andrel wrote:
> I am talking about both time and space. You know, that 4 dimensional thing.

I think the point that Warp is making (and I agree with) is that space and 
time is only a four-dimensional thing in our current universe with our 
current physical laws. If those laws didn't hold before the big bang, 
there's no reason to believe there couldn't be space without time or time 
without space or that the speed of light has anything to do with anything in 
whatever universe was around before the big bang.

> below 0K and time before the Big Bang are both completely nonsensical 
> and for exactly the same reason. 

So you know about the physics of the universe before the big bang, enough to 
know that there couldn't be time of any sort before the big bang? How about 
light? How about gravity? Are those incompatible with "before the big bang"?

> Sigh, again: Big Bang theory says that the universe started with the big 
> Bang, so time did. End of story.

The theory says *this* universe started with the big bang. But that doesn't 
mean there was neither time nor space before the big bang, right?  Or has 
science actually changed "we can't tell what happened before the big bang" 
to "we have actual scientific evidence that there was no existence of 
anything before the big bang"?

-- 
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
    C# - a language whose greatest drawback
    is that its best implementation comes
    from a company that doesn't hate Microsoft.

Post a reply to this message