bang" cavalierly use everyday notions of time to discuss what most
certainly cannot be correctly described with such notions.

I don't know why so many people think the universe needs an external
cause.  Just what good would that do?

Perhaps the observation that the universe operates according to definite
rules contributes to this.  However, it is possible to make considerable
progress in understanding (a) how the rules are interrelated and (b) how
at least some of the rules could not be otherwise.  It seems perfectly
plausible to me that the fundamental laws are inherent in the nature of
existence and do not need to be ascribed to capricious whims of an
external agency.