Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 115 (8795 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 10-18-2017 4:27 PM
335 online now:
DrJones*, jar, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Phat (AdminPhat), ringo (6 members, 329 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: jaufre
Upcoming Birthdays: Astrophile
Post Volume:
Total: 820,815 Year: 25,421/21,208 Month: 1,048/2,338 Week: 169/450 Day: 41/52 Hour: 2/6

Announcements: Reporting debate problems OR discussing moderation actions/inactions


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
19202122
23
24Next
Author Topic:   Where did the matter and energy come from?
Larni
Member
Posts: 3951
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


(1)
Message 331 of 357 (641546)
11-20-2011 6:41 AM
Reply to: Message 330 by Butterflytyrant
11-19-2011 10:06 PM


Indeed sir, I would sir.

And I have way to manage this duel that will be hopefully acceptable.

1: both parties name a second (many thanks to you, good sir, for stepping into the breach, at the eleventh hour) and be accompanied by his physician.

2: the challenged party chooses weapon to be used: sword, pistol or cannon.

3: a constable or impartial referee is selected (who must be a gentleman of no small character and repute).

4: the time is selected for satisfaction by the aggrieved party.

5: the aggrieved party decides whether to seek 'first blood' or 'to the death'

This is where we diverge from the Code Duello (and many thanks to that renown brain-box Mr Ager-Cawley for making the relevant adaptions to the modern electronic Field of Honour).

6: both parties roll a dice at the prescribed time and PM the opposing second with the result. Failing to PM the opposing second with the result is considered cowardly and base behaviour and forfeits all honour. Man will shun him and God will turn His face from him.

7: one hour after the agreed time the constable or referee flips a coin. This result is PM to all parties. If heads, the highest dice roll wins. If tails, the lowest rolls win. A tie indicts both parties suffer the consequence of loosing (see below) but honour is satisfied and all animosity and grievance is forgotten.

8: if to first blood the looser must refrain from posting for one day if sword was the weapon of choice, two if pistol or three if cannon were used. These values are trebled if the duel was to the death.

9: once the looser has refrained from posting in the relevant thread for the appropriate length of time honour is considered satisfied and all animosity and grievance is forgotten.

It is my hope that Code Duello de Larni will regulate uncivil behaviour in discussion forums from now ever after.


The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53

Moreover that view is a blatantly anti-relativistic one. I'm rather inclined to think that space being relative to time and time relative to location should make such a naive hankering to pin-point an ultimate origin of anything, an aspiration that is not even wrong.

Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 330 by Butterflytyrant, posted 11-19-2011 10:06 PM Butterflytyrant has not yet responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 9890
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 332 of 357 (641610)
11-20-2011 5:40 PM
Reply to: Message 326 by cavediver
11-19-2011 6:24 PM


Re: Plausible explanation
Forgive my ignorance. I always thought that the singularity was essentially everything in one place at one time. I don't really understand time during or "before" the singularity.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 326 by cavediver, posted 11-19-2011 6:24 PM cavediver has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 333 by NoNukes, posted 11-20-2011 7:35 PM Phat has not yet responded
 Message 334 by Rahvin, posted 11-21-2011 12:52 PM Phat has responded

  
NoNukes
Member
Posts: 9993
From: Central NC USA
Joined: 08-13-2010
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 333 of 357 (641623)
11-20-2011 7:35 PM
Reply to: Message 332 by Phat
11-20-2011 5:40 PM


Re: Plausible explanation
Forgive my ignorance. I always thought that the singularity was essentially everything in one place at one time. I don't really understand time during or "before" the singularity.

You put "before" in quotes as if you understand that there is no real before. What does "before" mean?

It seems you are saying, "Yeah, there was no before, but what really happened before???


This message is a reply to:
 Message 332 by Phat, posted 11-20-2011 5:40 PM Phat has not yet responded

    
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 744 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 334 of 357 (641671)
11-21-2011 12:52 PM
Reply to: Message 332 by Phat
11-20-2011 5:40 PM


Re: Plausible explanation
Forgive my ignorance. I always thought that the singularity was essentially everything in one place at one time. I don't really understand time during or "before" the singularity.

You also previously used the word "static" in describing the early, super-compressed Universe.

How can a thing be in a static state when "before" doesn't mean anything? How can something be unchanging when there is no past for a different state to potentially exist in?

There has never been a static state Universe. As cavediver said, there was no cosmic egg waiting for the right "moment."

The singularity wasn't a bomb waiting for some divine mover to press the button and make it explode.

Instead, the Universe has always been expanding, for literally every moment of time. We aren't talking here about bodies at rest remaining at rest until acted upon by an external force - we're talking about the Universe, which was always expanding.

You can choose any two coordinates in the entire timeline, it doesn't matter which two, and the spacial component of the Universe will be larger at the coordinate where entropy is greater. You can pick the first two milliseconds, or the first two billion years, or the first two trillionths of a nanosecond, and you'll still see that the Universe is larger at the later coordinate.


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.”
- Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers


This message is a reply to:
 Message 332 by Phat, posted 11-20-2011 5:40 PM Phat has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 335 by Phat, posted 11-21-2011 1:57 PM Rahvin has responded

  
Phat
Member
Posts: 9890
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 335 of 357 (641674)
11-21-2011 1:57 PM
Reply to: Message 334 by Rahvin
11-21-2011 12:52 PM


Re: Plausible explanation
Rahvin writes:

You can choose any two coordinates in the entire timeline, it doesn't matter which two, and the spacial component of the Universe will be larger at the coordinate where entropy is greater. You can pick the first two milliseconds, or the first two billion years, or the first two trillionths of a nanosecond, and you'll still see that the Universe is larger at the later coordinate.

Still boggles. Granted the universe is larger the first two nanoseconds. But what about the very first googlesecond?

How small is "it" initially?

Edited by Phat, : added


This message is a reply to:
 Message 334 by Rahvin, posted 11-21-2011 12:52 PM Rahvin has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 336 by Rahvin, posted 11-21-2011 2:07 PM Phat has not yet responded
 Message 337 by New Cat's Eye, posted 11-21-2011 2:35 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 744 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


(1)
Message 336 of 357 (641676)
11-21-2011 2:07 PM
Reply to: Message 335 by Phat
11-21-2011 1:57 PM


Re: Plausible explanation
Still boggles. Granted the universe is larger the first two nanoseconds. But what about the very first googlesecond?

So far as we can tell thus far, given any two real coordinates in time, the space of the Universe will be larger in the later coordinate than in the earlier coordinate.

How small is "it" initially?

Well, that's why we call it a "singularity." It's physics-speak for "the math stops working here, we don't have enough relevant observations to predict exactly what was going on."

If you follow the expansion backward in time, you eventually wind up with a Universe that existed as a single, dimensionless point at the very first moment of time. There's nothing to compare that sort of "size" to, just as you can't describe the third dimension of a 2-dimensional line.


“The human understanding when it has once adopted an opinion (either as being the received opinion or as being agreeable to itself) draws all things else to support and agree with it.”
- Francis Bacon

"There are two novels that can change a bookish fourteen-year old's life: The Lord of the Rings and Atlas Shrugged. One is a childish fantasy that often engenders a lifelong obsession with its unbelievable heroes, leading to an emotionally stunted, socially crippled adulthood, unable to deal with the real world. The other, of course, involves orcs." - John Rogers


This message is a reply to:
 Message 335 by Phat, posted 11-21-2011 1:57 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Member
Posts: 11761
From: near St. Louis
Joined: 01-27-2005
Member Rating: 1.6


(1)
Message 337 of 357 (641679)
11-21-2011 2:35 PM
Reply to: Message 335 by Phat
11-21-2011 1:57 PM


Re: Plausible explanation
Still boggles. Granted the universe is larger the first two nanoseconds. But what about the very first googlesecond?
How small is "it" initially?

Hey Phat, think of like an asymptote. Here's a plot of f(x) = 1 / x:

As 'x' increases, the value of f(x) gets smaller and smaller, but it can never actually reach zero, the x axis.

Asking, but what about when x is a brazillian-gazillion, still doesn't get you to actual zero.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 335 by Phat, posted 11-21-2011 1:57 PM Phat has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 353 by Dr Adequate, posted 02-24-2012 3:18 AM New Cat's Eye has responded

  
whytera 
Suspended Junior Member (Idle past 2064 days)
Posts: 3
Joined: 11-25-2011


Message 338 of 357 (642046)
11-25-2011 1:54 AM


Spam
where did all the matter and energy contained in the big bang come from or, what form did the matter and energy (for want of more accurate labels) have at that point?
Buy WOW Gold EU
Tera Gold

zyy.com supports spam.

tera4sale.com supports spam.

Edited by Adminnemooseus, : Change subtitle, nuke spam links, add message.


    
Portillo
Member (Idle past 1717 days)
Posts: 258
Joined: 11-14-2010


Message 339 of 357 (644263)
12-16-2011 5:02 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Larni
01-12-2010 10:20 AM


If the big bang truly was the beginning of everything, then there couldnt possibly have been matter and energy before. Since those things came into existence after the bang.

Edited by Portillo, : No reason given.


And the conspiracy was strong, for the people increased continually - 2 Samuel 15:12

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Larni, posted 01-12-2010 10:20 AM Larni has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 340 by jar, posted 12-16-2011 7:12 PM Portillo has not yet responded
 Message 341 by Larni, posted 12-17-2011 6:06 AM Portillo has not yet responded

  
jar
Member
Posts: 29434
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 340 of 357 (644275)
12-16-2011 7:12 PM
Reply to: Message 339 by Portillo
12-16-2011 5:02 PM


Well, kinda.

The matter and energy that makes up this universe didn't exist.


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!

This message is a reply to:
 Message 339 by Portillo, posted 12-16-2011 5:02 PM Portillo has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 342 by Phat, posted 01-20-2012 12:04 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

  
Larni
Member
Posts: 3951
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 341 of 357 (644314)
12-17-2011 6:06 AM
Reply to: Message 339 by Portillo
12-16-2011 5:02 PM


I don't understand how you can read this entire thread and make such a comment.

Are you impervious to knowledge?


The above ontological example models the zero premise to BB theory. It does so by applying the relative uniformity assumption that the alleged zero event eventually ontologically progressed from the compressed alleged sub-microscopic chaos to bloom/expand into all of the present observable order, more than it models the Biblical record evidence for the existence of Jehovah, the maximal Biblical god designer.
-Attributed to Buzsaw Message 53

Moreover that view is a blatantly anti-relativistic one. I'm rather inclined to think that space being relative to time and time relative to location should make such a naive hankering to pin-point an ultimate origin of anything, an aspiration that is not even wrong.

Well, Larni, let's say I much better know what I don't want to say than how exactly say what I do.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 339 by Portillo, posted 12-16-2011 5:02 PM Portillo has not yet responded

    
Phat
Member
Posts: 9890
From: Denver,Colorado USA
Joined: 12-30-2003
Member Rating: 1.4


Message 342 of 357 (649087)
01-20-2012 12:04 PM
Reply to: Message 340 by jar
12-16-2011 7:12 PM


Where did IT come from?
jar writes:

The matter and energy that makes up this universe didn't exist.

I thought that matter could neither be created nor destroyed. (OOPS...that disproves a Creator )
This message is a reply to:
 Message 340 by jar, posted 12-16-2011 7:12 PM jar has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 343 by Perdition, posted 01-20-2012 12:09 PM Phat has not yet responded

  
Perdition
Member (Idle past 795 days)
Posts: 1593
From: Wisconsin
Joined: 05-15-2003


Message 343 of 357 (649090)
01-20-2012 12:09 PM
Reply to: Message 342 by Phat
01-20-2012 12:04 PM


Re: Where did IT come from?
I thought that matter could neither be created nor destroyed.

In this universe that is correct, sort of. But it has no bearing on what may or may not happen "outside" our universe.

Besides, if the net energy of the universe is zero, then it's still technically a gain of nothing, just like virtual particles can be created, but generally they cancel each other out so there is no net gain.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 342 by Phat, posted 01-20-2012 12:04 PM Phat has not yet responded

    
1.61803
Member
Posts: 2718
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004
Member Rating: 2.9


Message 344 of 357 (649094)
01-20-2012 12:41 PM


A balanced equation
The way I look at it is the cosmos is the ultimately balanced equation.
  
hugenot
Junior Member (Idle past 1973 days)
Posts: 7
From: palm beach gardnes, fl
Joined: 02-13-2012


Message 345 of 357 (652480)
02-13-2012 10:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Larni
01-12-2010 10:20 AM


There was no big bang, God created the Earth and the universe 6000 years ago through His Word.
Planets cannot form out of nothing, and organise themselves and start turning in organisez fashion!
It is just impossible!
http://www.bible-tube.com/hovind-1-age-of-the-earth.php

Edited by Admin, : Disable the link.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Larni, posted 01-12-2010 10:20 AM Larni has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 346 by subbie, posted 02-13-2012 10:29 PM hugenot has not yet responded
 Message 347 by Larni, posted 02-14-2012 5:57 AM hugenot has not yet responded
 Message 348 by rueh, posted 02-14-2012 12:45 PM hugenot has responded

    
RewPrev1
...
19202122
23
24Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017