Quote from: BADecker on October 08, 2018, 12:45:16 PM

Here is the problem with all these calculations. When the Beginning happened, be it by God-creation, or by some sort of big bang, time and other physics was not set in place like it is today. Time and other physics were all in formation.

What does this mean? It means that all of our math and understandings of past timelines are incorrect. Why are they incorrect? Because we are measuring things by the standards that we use, rather than by the standards that were in existence when the past happened.

Can we ever determine what the standards of the so-called distant past were? Possibly. But it will take way more calculation than we can currently program a computer to calculate, and it will take more precise measurements than we are able to make at this time. Why? Because we will need to see how physics is changing, just so we can extrapolate back to see what physics was in the so-called distant past.

We are absolutely just in the beginnings of understanding things. And things are so greatly complex that we may never understand them as individuals... even though a computer might be built that is capable of crunching the numbers so-to-speak.

Cool

Fair points it is indeed possible that things were different in the early universe. I came across the work of these scientists in an earlier discussion. Though the work discussed remains very theoretical the direction of research supports your position.

Quote from: CoinCube on January 09, 2017, 12:16:28 AM

Quote from: iamnotback on January 07, 2017, 12:26:10 AM

I have explained that we can't exist (the past and future will collapse) if there could exist an absolute truth...

iamnotback you have not made the case that an absolute truth cannot exist though perhaps you made this argument somewhere I am not aware of. In your essay The Universe you instead made this claim.

"If the speed-of-light were infinite, the time domain (and thus reality) would collapse to a single point, because all future changes in configuration would occur instantly."

There are a minority of scientists who believe that this is the exact the condition of the universe at the start of the big bang.

Scientists Think the Speed of Light Has Slowed, and They're Trying to Prove It
http://motherboard.vice.com/read/light-speed-slowed

Quote

But in the late 1990s, a handful of physicists challenged one of the fundamental assumptions underlying Einsteins theory of special relativity: Instead of the speed of light being constant, they proposed that light was faster in the early universe than it is now.

This theory of the variable speed of light wasand still iscontroversial. But according to a new paper published in November in the physics journal Physical Review D, it could be experimentally tested in the near future. If the experiments validate the theory, it means that the laws of nature werent always the same as what we experience today and would require a serious revision of Einsteins theory of gravity.

"The whole of physics is predicated on the constancy of the speed of light."

...
So just how much faster was light speed just after the Big Bang? According to Magueijo and his colleague Niayesh Afshordi, an associate professor of physics and astronomy at the University of Waterloo, the answer is infinitely faster.

The duo cite light speed as being at least 32 orders of magnitude faster than its currently accepted speed of 300 million meters per secondthis is merely the lower bounds of the faster light speed, however. As you get closer to the Big Bang, the speed of light approaches infinity.

On this view, the speed of light was faster because the universe was incredibly hot at the beginning. According to Afshordi, their theory requires that the early universe was at least a toasty 10²⁸ degrees Celsius (to put this in perspective, the highest temperature we are capable of realizing on Earth is about 10¹⁶ degrees Celsius, a full 12 orders of magnitude cooler).

As the universe expanded and cooled below this temperature, light underwent a phase shiftmuch like liquid water changes into ice once the temperature reaches a certain thresholdand arrived at the speed we know today: 300 million meters per second. Just like ice wont get more "icy" the colder the temperature gets, the speed of light has not been slowing down since it reached 300 million meters per second.

If Magueijo and Afshordis theory of variable light speed is correct, then the speed of light decreased in a predictable waywhich means with sensitive enough instruments, this light speed decay can be measured.

"Varying speed of light is going back to the foundations of physics and saying perhaps there are things beyond relativity."

...
Now that theyve used the variable light speed theory to put a hard number on the spectral index, all that remains to be seen is whether increasingly sensitive experiments probing the CMB and distribution of galaxies will verify or overturn their theory. Both Magueijo and Afshordi expect these results to be available at some point in the decade. But Marsh and other physicists aren't so sure.

If their theory is correct, it will overturn one of the main axioms underlying Einsteins theory of special relativity and force physicists to reconsider the nature of gravity. According to Afshordi, however, it is more or less accepted in the physics community that Einsteins theory of gravity cannot be the whole story