Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
10 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   first genetic material
dpeele
Junior Member (Idle past 5435 days)
Posts: 21
Joined: 04-28-2009


Message 59 of 84 (508123)
05-10-2009 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by cavediver
05-10-2009 6:32 PM


Re: Fortuitous happenstances
The only reason I don't accept it is that I have never heard of scientist explaining anything in the context of "a few minutes". I was looking for a more precise measure.
Consider this quote found on Wiki - Big Bang
In 1931 Lematre went further and suggested that the evident expansion in forward time required that the universe contracted backwards in time, and would continue to do so until it could contract no further, bringing all the mass of the universe into a single point, a "primeval atom", at a point in time before which time and space did not exist. As such, at this point, the fabric of time and space had not yet come into existence.[10]
What is the origin of the primeval atom?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by cavediver, posted 05-10-2009 6:32 PM cavediver has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 8:05 PM dpeele has replied
 Message 64 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-10-2009 8:47 PM dpeele has not replied
 Message 65 by lyx2no, posted 05-10-2009 8:49 PM dpeele has not replied
 Message 66 by onifre, posted 05-10-2009 8:54 PM dpeele has not replied

  
dpeele
Junior Member (Idle past 5435 days)
Posts: 21
Joined: 04-28-2009


Message 60 of 84 (508125)
05-10-2009 8:04 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by Dr Adequate
05-10-2009 7:00 PM


Re: Fortuitous happenstances
What was that something? Why not a being doing magic that exists outside of time and space, as absurd as it sounds. I mean...
quote:
Something must have produced an excess of matter over anti-matter, because this excess exists.
does not convince me either.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-10-2009 7:00 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 63 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-10-2009 8:41 PM dpeele has replied

  
dpeele
Junior Member (Idle past 5435 days)
Posts: 21
Joined: 04-28-2009


Message 62 of 84 (508127)
05-10-2009 8:10 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Theodoric
05-10-2009 8:05 PM


Re: Fortuitous happenstances
That's what I thought... no answer.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 8:05 PM Theodoric has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Son, posted 05-10-2009 10:03 PM dpeele has not replied

  
dpeele
Junior Member (Idle past 5435 days)
Posts: 21
Joined: 04-28-2009


Message 67 of 84 (508134)
05-10-2009 8:55 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Dr Adequate
05-10-2009 8:41 PM


Re: Fortuitous happenstances
I can't deny its existence. however, neither of us have the answer to the "something", so we will have to wonder what that "something" was and believe what we believe. I don't know what is it was, but you can't tell me either (but it was definitely not a Being).

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-10-2009 8:41 PM Dr Adequate has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by onifre, posted 05-10-2009 9:04 PM dpeele has replied
 Message 71 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-10-2009 9:15 PM dpeele has not replied

  
dpeele
Junior Member (Idle past 5435 days)
Posts: 21
Joined: 04-28-2009


Message 69 of 84 (508137)
05-10-2009 9:06 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Theodoric
05-10-2009 6:45 PM


Re: Fortuitous happenstances
Nice paste... I don't need to know about the quarks,antiquarks, leptons and photons... although an interest read. I would like an explaination for the "unknown reaction" that violated the conservation a little over 13 billions years ago.
Which according to the article [quote]"The baryon number is nearly conserved in all interactions of the Standard Model.[quote]"
And
quote:
Currently, there is no experimental evidence of particle interactions where the conservation of baryon number is broken perturbatively: this would appear to suggest that all observed particle reactions have equal baryon number before and after.
I've taken a shot at your question... now tell me where did the "primeval atom" originate?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Theodoric, posted 05-10-2009 6:45 PM Theodoric has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by onifre, posted 05-10-2009 9:14 PM dpeele has not replied
 Message 72 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-10-2009 9:18 PM dpeele has not replied
 Message 74 by Son, posted 05-10-2009 10:12 PM dpeele has not replied

  
dpeele
Junior Member (Idle past 5435 days)
Posts: 21
Joined: 04-28-2009


Message 75 of 84 (508153)
05-10-2009 11:51 PM
Reply to: Message 68 by onifre
05-10-2009 9:04 PM


Re: Fortuitous happenstances
The point is we don't know. We can re-engineer the universe back to a certain point and then have to say "I don't know what this is, how it got here or how it works". Science has answered miriads of questions only to uncover others. Like the ones you have asked...
When we started our thread my purpose was never to dispute scientific facts. I am testing the logic of the theory. My thought in regards to the origin of the universe is the theories backs into unprovable assumptions.
I have posed similar questions to creationists and they go back as far back as a Being with no beginning, no end, all powerful, etc... with no other explanation.
Both positions appear to build on or back into unapprovable assumptions. I'm in the "I don't know, but let's research it camp", but I can't tell someone this is how it happened when there are so many unknowns.
Still reading through the links...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by onifre, posted 05-10-2009 9:04 PM onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 76 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-11-2009 3:41 PM dpeele has not replied
 Message 78 by Richard Townsend, posted 05-11-2009 6:12 PM dpeele has not replied
 Message 81 by onifre, posted 05-15-2009 2:28 PM dpeele has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024