Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Before Big Bang God or Singularity
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 46 of 405 (452164)
01-29-2008 4:14 PM
Reply to: Message 36 by cavediver
01-29-2008 2:32 PM


Re: Re Singularity
Hi cavediver,
cavediver writes:
Utter, utter bollocks... you have completely failed to understand what he is saying.
quote:
A spacetime is singular if it is timelike or null geodesically incomplete, but can not be embedded in a larger spacetime.
Does Dr. Hawking say?
"but can not be embedded in a larger spacetime"
Does that mean that it can not reside in an absence of anything?
quote:
I have emphasized what I consider the two most remarkable features that I have learnt in my research on space and time: first, that gravity curls up spacetime so that it has a begining and an end. Second, that there is a deep connection between gravity and thermodynamics that arises because gravity itself determines the topology of the manifold on which it acts.
Did Dr. Hawking say: gravity curls up spacetime?
quote:
The positive curvature of spacetime produced singularities at which classical general relativity broke down.
Did Dr. Hawking say: The positive curvature of spacetime produced singularities?
Questions:
Did gravity exist before the big bang?
Did spacetime exist befoe the big bang?
If there was no gravity before the Big Bang and there was no spacetime before the Big Bang.
The postive curvature of spacetime could not produce the singularity our universe is supposed to have come from. All this according to Dr. Hawking.
Now if there was gravity before the Big Bang and spacetime, "Where did they come from?
If there could be no singularity then it could not be the answer to my question. That leaves only one thing.
In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Gen. 1:1
cavediver writes:
And the lectures were not at the Isaac Newton Institute - they were at Lady Mitchell Hall on the Sidgwick Site. We had far too many visitors to fit into the old Isaac Newton lecture hall.
The web site still lists Isaac Newton Institute that is all I have to go on. I was not there like you was.
cavediver writes:
Why do you insist on making such a prick of yourself by refering to Hawking as 'Dr Hawking'? We've been through this before
Yes we have it was over me refering to him as Stephen Hawking. I then started to refering to him as Dr. Hawking to show a little respect for your sake. The man shows nothing but contempt for my God why should I even refer to him as Dr Hawking. If you perfer I will refer to him as Stephen Hawking in the future, your choice.
Have fun,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 36 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 2:32 PM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 48 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-29-2008 4:34 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 51 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 4:56 PM ICANT has replied

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 47 of 405 (452174)
01-29-2008 4:29 PM
Reply to: Message 42 by teen4christ
01-29-2008 3:51 PM


Re: Re Singularity
Hi t4C,
teen4christ writes:
ICANT, speaking as a college student, I can understand why other people here are frustrated with you.
When you make a wrong assumption do your Professors revile you or do they explain where you are wrong?
tean4christ writes:
By reading a few words on the matter and claiming yourself an expert on it,
Hold on there a minute tiger.
I do not claim to be an expert on science that is why I am here to pick these smart peoples brain so I can learn.
Now if your definition of expert is a drip under pressure I would have to claim that one because these guys have put me under pressure and keep me there. But how else can I learn at my age.
If my conclusion I draw from what Dr. Hawking said is wrong all anybody has to do is to take his words and show me my assumptions are incorrect.
No I am called everything in the book but no explanation.

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 42 by teen4christ, posted 01-29-2008 3:51 PM teen4christ has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 53 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 5:11 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 63 by teen4christ, posted 01-29-2008 7:54 PM ICANT has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 48 of 405 (452177)
01-29-2008 4:34 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by ICANT
01-29-2008 4:14 PM


Re: Re Singularity
Did gravity exist before the big bang?
Did spacetime exist befoe the big bang?
As has been explained, there is no such thin as before the Big Bang.
The things Prof. Hawking is writing about, singularities, are not necessarily "The Singularity" that is refered to as the Big Bang. In other words, the Big Bang was a singularity, but not all singularies are the Big Bang.
When Prof. Hawking is talking about black holes' gravity curving up space time into a singularity, he is not talking about the things that happend prior to the Big Bang.
But to directly answer your questions: Yes, they were both there.
Now if there was gravity before the Big Bang and spacetime, "Where did they come from?
They always were.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 4:14 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 50 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 4:54 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 49 of 405 (452180)
01-29-2008 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by cavediver
01-29-2008 3:35 PM


Re: Singularity
Hi cavediver,
cavediver writes:
This is what Hawking is describing in this lecture. Somehow ICANT has managed to get this completely arse-about-face.
I understand that Dr. Hawking started of talking about the no boundry theory and he did a good job of explaining how things could be.
Then he summed up his lecture with the things I refer to.
Either he said them or he didn't. Whether he believes them or not is something else.
I have no problem with an eternal universe I have said every since I came to EvC I believe in one.
I even have a beginning for one.
Have fun

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 3:35 PM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 54 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 5:12 PM ICANT has not replied

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 50 of 405 (452185)
01-29-2008 4:54 PM
Reply to: Message 48 by New Cat's Eye
01-29-2008 4:34 PM


Re: Re Singularity
Hi Scientist,
Catholic Scientist writes:
But to directly answer your questions: Yes, they were both there.
Would you have any information as to their orgin?
Catholic Scientist writes:
"The Singularity" that is refered to as the Big Bang. In other words, the Big Bang was a singularity, but not all singularies are the Big Bang.
Are you saying the singularity the universe expanded from is a special singularity that is not created by the method Dr. Hawking described.
What a revelation, now if you would be so kind as to explain how it was created I would love to learn.
Catholic Scientist writes:
They always were.
I believe that because I believe they are a part of God.
Have fun,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 48 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-29-2008 4:34 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 52 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-29-2008 4:57 PM ICANT has replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 51 of 405 (452186)
01-29-2008 4:56 PM
Reply to: Message 46 by ICANT
01-29-2008 4:14 PM


Re: Re Singularity
*sigh*
Hawking writes:
A spacetime is singular if it is timelike or null geodesically incomplete, but can not be embedded in a larger spacetime.
i.e. - the spacetime is singular if it is (timelike or null) geodescially incomplete *AND* *IF* it cannot be embedded in a larger spacetime - in other words, the space-time cannot be analytically continued into some larger 'covering' metric, such as what we do with the Schwarzschild black hole, moving from Schwazschild coordinates to Kruskal-Szekeres coordinates, which shows that the 'singularity' at r=2M is not really a singularity at all, but simply an artifact of the coordinate system.
This is used to determine that a space-time will be singular if it obeys the above two conditions. If we take a space-time that has a blatent singularity in its metric, such as the 'big bang' FRW space-time, then it's not that particularly useful!!! It's f'ing obvious it has a singularity.
Does Dr. Hawking say?
"but can not be embedded in a larger spacetime"
Does that mean that it can not reside in an absence of anything?
WHAT? What the hell are you asking? What has this to do with what Hawking says above? He's talking about a situation where there are no analytical continuations that will save you from a definite curavture singularity. You do not understand this at all. I would never expect anyone below a student of general relativity to understand this. Why are you wasting my time?
Did Dr. Hawking say: gravity curls up spacetime?
No. 'Gravity curls up spacetime' is a simple layman statement of Einstein's General Relativity. Hawking says 'gravity curls up spacetime so that it has a begining and an end', which is just another statement of the singularity theorems.
Did Dr. Hawking say: The positive curvature of spacetime produced singularities?
Yes, but not in any way you understand. You think this means some temporal causal relation between positive curvature of spacetime 'in the past' 'causing' a singularity 'in the 'future'. Utter bollocks. Here we are considering the entire 4d solution and this is not a causal relationship. Think of it more as a boundary condition when solving a 4d elliptical differential equation.
Did gravity exist before the big bang?
In classical GR there is no 'before', so your question is meaningless.
Did spacetime exist befoe the big bang?
In classical GR there is no 'before', so your question is meaningless.
If there was no gravity before the Big Bang and there was no spacetime before the Big Bang.
The postive curvature of spacetime could not produce the singularity our universe is supposed to have come from.
Meaningless garbage resulting from completely failing to understand the point above.
In the standard classical big bang cosmology, T is larger than or equal to zero. T=0 is the singularity. As ever, there is no before.
All this according to Dr. Hawking.
hardly
Yes we have it was over me refering to him as Stephen Hawking.
No, it wasn't. I have no complaint whatsoever to you referring to him as Hawking, Stephen Hawking, SWH, Prof Hawking, etc, etc. He is just NOT 'Dr Hawking'. It is not his title.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 46 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 4:14 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 55 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 6:32 PM cavediver has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 52 of 405 (452187)
01-29-2008 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 50 by ICANT
01-29-2008 4:54 PM


Re: Re Singularity
Would you have any information as to their orgin?
If there is not a point in time when they did not exist then they do not have an origin, by definition.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 50 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 4:54 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 60 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 7:11 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 53 of 405 (452188)
01-29-2008 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 47 by ICANT
01-29-2008 4:29 PM


Re: Re Singularity
When you make a wrong assumption do your Professors revile you or do they explain where you are wrong?
When a first year physics/maths undergrad stands up in a lecture hall and announces that they can prove God using the Hawking-Penrose singularity theorems, they get reviled, pelted, laughed-at, and chased off campus.
I do not claim to be an expert on science that is why I am here to pick these smart peoples brain so I can learn.
Then you are going about this entirely the wrong way...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 47 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 4:29 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 57 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 6:46 PM cavediver has not replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 54 of 405 (452191)
01-29-2008 5:12 PM
Reply to: Message 49 by ICANT
01-29-2008 4:40 PM


Re: Singularity
Then he summed up his lecture with the things I refer to.
Either he said them or he didn't. Whether he believes them or not is something else.
The unbelievable arrogancy that you don't leave room for the possibility that you may have completely misunderstood what he was saying...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 49 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 4:40 PM ICANT has not replied

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 55 of 405 (452214)
01-29-2008 6:32 PM
Reply to: Message 51 by cavediver
01-29-2008 4:56 PM


Re Singularity
Hi cavediver,
cavediver writes:
No, it wasn't. I have no complaint whatsoever to you referring to him as Hawking, Stephen Hawking, SWH, Prof Hawking, etc, etc. He is just NOT 'Dr Hawking'. It is not his title.
As per your request I will refer to him as Hawking, less typing.
cavediver writes:
It's f'ing obvious it has a singularity
If you are saying the Big Bang obviously had a singularity, I got no problem with that.
cavediver writes:
Hawking says 'gravity curls up spacetime so that it has a begining and an end',
OK
ICANT writes:
Did Dr. Hawking say: The positive curvature of spacetime produced singularities?
cavediver writes:
Yes, but not in any way you understand. You think this means some temporal causal relation between positive curvature of spacetime 'in the past' 'causing' a singularity 'in the 'future'.
OK All I am concerned with is that it produced singularities time is irrelevant.
cavediver writes:
In classical GR there is no 'before', so your question is meaningless.
I agree as far as classical GR my question is meaningless.
cavediver writes:
In classical GR there is no 'before', so your question is meaningless.
I agree as far as classical GR my question is meaningless.
Let me see if I am getting the hang of this.
A singularity cannot be in anything as it is everything.
The Big Bang has a singularity.
Gravity curls up spacetime
The positive curvature of spacetime produced singularities
The Big Bang had a singularity.
But Gravity was non existent until after the Big Band.
Spacetime was non existent until after the Big Bang.
The only way put forth for the singularity to exist says it can not exist.
If there is another way for a singularity to come into being I would like to hear about it.
Until then I will say: In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Gen. 1:1
Have fun,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 51 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 4:56 PM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 56 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 6:42 PM ICANT has replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 56 of 405 (452218)
01-29-2008 6:42 PM
Reply to: Message 55 by ICANT
01-29-2008 6:32 PM


Re: Re Singularity
A singularity cannot be in anything as it is everything.
No, the singularity is a point in space-time (taking the easy case of a closed FRW), specifically the point T=0. Every other point in the Universe lies to the future of the singularity.
The Big Bang has a singularity.
Yes
Gravity curls up spacetime
Yes
The positive curvature of spacetime produced singularities
Not really relevant but ok
The Big Bang had a singularity.
has
But Gravity was non existent until after the Big Bang.
No, for all points T>=0. The Big Bang is at T=0.
Spacetime was non existent until after the Big Bang.
No, for all points T>=0. The Big Bang is at T=0.
The only way put forth for the singularity to exist says it can not exist.
Nonsense, the singularity is at T=0.
Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 55 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 6:32 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 58 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 6:50 PM cavediver has replied

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 57 of 405 (452221)
01-29-2008 6:46 PM
Reply to: Message 53 by cavediver
01-29-2008 5:11 PM


Re: Re Singularity
Hi cavediver,
What I said:
ICANT writes:
"NOTICE" I say if Dr. Hawking is correct in what "HE" says in these lectures there could have been no singularity the universe expanded from. There is no way one could form under the circumstances he described that they were created in.
"NOTICE" I am not saying that there is no way possible for a singularity to exist. But I am saying that under the understood Big Bang Theory it could not have. Under an amended Big Bang Theory it could exist.
How do you take this: "I say if Dr. Hawking is correct in what "HE" says"
And get this:
quote:
When a first year physics/maths undergrad stands up in a lecture hall and announces that they can prove God using the Hawking-Penrose singularity theorems,
I thought only creationist was supposed to do things like that.
Have fun,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 53 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 5:11 PM cavediver has not replied

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 58 of 405 (452223)
01-29-2008 6:50 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by cavediver
01-29-2008 6:42 PM


Re: Re Singularity
Hi cavediver,
cavediver writes:
Nonsense, the singularity is at T=0.
Then what process produced this singularity at T=O?
Or do you believe by faith it was there?
Have fun,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 6:42 PM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 59 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 6:52 PM ICANT has replied

cavediver
Member (Idle past 3643 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 59 of 405 (452224)
01-29-2008 6:52 PM
Reply to: Message 58 by ICANT
01-29-2008 6:50 PM


Re: Re Singularity
Then what process produced this singularity at T=O?
As Hawking said, the positive curvature of the space-time.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 58 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 6:50 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 7:16 PM cavediver has replied

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 60 of 405 (452227)
01-29-2008 7:11 PM
Reply to: Message 52 by New Cat's Eye
01-29-2008 4:57 PM


Re: Time
Hi Scientist,
Catholic Scientist writes:
If there is not a point in time when they did not exist then they do not have an origin, by definition.
Well it appears time did not exist until the Big Bang.
Have fun,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 52 by New Cat's Eye, posted 01-29-2008 4:57 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024