The question seems to be based on the notion "before". This notion relies of the concept of the arrow of time, meaning time "flowing" in some "direction". The arrow of time itself is based, among others, on the notion of "time".
The Planck epoch - the first epoch of the current Big Bang model - lasted a little less than $10^{-43}mbox{ s}$. That's the shortest unit of time. To ask within this short time interval for an arrow of time doesn't make any sense. Hence a before/after didn't exist within the Planck epoch, and hence asking for a "before" isn't meaningful within the Planck epoch.
The Planck epoch to be able to exist needs the mere existence of space and time, not yet an arrow of time.
The cause for the existence of space and time at all is a matter of the pre-Planck epoch. In this phase using any notion which is based on space or time isn't meaningful. Cause and effect in the temporal sense, which underly most "why?"-questions, are based on time, and are meaningless in this epoch.
It's possible to construct other "pre-Big-Bang" models. But it's hard to find observational evidence for any of them.
If you suggest a creator of whatever kind, you just push the ultimate question a little bit further to the "past", and making it much more complicated. How could a creator be created, able to create such a complex thing like the universe? You need a chain of ever more complex meta-creators without end.
If you argue, that the first creator doesn't need a cause to exist, this applies also for the universe, formed from a pre-Planck medium. Hence nothing would be won.
Therefore it's rather unlikely, that religion or philosophy could be able to provide a more satisfying answer than science.
(Here some metaphysical multiverse theories.)
No comments:
Post a Comment