Intelligent Design == Human Design?

... without understanding what the math is telling you!This is the crux of your problem, tesla. You have a layman's understanding of the math/concepts without the knowledge of the underlying principles and their connection to the models from which they are derived.One case in point:Do you really understand what the spacetime singularity is and what it means?What attributes for this singularity are derived from the math?What do these attributes tell us about the models from which the equations sprang?It's as if you heard or read about this singularity then stopped thinking. You did not read or comprehend the following paragraphs that relayed (or should have relayed) what the attributes of this singularity means to the underlying models.You are so hell-bent on proving your preconceived religious point you can not be bothered with what a spacetime singularity means to the "physics LAW and RELIABLE physics math" you so errantly think you are quoting.

Precisely what I meant. You have it wrong.Singularity ≠ all of everything.Singularity ≠ existence.Singularity = ignorance.Singularity is the term used to describe that area where both of our most accurate models break down by showing impossible absurdities. It is that area of which we know nothing. You are ignoring the fact that no one knows if there was anything else to interact with or not. Your beliefs mean nothing.The rest of your post is drivel.Whether the Universe is an embedded manifold or not is unknown. Piercing the singularity cannot yet be done. The math tells you nothing because it does not yet exist.You, further, extrapolate your intuition from things in our 4D existence onto those areas of ignorance. If there is one thing our models show, operating in those areas where they are known to have exceptional efficacy, it is that this Universe defies intuition at every level. Edited by AZPaul3, : delete redundedunencyEdited by AZPaul3, : spelin

quote:

---

Whether the Universe is an embedded manifold or not is unknown.
  —AZPaul3

---

Your "fact" is not evidenced. It will not, cannot, be accepted.

quote:

---

The math tells you nothing because it does not yet exist.
  —AZPaul3

---

You say you respect the science and try to use the science, yet you twist then abandon the protocol for your religious speculations.Fail.

We're talking the Universe here, tesla, not some damn bell jar on your table! Pull your head out of it man! So you do not know what "expansion" means and you do not understand the concept of an un-embedded manifold. Sorry, tesla, there is no edge.If spacetime is flat then the universe is infinite and unbounded. If curved then it is finite and like the surface of a sphere there is no edge.At present most evidence points toward a flat Universe, yet, within the error bars, there may be a slight curvature. More study is required. Since this edge does not exist that will be difficult.You do not understand the most basic cosmological concepts. You keep relying on your intuition to build your model. Again, tesla, we have already seen, have proven beyond a doubt, that the Universe defies human intuition.Only the evidence rules here, tesla, despite and contrary to your intuition.

There is your intuition, again. Yes, in fact, they do. As Huntard already suggested, look up and go about 30,000 km. You really don't have to go that far but I figure the exercise will do you some good. Yes, precisely. We don't need any links. Science has a great deal of evidence that the Universe is expanding and in an accelerating way.The counter intuitive thing is that the Universe is not expanding into anything. Wrap you tiny little mind around that one! Remember, you asked for this.You're an idiot. See FLRW and WMAP.The evidence (not proof, mind you, this is not religion) is in the math.Since the math appears to be beyond you I'll provide some simple-minded kiddie links that give a flavor of what the math shows. here and hereOK.Your flying car will not be. This is not because of the technology, which does exist, but because of society.We have enough problems with idiots behind the wheel of cars firmly planted upon the surface. Imagine the havoc of letting those fools loose in the air!Not gonna happen.

See the "tesla has not yet responded" at the bottom of a post?Click on it. It will change to "tesla acknowledges this reply"

And there are a lot of things that lack any evidence whatsoever, and are contrary to the evidence we do have, that I cannot see. That certainly does not mean they are there just to fulfill an emotional need. Since you do not know what the math says, or better yet, why the math is structured as it is, your conclusion here is warrantless, intellectually dishonest. Got plenty of it. You just do not care to see it. Well, best of luck to you in your endeavor. Send us a post card from Stockholm.

There you go with your myopic view from your common sense experience again without understanding the basic concept.Vacuum does not possess any power. Vacuum does not "suck" things into it.Here on earth, to maintain a vacuum, it must be contained because the atmospheric pressures outside the vacuum will rush inward to occupy that volume. It is only the pressure differential between a dense atmosphere and a less dense atmosphere that define a vacuum.In space, the atoms of the earth are held here by gravity. In its absence our atmosphere would migrate out into the less dense regions (vacuum) of space. It is the atoms flowing out, not the vacuum pulling, that would happen.On a Universal level, as a non-embedded manifold, there is no pressure differential from "outside" against which some kind of "edge" or "containment" is needed. Edited by AZPaul3, : better syntax