|
Author
|
Topic: Theories of Cosmological Origins: Are They Science?
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
|
Message 1 of 115 (460635)
03-17-2008 2:49 PM
|
|
|
It was suggested that if I wanted to explore the beginnings further I should start a new tread.
HereHi bluescat48,
bluescat48 writes: In what way does science require faith? Good question. Anything at and everything prior to T=10 -43 has to be believed by faith. I have learned some things over the past year even though no one thinks I have. One of the things I have learned is:
HereSon Goku says, Now for the umpteenth time, the singularity is not a physical object.
If the singularity is a mathematical equation and not physical then it can not be the universe. Another of the things I have learned is:
Here Son Goku says, 13.7 billion years ago the whole universe was about the size of a pea. This pea sized universe is at T=10 -43. The only way that universe can be there is to believe it is there by "FAITH" there is no evidence for it being there. From the point the Big Bang Theory takes over and begins to describe what took place there is evidence, some of which is questioned. Similar evidence is presented in the Bible. God Bless, Edited by ICANT, : Trim Down for Admin Edited by Admin, : Change title.
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
|
|
Message 3 of 115 (460653)
03-17-2008 5:44 PM
|
Reply to: Message 2 by Admin
03-17-2008 3:08 PM
|
|
Re-Trim Down
Admin, I trimed it down and changed the name. If the name is not sufficient change it to whatever you think is best. God Bless,
"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 2 by Admin, posted 03-17-2008 3:08 PM | | Admin has not replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
Re-Taking a Stab
Hi teen4christ,
teen4christ writes: it had to be very dense and very hot. In other words, the whole universe back then had to be glowing hot. Why did it have to be so hot? Why could it just not exist? You say this point which is a mathamatical equation can't tell us anything. So without faith how do we know anything is there.
teen4christ writes: Sure enough, the cosmic background radiation was discovered.
It sure was. You do know other predicted the CMB before Gamow and did a better job and they did not use the Big Bang Model. God Bless,
"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 5 by teen4christ, posted 03-17-2008 6:49 PM | | teen4christ has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
|
|
Message 8 of 115 (460685)
03-18-2008 12:45 AM
|
Reply to: Message 6 by lyx2no
03-17-2008 11:26 PM
|
|
Re: Theories of Cosmological Origins: Are They Science?
Hi lyx2no,
lyx2no writes: Scientific theories start some wee bit of time after the origin. About 10 -43 seconds after. The Big Bang Theory starts then. Read the title again it says origins. This is Percy's choice of title.
lyx2no writes: By that very same token, science, striving to be scientific and all, doesn't say what happened prior to 10 -43 seconds. Then why did you say: " Only that it was probably hotter and denser. " You say it don't say anything and then you say it says something. Isn't that showing faith.
If by "origin" you don't mean T=0 kindly let me know. I am refering to anything between T=O and T=10 -43. Anything that is there has to be assumed, believed to be there, faith that it is there. Because there is no evidence that anything is there. God Bless,
"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 6 by lyx2no, posted 03-17-2008 11:26 PM | | lyx2no has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
Re: Re-Taking a blow to the head.
Hi Chiroptera,
Chiroptera writes: I think we need a program that buys religious people dictionaries and explains to them why the different definitions are separated by numbers. No need for a dictionary I am using Rahvin's definition of Faith. Found Here2. belief that is not based on proof: God Bless,
"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 18 by Chiroptera, posted 03-18-2008 11:44 AM | | Chiroptera has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 24 by Admin, posted 03-18-2008 4:09 PM | | ICANT has not replied | | | Message 25 by Rahvin, posted 03-18-2008 4:16 PM | | ICANT has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
|
|
Message 23 of 115 (460737)
03-18-2008 3:54 PM
|
Reply to: Message 19 by Modulous
03-18-2008 12:34 PM
|
|
Re: early predictions/measurements of CMB
Hi Mod,
Modulous writes: I'm assuming it is to that that ICANT is referring. You assumed correctly. God Bless,
"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 19 by Modulous, posted 03-18-2008 12:34 PM | | Modulous has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 52 by Straggler, posted 03-19-2008 9:31 AM | | ICANT has not replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
Re: early predictions/measurements of CMB
Hi Chiroptera,
Chiroptera writes: So, the source does make some delicious reading in the history of science, which is, in my opinion, one of the best ways to learn how science really works. We have several competing theories that predict a certain phenomenon, and additional observations of the phenomena predicted by each model can rule out particular models to leave, in this case, one possibility. What would happen if we could find something to make Max Born a little more of a prophet? Discovery of H2 , in Space Explains Dark Matter and Redshift
Published in 21st CENTURY Science & Technology, Spring 2000 God Bless,
"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 20 by Chiroptera, posted 03-18-2008 1:10 PM | | Chiroptera has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
|
|
Message 27 of 115 (460742)
03-18-2008 4:39 PM
|
Reply to: Message 25 by Rahvin
03-18-2008 4:16 PM
|
|
Re: Re-Taking a blow to the head.
Hi Rahvin,
Rahvin writes: It is, however, a statement based around the objective evidence we do have available. But you have no evidence of anything existing at T=O. The only way you can have something at T=O is to believe it is there. That takes faith. God Bless,
"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 25 by Rahvin, posted 03-18-2008 4:16 PM | | Rahvin has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
Re: Re-Taking a Stab
Hi t4c,
teen4christ writes: That's just it. We don't know anything was there. Human intuition, however, tells us that since there was something there a little bit later, there probably must have been something there right before that point. You should have seen how these guys pounded me when I mentioned before in another thread.
teen4christ writes: Suppose you are walking along in a forest. If I am in a forest I would expect trees to be there. If I am looking nothing I expect nothing to be there. And since science can tell me nothing I have to guess. Add an assumption, or just have faith that something was there. But if it was, where did it come from? Now I got to make more assumptions. I have mentioned assumptions several times so I will now quote Hawking. Herepage 40.
There is, however, a second and more serious objection. Cosmology can not predict anything about the universe unless it makes some assumption about the initial conditions.
Without such an assumption, all one can say is that things are as they are now because they were as they were at an earlier stage. Hawking said these assumptions were necessary to predict anything. In other words we have to presume certain things existed. You call it anything you want too. As I have stated throughout the only way it can be there is if I believe it is there and that is faith. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
|
|
Message 34 of 115 (460752)
03-18-2008 5:37 PM
|
Reply to: Message 30 by Rahvin
03-18-2008 5:05 PM
|
|
Re-Taking a blow to the head.
Hi Rahvin,
Rahvin writes: We have evidence that the Universe exists after T=0. It is perfectly logical to conclude from that objective, observable evidence that it is highly likely "something" also exists at T=0. If we go on that logic then it should exist prior to T=O. God Bless,
"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 30 by Rahvin, posted 03-18-2008 5:05 PM | | Rahvin has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 35 by Rahvin, posted 03-18-2008 5:44 PM | | ICANT has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
|
|
Message 36 of 115 (460756)
03-18-2008 5:47 PM
|
Reply to: Message 31 by Modulous
03-18-2008 5:13 PM
|
|
Re-Taking a blow to the head.
Hi Mod,
Modulous writes: OK, so nothing exists at T=0, what follows from your hypothesis? Well I actually believe something exists at T=0 and even prior to T=0. And Yes I believe it by faith. I refer to it as pure energy and from that energy everything that ever was and ever will be had it's beginning. This same energy is what keeps things as they are. God Bless,
"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 31 by Modulous, posted 03-18-2008 5:13 PM | | Modulous has replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
|
|
Message 38 of 115 (460758)
03-18-2008 5:51 PM
|
Reply to: Message 35 by Rahvin
03-18-2008 5:44 PM
|
|
Re-Taking a blow to the head.
Hi Rahvin,
Rahvin writes: Time is part of the Universe. You cannot possibly have coordinates of time for which the Universe does not exist. Sure you could all you would have to do is call it eternity. I like that better than I do imaginary time. God Bless,
"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 35 by Rahvin, posted 03-18-2008 5:44 PM | | Rahvin has not replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
Re: early predictions/measurements of CMB
Hi Chiroptera,
Chiroptera writes: Why bother even posting at all if you're not going to say anything? You were answering Modulous and I thought you said you liked to read. So I pointed out this article. I thought the article was pretty good. It explains the redshift and does away with the need for dark matter. So if this is correct Nernst, Finlay-Freundlich, Max Born and Louis de Broglie was correct and their theory of a Universe in dynamical equilibrium without expansion and without continuous creation of matter, would be the correct Theory. God Bless,
"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 28 by Chiroptera, posted 03-18-2008 4:54 PM | | Chiroptera has not replied |
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
Re-Taking a Stab
Hi t4c,
teen4christ writes: I must say that you have a very odd perception of what the word faith means. This is my definition of faith. Faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.
teen4christ writes: Perhaps this will clear it up. Many, if not most, people would agree with me that if I come across a fallen tree with burnt marks, especially after a stormy night, that my believing that lightning struck that tree down is not a faith based assumption. Do you dispute this? That is a normal assumption. But if you did not examine the tree stump and the burn mark because time was too short or for any other reason and went on your merry way believing it was caused by the lightning the night before you would be accepting that fact on faith. If you examined the stump and it was a fresh break then you examined the burn mark and found it to be fresh, then you would have pretty good circumstantial evidence. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
ICANT
Member Posts: 6769 From: SSC Joined: 03-12-2007 Member Rating: 1.6
|
Re: early predictions/measurements of CMB
Hi t4c,
teen4christ writes: Could you provide a link? Sorry thought I did.
Here it is. God Bless,
"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."
|
™ Version 4.2