Following up on the
survival of Stephen Hawking’s here’s another effort to eliminate a beginning :
When we think about our cosmic origins, then, it’s only human to ask the most fundamental of all possible questions: where did this all come from? It’s been more than half a century since the first robust and unique predictions of the Big Bang were confirmed, leading to our modern picture of a Universe that began from a hot, dense state some 13.8 billion years ago. But in our quest for the beginning, we know already that time couldn’t have started with the Big Bang. In fact, it might not have had a beginning at all…
Thousands of years after we laid out the three major possibilities for how time began — as having always existed, as having begun a finite duration ago in the past, or as being a cyclical entity — we are no closer to a definitive answer. Whether time is finite, infinite, or cyclical is not a question that we have enough information within our observable Universe to answer. Unless we figure out a new way to gain information about this deep, existential question, the answer may forever be beyond the limits of what is knowable. Ethan Siegel, “Did Time Have A Beginning?” at Forbes
It’s quite clear that Siegel’s objection to the idea of a beginning to the universe is philosophical. Most of the nonsense one hears, genrlaly, can be traced to unwillingness to admit that.
Follow UD News at Twitter!
See also: Hawking’s idea that the universe had no beginning is still alive, on life support At Quanta: After two years of sparring, the groups have traced their technical disagreement to differing beliefs about how nature works.
and
The Big Bang: Put simply,the facts are wrong.