Big Bang - Big Dud

Well, putting the BB aside for the moment: you are wrong. It is possible for something to come from "nothing". It happens all the time.Try a google on virtual particles or the casimir effect. It won't be changed because it has a nice ring to it. Changing the name would not help save the "petty arguments" since they arise out of ignorance of the subject. Changing the name won't suddenly enlighten those who know nothing about the topic.This message has been edited by NosyNed, 02-05-2005 02:50 AM

this is the definition of the Casimir effect>>>
"In 1948 Dutch physicist Hendrik B. G. Casimir of Philips Research Labs predicted that two uncharged parallel metal plates will be subject to a force pressing them together. This force is only measurable when the distance between the two plates is extremely small, on the order of several atomic diameters. This attraction is called the Casimir effect."If the virtual particles truly came from nothing then there would be no metal plates. The metal plates are something. Does this phenomenon happen when there are no plates? I don't see how the Casimir effect supports the something-from-nothing theory since there is already matter present to cause the forces in between the metal plates.

I find this lack of communication be twiXt the posters to be indicative of all larger evc phenomena which I historically associate with 'the Galvani-Volta'difference of opnion and the new chemistry of Faraday. "The attack on the special theory of contact electricity was based on two fundamental proofs. With a few well-conducted experiments, the Galvanists successfully showed that : (1) Contractions were also obtained with homogenousarmatures. This proof, provided by Valli, Aldini, and Galvani, was fairly convincing; however, its value as refutation was bluneted from the outset by Volta's ad hoc hypothesis on the imperceptibility of the differences between the armature's contact points. (2) Contractions were also obtained without armatures, whether single-metal or bimetallic; this proof was furnished by a crucil experiment because it refuted the theory of contact electricity between unlike metals and confirmed the theory of intrinsic electrical imbalnce." in chapter 5 THE CRUCIAL EXPERIMENTS by Marcello Pera The Ambiguous Frog---The Galvani-Volta Controversy on Animal Electricity.Is is any wonder I was on trial for lack of 'chemical' balance?
The only lack of correspondence to the lack of communicatio between Ned and DaBear is the bomb of not having to recount the history of electricity and mental treatment, virtuality subsitutes.

There was "no scientific law" to allow an electron (or a baseball...) to have the properties of a wave (wavelength, frequency, ability to be diffracted) until eighty years ago, either, but they always did and still do. Just because you or I are ignorant of the things physicists are working on means not that they don't exist.And of course the Casimir Effect still works without the metal plates - it's just a helluva lot harder to measure it that way.

ok,
I am stil learning things physica.

From what I've read it sounds like it only happens when the plates are present. What are you talking about?"The Casimir effect is a small attractive force which acts between two close parallel uncharged conducting plates. It is due to quantum vacuum fluctuations of the electromagnetic field."

If there's any other believable instances of something resulting from nothing then I would like to hear them. Maybe small electromagnetic waves can be created but how is enough energy created to spark the growth of an enormous universe?

The answer was given: we don't know.Another point: there is reason to think the total energy of the universe is very near zero in which case the "enough energy" isn't what you imagine. I'm not a cosmologist who understands the calculations however.

Virtual particle pairs are forming and annihilating whether the plates are there or not. The plates just provide the means to detect the effect.

So if the plates are not present then you can't detect the effect? Then how do you know it's there?

Did you actually read any material you googled?You will find that the effect was predicted decades before it could be measured. The very well tested math of quantum mechanics says it should be there. The measurements confirmed it.

No, i didn't even google. What does this prove though? All I hear is scientific ramble and in no way any sound arguments to support the Big Bang. So something can come from nothing? How does this apply to the Big Bang?

Remember when you said this?

quote:

---

The main reason why I see the Big Bang as a dud is because there's no scientific law that allows something to come from nothing.

---

Notice that I asked a question, not made a statement.

Then notice that your own statement answers your question. If you didn't think a physical law that allows or prevents something to come form nothing had anything to do with the Big Bang, then why did you say it did?