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.