Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,906 Year: 4,163/9,624 Month: 1,034/974 Week: 361/286 Day: 4/13 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Before Big Bang God or Singularity
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 20 of 405 (452000)
01-29-2008 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 19 by Taz
01-29-2008 11:16 AM


Re: Re-North Pole
People always ask what's before the singularity as if it's somehow going to destroy science and bring back christian theocratic rule. I'm just tired of seeing this argument put forth over and over... as if 200 years of science advancement will be destroyed by this question.
You mean just like when people ask who created god?
Cause I'm tired of seeing that one too.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Taz, posted 01-29-2008 11:16 AM Taz has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 22 of 405 (452004)
01-29-2008 11:53 AM
Reply to: Message 21 by ICANT
01-29-2008 11:49 AM


Re: Re-North Pole
I say there was no singularity therefore there could be no Big Bang as taught.
You care to show evidence that I am wrong? I would love to discuss it.
Why don't (can't) you show evidence that you are right?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 21 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 11:49 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 23 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 12:22 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 24 of 405 (452027)
01-29-2008 12:44 PM
Reply to: Message 23 by ICANT
01-29-2008 12:22 PM


Re: Re-North Pole
Can we agree that these statements are true?
I can assume that anything is true for the sake of arguing
If fact, you can just phrase your argument as: If X is assumed to be true, then Y.
And then you don't even have to ask for my agreement to move the argument forward. If I don't agree with your assumptions then I can still address your agument, or I can address why your premises are false.
But anyways....
This definition implies that none of the things brought into being during the orgin of the universe had an existence prior to the orgin of the universe.
They did not have existance as they are now, but what they came from was not a total lack of anything, meaning that they did not come from nothing.
Therefore it is not the distribution of things but the actual creation of those things and the distribution of them.
Like I said, the Big Bang is not creation ex nihilo...
Also:
Genesis 1:1 In the beginning God created the heaven and the earth.
Is more accurately read, according to the hebrew, as:
quote:
In the beginning, when god was creating the heaven and the earth...
Not that it happened at some instant in the past.

Science fails to recognize the single most potent element of human existence.
Letting the reigns go to the unfolding is faith, faith, faith, faith.
Science has failed our world.
Science has failed our Mother Earth.
-System of a Down, "Science"
He who makes a beast out of himself, gets rid of the pain of being a man.
-Avenged Sevenfold, "Bat Country"

This message is a reply to:
 Message 23 by ICANT, posted 01-29-2008 12:22 PM ICANT has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 27 of 405 (452049)
01-29-2008 1:09 PM
Reply to: Message 26 by cavediver
01-29-2008 1:00 PM


Re: Not a trick question
Typical idiot teenager
FYI, actually, I think he's an old fart (no offense to anyone), like almost 70 years old. But his behavior is the same, you're correct.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 1:00 PM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 33 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 1:52 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 37 of 405 (452110)
01-29-2008 2:34 PM
Reply to: Message 33 by cavediver
01-29-2008 1:52 PM


Re: Not a trick question
CS, I hereby offer an invitation to come over to England and stay at my place, where you will be instructed in the ancient arts of sarcasm, irony, and satire
Awe shucks, thanks! I'm on my way... I know that I have a lot to learn of those arts. What kind of beer should I bring?

Sarcasm is hard to spot, ya know... And since your participation is sporadic, I really did think that you thought that ICANT was a teenager. He seemed like it to me when I first met him.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 33 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 1:52 PM cavediver has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 38 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 2:46 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 40 of 405 (452133)
01-29-2008 3:11 PM
Reply to: Message 38 by cavediver
01-29-2008 2:46 PM


Man, I would really like to visit the UK someday...
He's reading notes from a highly technical (albeit advanced-layman) talk and expecting to be able to use what he's learned to formulate his own ideas. And then expects those original notes to back up his ideas... and says that anyone challenging his ideas is essentially challenging Hawking!!!
yeah, he does the same thing with the Bible....
I just cannot understand his attiutude here. Truly bizarre.
I think its a n00b issue with the lack of humility, even though he's not all that new anymore.
But humility seems to be proportional to participation, so there hope that one of these days he'll "grow up".

This message is a reply to:
 Message 38 by cavediver, posted 01-29-2008 2:46 PM cavediver 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

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

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 76 of 405 (452449)
01-30-2008 12:05 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by Son Goku
01-30-2008 11:51 AM


Re: Singularity.
Hey Son Goku,
Thanks for the insight. I just have one discrepancy...
windscreen glass
They're windshields.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by Son Goku, posted 01-30-2008 11:51 AM Son Goku has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Son Goku, posted 01-30-2008 12:13 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 135 of 405 (453083)
02-01-2008 11:33 AM
Reply to: Message 131 by ICANT
02-01-2008 11:17 AM


Re: Re-Summation
Then I am told that space and time was created in the Big Bang.
The Big Bang didn't create spacetime. Spacetime was in existence, as the singularity, and then it started expanding. This expansion is referred to as the Big Bang.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 131 by ICANT, posted 02-01-2008 11:17 AM ICANT has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 137 of 405 (453087)
02-01-2008 11:48 AM
Reply to: Message 132 by ICANT
02-01-2008 11:27 AM


Re: Re-Summation
Rahvin writes:
Why does it need to be "created?"
Then it had to come from an absence of anything.
No, not necessarily. How many times do people have to tell you that you're wrong about something before you stop repeating it?
Here is an alternate theory to the Big Bang. In this theory, the universe was not created and it did not come from nothing.
Here is the animation of the energence.
So can you stop saying that those are the only two possibilities now?
I'm guessing not since it will get in the way of you beliefs

This message is a reply to:
 Message 132 by ICANT, posted 02-01-2008 11:27 AM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 139 by tesla, posted 02-01-2008 11:56 AM New Cat's Eye has replied
 Message 146 by ICANT, posted 02-01-2008 12:15 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 140 of 405 (453094)
02-01-2008 11:58 AM
Reply to: Message 139 by tesla
02-01-2008 11:56 AM


Re: Re-Summation
there was still a before that. the dimensions came from..what? existed..how?
inevitably, there is still T=0
Not if they've existed forever....
The point is that our Universe could have came from somthing that was a non-universe and that it did have to come from the absence of anything.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 139 by tesla, posted 02-01-2008 11:56 AM tesla has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 143 by tesla, posted 02-01-2008 12:06 PM New Cat's Eye has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 149 of 405 (453110)
02-01-2008 12:24 PM
Reply to: Message 147 by ICANT
02-01-2008 12:21 PM


Re: Re-Summation
and the Big Bang Theory is that it came into existence
But its not.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 147 by ICANT, posted 02-01-2008 12:21 PM ICANT has not replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 151 of 405 (453114)
02-01-2008 12:42 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by ICANT
02-01-2008 12:34 PM


Re: Space-time
I thought that is what the Big Bang Theory was to the static universe and gave the universe a beginning.
There you go thinking again....

This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by ICANT, posted 02-01-2008 12:34 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 153 by ICANT, posted 02-01-2008 12:51 PM New Cat's Eye has replied

New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


Message 154 of 405 (453121)
02-01-2008 12:57 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by ICANT
02-01-2008 12:51 PM


Re: Space-time
So correct my thinking.
I think the best correction for your thinking is for it to stop.
Maybe I should just accept what everybody else says and not question anything.
Please do. It will save a lot of wasted time on you.
You're not going to budge. You're just going to repeat the same old nonsense that is required for you to maintain your beliefs.
Big Bang Theory is that the universe definitely had a beginning.
There is no point in time at which the Universe did not exist because time is a part of the Universe and does not exist without it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by ICANT, posted 02-01-2008 12:51 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by ICANT, posted 02-01-2008 1:05 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