Before and after: the universe has everything?

[Philosophy Explorer]

It's said the universe has everything. If so how do you account for the nonexistence of before and after? And if they don't exist, then now doesn't exist either because now follows before which is needed to cause now (but before doesn't exist) and after doesn't exist since it's not caused by now which doesn't exist.

PhilX

[surreptitious57]

Nonexistence cannot exist because that would violate the law of non contradiction
There has always been something because a state of absolute nothing is impossible

[Philosophy Explorer]

Nonexistence cannot exist because that would violate the law of non contradiction
There has always been something because a state of absolute nothing is impossible

Did the universe then exist before the Big Bang?
PhilX

[surreptitious57]

What existed before the Big Bang is not currently known at this point in time though
the event itself was simply the beginning of local cosmic expansion and nothing else

[QuantumT]

Our universe is just a tiny drop in a vast ocean.

[-1-]

Our universe is just a tiny drop in a vast ocean.

Hogyaszongya:

If that's true, then what is a single human being? Or the Earth? Or the Solar system?

Once you start comparing delimeted (finite) amounts to infinite amounts, the analogy breaks down, because a vast ocean is not even a drop of water against infinity.

In fact, any finite expanse relates to the infinite as a dimensionless point relates to any three-d object of any size of non-zero dimensions.

[-1-]

What existed before the Big Bang is not currently known at this point in time though
the event itself was simply the beginning of local cosmic expansion and nothing else

In fact, off the centre of our own known universe, a bit to the left, but not too far, is a local mass which had no beginning of local cosmic expansion.

Phusicists are currently calculating if this mass is off centre of the geometrical centre,or of the point of gravity of our known universe.

One thing is for sure: we know not much about the unknown universe.

[Noax]

Phusicists are currently calculating if this mass is off centre of the geometrical centre,or of the point of gravity of our known universe.

Are they now? How very pre-Hubble of them. You have a reference for this one?

[-1-]

Phusicists are currently calculating if this mass is off centre of the geometrical centre,or of the point of gravity of our known universe.

Are they now? How very pre-Hubble of them. You have a reference for this one?

Unfortunately, the off-centre non-expanding local cosmic mass is part of the unknown part of the universe.

So sorry. Better luck next time.

[Noax]

Unfortunately, the off-centre non-expanding local cosmic mass is part of the unknown part of the universe.

Really...
Do you have a link for this one then? Where are you learning these facts?

[Erk]

Nonexistence cannot exist because that would violate the law of non contradiction
There has always been something because a state of absolute nothing is impossible

YES!

[-1-]

Unfortunately, the off-centre non-expanding local cosmic mass is part of the unknown part of the universe.

Really...
Do you have a link for this one then? Where are you learning these facts?

How do you suppose to find a link to what's unknown? Duh...

Facts? Are you saying I am quoting facts? Double duhh...

[Noax]

Do you have a link for this one then? Where are you learning these facts?

How do you suppose to find a link to what's unknown? Duh...

Facts? Are you saying I am quoting facts? Double duhh...

You first post implied that actual physicists are looking for this thing you've apparently just made up then.
The second post implied that they've found this center of mass to be outside our visible universe.
These statements suggest actual theories and findings, not unknown fiction.

Center of the universe is quite easy to point to actually, but it doesn't fit the description you put up here.