Or the \"Knot of Truths?\" (Endings)

by BBella , Friday, June 19, 2009, 18:34 (5634 days ago) @ George Jelliss

Thanks for that link to Paul Davies interview. I found it most interesting. Particularly this bit:
> 
> "We can work out the information-processing capacity of the universe. It's finite ... and it comes out with a very big number, about 10^122 /// the significant thing is that in the past, the number was much smaller. When you go back to the time when the structure of the universe was being laid down ... the time of inflation, 10^-34 seconds, the bits that the universe would have contained was only about 10^20. So if we restrict our description of the laws of physics to have that accuracy ... one part in 10^20 ... then that starts to become significant." - >> Presumably when you go back to time zero there were absolutely zero bits! - I found this part interesting as well. I appreciate Davies ability to answer these questions in layman terms so that even I could understand much of what he was saying. He said a whole lot in a small space. - To my way of thinking, I do not see that if you go back in time you come to zero bits. You might come to just one bit...but not zero. And within that one bit is all that's needed for what we now have. The whole idea of 'zero' is believed and pursued religiously and is possibly just another myth, just as the word "beginning" is. Of course we created these ideas of nothing/zero/beginnings in our own minds in the first place and science carries this torch ideal of nothing religiously. What proof is there of zero or a beginning? Both are another word for nothing and no proof has ever been made of nothing (but it's a great idea for spending lots of money and keeping lots of scientist eating). Nothing is the holy grail of science. There never was nothing and there never will be. The idea's of past and future are right up there with zero and beginnings, yet much of science is based on the pursuit of knowing more about all of these ideas of nothing. - Of course I could be entirely wrong, I'm the first to say I could be. Nothing (zero, beginning, past, future) may be just as real as something. As long as man thinks it's real, it's real..until he can prove it's not, it is.