Evidence of the Eternal Recurrence

5 posts

Bob Dylan Roof

Going round in circles
In contradiction to most cosmologists’ opinions, two scientists have found evidence that the universe may have existed for ever

WHAT happened before the beginning of time is—by definition, it might be thought—metaphysics. At least one physicist, though, thinks there is nothing meta about the question at all. Roger Penrose, of Oxford University, believes that the Big Bang in which the visible universe began was not actually the beginning of everything. It was merely the latest example of a series of such bangs that renew reality when it is getting tired out. More importantly, he thinks that the pre-Big Bang past has left an imprint on the present that can be detected and analysed, and that he and a colleague in Armenia have found it.

Niccolo and Donkey
Flag To: ThrillGates

Penrose flag.

Ya, I've read about this sort of stuff before. Sometimes it's painful to see the best scientists inspired by awful sci-fi.

Bronze Age Pervert

The world is eternal.


Many cosmologists have always been uncomfortable with the conventional Big Bang singularity model, since it invites unwanted comparisons with the Biblical model of creation. As Hawking said, "So long as the universe has a beginning, we could suppose it had a creator". And as David Berlinski points out in The Devil's Delusion , this alarms scientists who are committed to the materialist project -- so they begin to explore alternate cosmologies (Hawking, Penrose, Vilenkin, etc). Perhaps this latest 'revelation' is likewise intended to demolish the idea of creation.

Edit: also I don't know how germane it is to the discussion, but Borges once wrote a pretty convincing refutation of Nietzsche's eternal recurrence inspired by Leibniz, if anyone is interested.