Quote Originally Posted by peacetrain
People used to say the same thing about a variety of philosophical or scientific conundrums that are now very simple to grasp (for most of us). If we continue to put the word finite mind next to human...we're making ourselves finite. I don't think god/lack of god or the infinite universe are necessarily outside the realm of human comprehension or understanding...forever, anyways.

As for the original question...I too would suggest Hawking...you say "theory" as if it's something that scientists just came up with off the top of their heads after a night of heavy drinking. Substantial evidence is required for any theory. Theories of physics are the best answer humans have at this point in time. Our understanding of how our universe was created expands every day.

And the Big Bang's intention isn't to solve the problem of what happened before the singularity, it's basically just saying that, like most things we perceive, something complex comes from something simple, not the reverse. Not sure how familiar you are with string theory/M theory...but those helped me out a lot.

And yeah, our entire universe could be on the "blade of grass" of some other universe. We have no idea where we fall into the entire cosmic scope because it hasn't been/can't be entirely explored yet...but we already are getting the sense that we're pretty damn small. Then again, big and small is really only in the reference point.
true, i was angry when i wrote that response to herbal.
i dont like being called a fool which is what i believe he implied.
ive read plenty of physics books, but this is just something that ive toyed around in my mind for a little while.
i know substantial evidence is required for a theory, otherwise its just a hypothesis, but a theory still isnt fact, thats why its theory and can still be toyed with and/orcast aside.