Starlight

A couple things. You misunderstood my comment in jest there. I'm also a physicist, but not to the level that cavediver is. After spending years in research, I went off to a different career direction a few years back. When talking about things such as string theory and multiple universes, my head always explodes because it is beyond my comprehension. I also know enough about physics to appreciate the people who actually KNOW what the hell is going on on a mathematical level.You, on the other hand, don't seem to understand the most basic stuff. I've seen plenty of general statements and misconceptions from you, though.Hint: there are a lot of people smarter than me.Double hint: there are a lot of people smarter than you.Edited by Taz, : No reason given.

---

People
Eating
Tasty
Animals

Then you of all people should understand how frustrating it is for a specialist to come across someone who's arrogant but only knows the misconceptions of whatever subject the specialist is an expert in.When I was a physics TA, the most annoying thing that I encountered on a regular basis was theology or english students arguing with me about such and such in class. There was one instance that comes to my mind now. I think this was an english or theology major that came to me for help on a physics problem. Coming from memory, it went something like 1 person jumps up and falls back to the ground while another person in a moving elevator (elevator was moving up) jumps up and falls down to the elevator floor. Assuming they both jumped up with the exact same energy input, who will fall back down faster?It was a basic problem and the answer was obvious. But we ended up arguing for 20 minutes or so because her common sense told her the guy in the elevator should hit the bottom of the elevator faster than the guy jumping from the ground. It was frustrating to be talking to someone who didn't know what she was talking about but insist on being right.You wouldn't appreciate it if I start claiming that biblical evidence suggest Jesus was actually an alien in disguise, would you?Remember that the people who are criticizing you are phd's in the field we're talking about.

---

People
Eating
Tasty
Animals

You forgot that when someone finds Jesus they automatically become an expert in every single field of human knowledge, they may not have the bits of paper, but they are experts nonetheless! I had a thread on this a few years ago but cannot find it now, it was entitled something like 'forget university, find the Lord' I think, and it is basically arguing that why bother putting all the years of hard graft at uni if you can find Jesus and become an expert in everything.But, seriously, there may be something a bit sinister going on here. Take Revhugger there as an example. Now, to the average punter he preaches to I would imagine that the Rev talks a good game, the amateur astronomer, the 'impressive' M.A. in Christian Theology will probably give him a lot of credence in the circles that he moves in, yet we know most of what he says is essentially incorrect, but how many of his flock and friends would question his arguments? Probably none, so we have his immediate flock sucking all this misinformation in because it sounds impressive and a man of revs credentials cannot possibly be wrong, then they tell others who are similarly impressed and the ignorance spreads.One thing I have noticed about this type of know-it-all Christian is that if they stumble upon a convincing sound-bite then it spreads like wildfire throughout their social circles, even though the sound-bite is usually incorrect.There are thousands of Revhuggers out there, all spreading incorrect information that they have not bothered to reserch for themselves, or have researched it and know that it is wrong, but it wont stop them telling others so that their ego can have a little massage.It's as if you need some kind of logic bypass to follow this particular brand of Christianity, I have no idea what the driving force behind it is. maybe it's money, or fame, or a genuine belief that they are doing God's work.

The Big Bang certainly gives rise to an effective multitude of universes by way of Inflation. The Observable Universe constitutes only a tiny fraction of the entire Universe, and it is quite possible, if not inevitable, that widely separated volumes of the Universe will have differing physics to some extent, as they have never been in causal contact with each other.But then, why would you even need to argue with something as stupid and obviously flawed as the KCA?

Hi RCH I'd be very interested in hearing what these mistakes are. As I am now, save your congratulations all, a graduate of the 9^th grade I am less easily led astray then I was a few, short weeks ago. But I do have a certain degree of awe regarding cavediver which would likely blind me to his foibles. Consider me, if you will, one of the little children not to be led astray. I place myself in your hands to be delivered from his (cavediver's, in this instance) hands.If I could suggest a good place to start: In Message 59, before the current unpleasantness, I asked a series questions. Could you do me the service of answering them. They are real question that I really don't know the answers to, and have not been able on my own to find the answers to.The danger is that I might unwittingly, having formed an incorrect understanding of these points, use them in constructing more advanced arguments; i.e., my Message 57 to you. You could also, please, answer the question I posed to you there as well; not the rhetorical question per se, but correcting any error I would be making in assuming the cases are not the same.

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.

I said universe, not Godel universe etc , universe. A universe a universe. Google it. No, not at all, I would suggest that you are. So, click click away and get back with me when you have learned basic cosmology...Thanks for your replies, I answered the non personal ones which was zero. As I said I would trade my educational credentials and other achievements (I owned and ran an R&D/and testing lab for four years) with anyone here. That should shut up the posers here. So if you must try and discredit my education and belittle my intelligence etc put up or shut up, got it?; }>btw I determine personal content key words and stop reading at that point, so no replies were fully read....FYIJust for fun, how many Christians do we have in here? Yep just as I thought, the real reason for the confrontational attitude is beyond evident... Edited by RevCrossHugger, : No reason given.Edited by RevCrossHugger, : No reason given.

Not mine. Message 80

---

Ridicule is the only weapon which can be used against unintelligible propositions. Ideas must be distinct before reason can act upon them.

I will have another look at it. Thanks for the heads up.; {>

Is an entirely appropriate statement. We may be using the word universe to discuss "observable universe"-like volumes of the entire Lambda-CDM space-time, or that entire space-time. We may be using it in the context of chaotic inflation and similar scenarios, where we have an eternal bubbling or nucleation of "universes". We may be thinking of elements of a higher dimensional space, such as in supergravity and string theory, where our universe could be just one of a myriad of spaces of widely varying dinmensionality and physics. All of these have been discussed in the popular literature, and asking which of these are possible in the context of Big Bang comsology is entirely sensible. It would also be prudent to ask by what one means as Big Bang comsology - just plain old FRW or modern lambda-CDM. I cannot think why anyone would think of bringing up the Godel space-time in this context - it is uttrly irrelevant to cosmology at the level of this discussion and is pure distraction. The idea that the meaning placed on 'a universe' is obvious is exceptionally naive. I think you may have some serious learning of your own first. Amateur astronomy is no basis for a serious discussion on comsology, as you are finding. Despite the fact that I happened to start out as a professional astronomer, none of my cosmological/theoretical-physics peers had a clue as to the advanatges of a Ritchey-Chretien Cassegrain over a Schmidt Cassegrain...Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.