Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 77 (8905 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 04-24-2019 7:48 PM
74 online now:
dwise1, JonF, Minnemooseus (Adminnemooseus), Percy (Admin) (4 members, 70 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: WookieeB
Post Volume:
Total: 850,194 Year: 5,231/19,786 Month: 1,353/873 Week: 249/460 Day: 65/29 Hour: 1/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Prev1
...
67
8
910
...
27NextFF
Author Topic:   Before Big Bang God or Singularity
cavediver
Member (Idle past 1753 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 106 of 405 (452947)
01-31-2008 9:00 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by ICANT
01-31-2008 8:49 PM


Re: ... In the beginning
Would it be in the general direction of the North Star.

Yes it would... wow, I forgot that North is straight-up :laugh: :laugh: :laugh:

oh dear, it is too late for this level of humour stimulation.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2008 8:49 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 110 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2008 9:24 PM cavediver has not yet responded

Rahvin
Member (Idle past 1297 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 107 of 405 (452950)
01-31-2008 9:09 PM
Reply to: Message 104 by ICANT
01-31-2008 8:49 PM


Re: ... In the beginning
You know I been thinking about this North Pole thing quite a bit because it keeps coming up.

The thought occured to me when I saw a sub stick it's nose through the ice.

What if we had a sub over the North Pole and He launched a rocket straignt up what direction would it be heading. Would it be in the general direction of the North Star.

Just a thought.

Have fun,

Oh for crying out loud! It's an analogy, ICANT!

And aside from that, the rocket would be heading "up." Not North. The North Star is called the North Star because it happens to be aligned with our North pole, but the star itself doesn't designate the direction.


When you know you're going to wake up in three days, dying is not a sacrifice. It's a painful inconvenience.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 104 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2008 8:49 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 109 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2008 9:20 PM Rahvin has not yet responded

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6187
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 108 of 405 (452951)
01-31-2008 9:10 PM
Reply to: Message 102 by cavediver
01-31-2008 7:43 PM


Re: ... In the beginning
Hi cavediver,

cavediver writes:

Yes, it definietly does. That is the point of the analogy. At T=0 in classical big bang, or in no-boundary, there is no concept of before. But as I asked earlier, if you are looking for a cause, why does it have to be in the past?

Why not just say just because.

Now lets examine that.

It can't be in the future. No definately not.

If it is in the present being the moment of T=0+

There is no way the singularity could spawn the universe unless it did it out of the absence of anything.

Because there had been no condition to be able to cause the singularity to come into being.

There was no space=time.
There was no gravity.
There was no black holes.

I got 2 choices.

It spawned from an absence of anything.
It spawned from something that was in existence before T=0.

I choose the latter it make's more sense.

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 102 by cavediver, posted 01-31-2008 7:43 PM cavediver has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 117 by cavediver, posted 02-01-2008 8:04 AM ICANT has responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6187
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 109 of 405 (452953)
01-31-2008 9:20 PM
Reply to: Message 107 by Rahvin
01-31-2008 9:09 PM


Re: ... North Pole
Hi Rahvin,

Oh for crying out loud! It's an analogy, ICANT!

And aside from that, the rocket would be heading "up." Not North. The North Star is called the North Star because it happens to be aligned with our North pole, but the star itself doesn't designate the direction.

OK I still been thinking.

How about if a rocket took off from Cape Kenedy heading north flying at about 20,000 feet When it reached the North Pole still heading North out into space where would it be heading?

I know one thing it would leave a lot of busted glass in its path.

Just a thought.


"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 107 by Rahvin, posted 01-31-2008 9:09 PM Rahvin has not yet responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6187
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 110 of 405 (452955)
01-31-2008 9:24 PM
Reply to: Message 106 by cavediver
01-31-2008 9:00 PM


Re: ... In the beginning
Hi cavediver,

Yes it would... wow, I forgot that North is straight-up

I thought you would get a kick out of that I actually got that from Hawking's imaginary time.

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 106 by cavediver, posted 01-31-2008 9:00 PM cavediver has not yet responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6187
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 111 of 405 (452964)
01-31-2008 9:45 PM
Reply to: Message 95 by cavediver
01-31-2008 6:12 AM


Re-Summation
Hi cavediver I missed this one.

cavediver writes:

No, it is not impossible. Why do you claim this?

How could we exist? There would be no universe.

Msg=56

ICANT writes:

The only way put forth for the singularity to exist says it can not exist.

cavediver writes:

Nonsense, the singularity is at T=0.

Message 59

ICANT writes:

Then what process produced this singularity at T=O?

cavediver writes:

As Hawking said, the positive curvature of the space-time.

Message 62

ICANT writes:

So are you saying there was space-time before the Big Bang?

cavediver writes:

No, of course not...


You said "singularity cause by the positive curvature of the space-time."

You said there was no space-time before Big Bang = T=0+.

No spacetime = no positive curvature of the space-time = no singularity = no Big Bang.

So if you are correct in what you said we can't be here.

Unless you got a better explanation.

I got one but you won't accept it.

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 95 by cavediver, posted 01-31-2008 6:12 AM cavediver has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 113 by Modulous, posted 01-31-2008 10:11 PM ICANT has responded
 Message 118 by cavediver, posted 02-01-2008 8:12 AM ICANT has responded
 Message 119 by Rahvin, posted 02-01-2008 10:22 AM ICANT has responded

  
Hill Billy
Member (Idle past 3464 days)
Posts: 163
From: The hills
Joined: 01-26-2008


Message 112 of 405 (452967)
01-31-2008 10:07 PM
Reply to: Message 17 by ICANT
01-29-2008 10:37 AM


Re: Re-Hard time wraping small head around this
I'm sorry, but I'm kinda stuck here.
The universe always was but it used to be smaller?
Is this true?

As I said, I wanna understand.


" When hunting the obtuse subtlety makes excellent bait." Jimmy V.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 17 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 10:37 AM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 114 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2008 10:26 PM Hill Billy has not yet responded

Modulous
Member (Idle past 214 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 113 of 405 (452969)
01-31-2008 10:11 PM
Reply to: Message 111 by ICANT
01-31-2008 9:45 PM


Re: Re-Summation
You said there was no space-time before Big Bang = T=0+.

No spacetime = no positive curvature of the space-time = no singularity = no Big Bang.

You still thinking of things like this:

Nothing.........spacetime....positive curvature...singularity...big bang

This is wrong.

Spacetime is a four dimensional entity. At some coordinates in that entity there exists postitive curvature of spacetime. One such coordinate is at T=0.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2008 9:45 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2008 10:34 PM Modulous has responded

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6187
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 114 of 405 (452970)
01-31-2008 10:26 PM
Reply to: Message 112 by Hill Billy
01-31-2008 10:07 PM


Re: Re-Hard time wraping small head around this
Hi Hill Billy,

Hill Billy writes:

As I said, I wanna understand.

You having a hard time. Man I just walked out into the yard and looked up there is so much stuff up there. I came back in and set down and started trying to figure out how you could get Jupiter which is 9 times the size of the earth into something as small as a point. Then what would I do with all that other stuff?

Hill Billy writes:

I'm sorry, but I'm kinda stuck here.

The universe always was but it used to be smaller?
Is this true?

But to answer your question yes.

Isai. 45:12 (KJV) I have made the earth, and created man upon it: I, even my hands, have stretched out the heavens, and all their host have I commanded.

See I told you it was smaller but is now larger. I Know I got it from a reliable source.


"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 112 by Hill Billy, posted 01-31-2008 10:07 PM Hill Billy has not yet responded

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6187
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 115 of 405 (452973)
01-31-2008 10:34 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by Modulous
01-31-2008 10:11 PM


Re:Space-time
Hi Mod,

modulous writes:

Spacetime is a four dimensional entity. At some coordinates in that entity there exists postitive curvature of spacetime. One such coordinate is at T=0.

Are you saying there was space-time and at some coordiance in that spacetime is where the postitive curvature of space-time created the singularity that spawned the universe?

Very interesting,


"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 113 by Modulous, posted 01-31-2008 10:11 PM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by Modulous, posted 02-01-2008 7:39 AM ICANT has responded

  
Modulous
Member (Idle past 214 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 116 of 405 (453019)
02-01-2008 7:39 AM
Reply to: Message 115 by ICANT
01-31-2008 10:34 PM


Re: Re:Space-time
Are you saying there was space-time and at some coordiance in that spacetime is where the postitive curvature of space-time created the singularity that spawned the universe?

Very interesting,

No, I'm saying the big bang is not about spawning the universe. The big bang is just part of the universe just like any other part of the universe we might give a name. The universe doesn't 'come into existence' at the big bang. The universe exists - past, present and future as one four dimensional entity.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 115 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2008 10:34 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 120 by ICANT, posted 02-01-2008 10:31 AM Modulous has responded

cavediver
Member (Idle past 1753 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 117 of 405 (453023)
02-01-2008 8:04 AM
Reply to: Message 108 by ICANT
01-31-2008 9:10 PM


Re: ... In the beginning
It can't be in the future. No definately not.

Really? I wish I'd known you were such an expert on space-time physics. Why can it not be in the future?

BTW, it is 'definitely' - think of it as de-finite, you won't go wrong again...

Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.

Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 108 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2008 9:10 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 122 by ICANT, posted 02-01-2008 10:47 AM cavediver has responded

cavediver
Member (Idle past 1753 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 118 of 405 (453025)
02-01-2008 8:12 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by ICANT
01-31-2008 9:45 PM


Re: Re-Summation
ICANT writes:

So are you saying there was space-time before the Big Bang?

cavediver writes:

No, of course not...

You said there was no space-time before Big Bang = T=0+.

No I did not :) You should read what I said...

I said that I was NOT saying that "there was space-time before the Big Bang"

It simply makes no sense. There is no 'before' so it impossible to talk about it.

Of course there is space-time. The singularity is surrounded by it. The singularity is a feature of that space-time, and arises because of the nature of that space-time. Simple...


This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2008 9:45 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 124 by ICANT, posted 02-01-2008 10:53 AM cavediver has responded

Rahvin
Member (Idle past 1297 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


Message 119 of 405 (453054)
02-01-2008 10:22 AM
Reply to: Message 111 by ICANT
01-31-2008 9:45 PM


Re: Re-Summation
You said there was no space-time before Big Bang = T=0+.

ICANT, time is part of space-time. Speaking about "before" space-time is like taking this ray:

*------------------------------>

and asking "what point is farther to the left of the start of the ray?"

It doesn't make sense - there are no points on the line farther to the left of the start of the ray.

"Before" is defined as "earlier in time than x." You're trying to ask "what is earlier in time than time?" That question doesn't make sense.

If you stand exactly on magnetic North and pull out a compass, how do you go further North? The question doesn't make sense.

If you ask "which is higher up, Mars or Venus?" the question doesn't make sense - "up" from the perspective of Earth doesn't make sense after you get a relatively short distance from the ground.

Any of this helping? The questions you're asking and the things you say when you think you understand are like asking "what's wider than width?"


When you know you're going to wake up in three days, dying is not a sacrifice. It's a painful inconvenience.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 111 by ICANT, posted 01-31-2008 9:45 PM ICANT has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 131 by ICANT, posted 02-01-2008 11:17 AM Rahvin has responded

ICANT
Member
Posts: 6187
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007


Message 120 of 405 (453056)
02-01-2008 10:31 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by Modulous
02-01-2008 7:39 AM


Re: Re:Space-time
Hi Mod,

Modulous writes:

No, I'm saying the big bang is not about spawning the universe.

Then at the Big Bang. Time, space, and all matter did not come into existence.

Modulous writes:

The big bang is just part of the universe just like any other part of the universe we might give a name.

Like the Andromeda Galaxy, Sunflower Galaxy, or our milky way galaxy.

Then what was the function of the Big Bang?

Modulous writes:

The universe doesn't 'come into existence' at the big bang.

OK. When did it come into existence if it is only 13 billion to 20 billion years old?

Modulous writes:

The universe exists - past, present and future as one four dimensional entity.

This is supposed to be my line.

I believe Genesis 1:1. In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth. Since God had no beginning the universe had to always be here in some form. I have so stated many times on this forum.

Have fun now,


"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 116 by Modulous, posted 02-01-2008 7:39 AM Modulous has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 121 by Rahvin, posted 02-01-2008 10:42 AM ICANT has not yet responded
 Message 123 by Modulous, posted 02-01-2008 10:50 AM ICANT has responded

  
Prev1
...
67
8
910
...
27NextFF
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019