Ruling out an expanding universe with conventional proofs

Whatever thing you are referring to, it cannot be the singularity. The Universe, which the singularity is not. Huh? I'm talking about what the Big Bang theory says, this is not a statement of knowledge that I have. Exactly, so I should never see you type about where the Universe came from. Nobody knows anything, hurray, there's no reason for us to converse.Now, if you want to talk about what the Big Bang theory says (as per the forum that this thread is in), then I'm pretty sure we can talk about that. No problem. Science and scientists will continue forward figuring things out and solving problems while you sit back and wallow in your ignorance proclaiming that it is all a bunch of bullshit.Nobody cares. If you understand these things then why do you post to the contrary? The Universe, itself. The singularity is not a thing nor is it a state of the Universe.

The singularity is not the "hot soup". The hot soup is the Universe. The Universe was not the singularity.The singularity isn't some thing that exists. As I've been saying, think of it like an asymptote.As the Universe approaches it, the Universe gets hotter and denser. But the Universe never actually gets there.Here is the plot of 1/X (we'll only use the positive portion): Starting at (1,1); as we keep going to the left towards the y-axis, the value of the function keeps getting larger and larger. As X approaches zero, the function approaches infinity. But if you ask what happens at zero, then the function becomes undefined. You can't divide by zero.That's kinda like how in the Big Bang Theory, as we go closer towards the beginning then it gets hotter and denser. But the Universe does not exist at the point of the singularity, it doesn't come from the singularity, it never was the singularity, the singularity never burped it out.Does that make sense? Obviously not, because I keep repeating that the singularity is not a thing that can do stuff.You're basically asking what the y-axis has to do to get the value of the function 1/X to appear from it at an infinite value. I am talking. Start comprehending.I don't care if you reject the Big Bang theory or not. But I am going to correct your mischaracterizations of it. No, it was not. The "soup" is the Universe. At no point in time does it exist as the singularity. The universe didn't come from it. It isn't a thing. It doesn't do stuff. Stuff doesn't come from it. Unfortunately, I don't share in your opinion that being a religion (is some derogatory place that) can be used to cast insults against my opponent's position (that I only think resembles being one), so your insult fell flat. But I am curious what you think is so bad about being a religion that you feel like you can tarnish my position with being one?I have religious beliefs.What the Big Bang Theory says (in layman's terms) is not one of them.

You also shouldn't say that the little hot soup spawned the Universe because the little hot soup is the Universe. It'd be no different than saying that yesterday spawned the Universe. You're welcome. Okay, let me know if you have any questions.Do you now understand how what you wrote earlier is simply nonsense?:

quote:

---

a singularity existed you know not why or how, and burped out the universe for no known reason.

---