I think matter has always existed and will always continue to exist.  But even if it hadn't, that doesn't then give us a reason to believe that some being created matter. Who created the being?  What if that supposed "being" is actually random luck over quite literally an unfathomable number of years? 


I tend to believe the Big Bang Theory i.e. all matter was previously compressed into a singularity, which then exploded.  But I also believe that before our Big Bang, there was probably another universe which both expanded and then shrank to a singularity, caused by the previous universe collapsing on itself.  At the start of that universe, another singularity caused by a gravitational collapse.  You see where I'm going.


I can even accept the possibility of a multiverse, though I consider it unlikely. Just my opinion, though I welcome arguments either way.


Why do some people assume there must have been a creation?  Why is it hard to believe that everything that is, has always been?  I find it more illogical to assume that something can be created out of nothing.


In my opinion, there have probably been more universes than we can imagine, more earths than we can conceive.  There are already, in the universe we exist in, a quantity of stars and planets that we are not capable of comprehending. I am not talking about a matter of 14 billion years, but a practically infinite number of years when you consider the previous universes that I believe may have collapsed and re-expanded.  For me there is no reason to believe that matter need have been created - it has just always been.


What say you?


I'm wondering: where do others stand on this idea?

Views: 560

Comment by Spartacus of Thrace on September 27, 2011 at 12:16am



I've come to a pretty much identical cosmology myself. What you are describing is how Mahayana Buddhism sees the universe. It posits that time and matter are eternal, in infinite time - kuon gango (Jap.) - "time without beginning". [Buddhism was originally more a philosophy that a religion]. And admits it is almost impossible for a human to comprehend. 


This is an argument I use, to (at least try to) bust theists' First Cause argument. They are assuming the universe HAD a beginning!

Comment by Artor on September 27, 2011 at 1:07am

I believe what you describe is known as the Oscillating Equilibrium theory, and it had a strong run against the Big Bang, but is no longer favored, for reasons beyond my comprehension. It's something I thought of too, and it certainly does make sense. I don't see why it's not considered compatible with the Big Bang.

Comment by Darlene Edelman on September 27, 2011 at 1:09am

Tex, I am not a scholar, but I do hold the belief that matter has no beginning and no end. I die, they throw me into a hole, the worms have lunch and poop me into the earth. I then become fertilizer and am absorbed into a plant, which is then eaten by a cow that turns up in Gordon Ramsay's restaurant. I think there is no way to truly eliminate matter once it occurs. Everything that has ever been on Earth is still here in a different form.

I had never thought of the possibility of previous universes, but I will entertain that thought now.

I have never believed in a god. Because of that, I have never wanted to read the bible. I only know the stories that were told to me in Sunday school and catholic school -- none of which ever seemed logical to me. 

I enjoyed your blog.  

Comment by Dylan Sloboda on September 27, 2011 at 1:25am

The pope of the time actually loved the big bang theory. Just think about it for a second, all the matter and energy in the universe emerging from a single point for no apparent reason... like it was CREATED... Just *poof*, magic!


The theory was created by a catholic priest/mathematician from a religious school. The intention was to create an explanation for the origin of the universe that would go right up to the "moment of creation" and no further. It doesn't actually function as an explanation to the origin of the universe. As a scientific theory, all it does is describe the beginning of a universe in which cosmic expansion has been constant.


Matter will actually not always continue to exist. It breaks down all around us constantly; splitting into energy that just disperses evenly... gradually taking us closer to entropy. Also, it is indeed possible for something to come out of nothing. It happens regularly as negative matter and normal matter pairs emerge completely at random out of nowhere and then collapse back into each other, nullifying.

Comment by Darlene Edelman on September 27, 2011 at 1:46am

Dylan, With regard to the negative and normal matter pairs, is this something that happens on our planet or somewhere else?

Comment by Dylan Sloboda on September 27, 2011 at 2:10am

It happens all the time everywhere, with just a slightly greater tendency to occur in areas isolated from electromagnetic fields such as deep space. It is the reason why black holes emit a continuous weak hum of radiation even when they are not feeding. This is because at the event horizon of a black hole the pairs can be torn away from each other, preventing them from nullifying each other and resulting in the creation of new matter.

Comment by Darlene Edelman on September 27, 2011 at 2:12am

Dylan, You are really making me miss Carl Sagan and "Cosmos."

Comment by Dylan Sloboda on September 27, 2011 at 2:48am

Nah... it's all about Morgan Freeman now. lol

Comment by Steve on September 27, 2011 at 12:49pm
Whether matter will always exists depends on whether protons decay. Just like molecules decay through radioactivity, it's possible that baryons (matter made of three quarks) decay into photons and leptons.

Proton decay is predicted in some advanced theories, but has yet to be physically observed. In any case their half-life is incredibly high, on the order of 6x10^33 years

If that occurs all matter will be spread throughout the universe, hardly ever encountering each other. Even without proton decay all larger structures such as galaxies, stars and black holes will eventually cease to exist
Comment by Peter on September 27, 2011 at 4:23pm

Your views seem very logical, Tex.

I think the problem with people when they must assume a creator is indoctrination. It pretty much develops a mental blockade which prevents critical thinking on things that go against what they've been taught. If you've been told your whole life that you were created and designed along with everything else you see/experience, then you start believing it (especially when teachers start teaching that BS and your whole sundays are taken up by church activities). 


You need to be a member of Think Atheist to add comments!

Join Think Atheist

© 2021   Created by Rebel.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service