Re-Problems With The Big Bang Theory

Finally, someone who understands the Universe. Why 137?

---

KindlyThere is a spider by the water pipe.

i understand what is obvious.what 137 are you referring? i will not be able to reply to your post, and i figure its just a jeer anyways. i still got that post 1 time every 30 minutes thing because the site is run by children who dont like real discussions. but i always love to try to figure out puzzles within what I'm capable of researching in the reality of our world.1 3 and 7 i noticed is times two plus one. ie: 1 times two plus 1 is 3 and 3 times two plus one is 7. i read an interesting article about cesium 137. a radioactive by product of nuclear fission. the glowing salt thing was kinda cool. but anyways, i dont see where any of that is useful.only God knows all the secrets of the universe. its his body. knowing that though, is a start to understanding what roles we play in it, individually, and as a whole. and for the seeker, you find that place. Gods blessing be with you always.see y'all when i get a chance to get back to a PC. take care, and God bless.

---

keep your mind from this way of enquiry, for never will you show that not-being is
~parmenides

Thanks for you opinion.In Message 62 I used information from Liddle. Liddle says according to the BBT predictions the universe would have recollapsed or expanded so rapidly nothing would exist on it.So how do you justify your statement inflation is not needed.Is Liddle wrong? I call them questions LIDDLE and BRANDENBERGER call them PROBLEMS.They then show how the BBT as proposed can not be true in their descrition of the problems.If you will read Message 7 you will see cavediver agrees there is a problem and that inflation fixes it. I am a Bible thumper. The Bible is not accepted as trustworthy here. So who am I to refute the BBT?I can point out where scientist say the BBT fails to match observations. Sure I can, and have you just don't like the answer. You are correct with that statement.But the problems presented by the Scientist I quoted say the BBT does not exist without Inflation.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."

what you don't seem to understand is that Inflation IS a form of the 'Big Bang'. In addition, inflation predicted the patterns of the structures of the universe ahead of time, before we discovered them.I suggest as a high level , layman's book, 'Wrinkles in Time' by George Smoot to explain how the inflationary model of the big bang made predictions.

IAJ,You really need to provide evidence for your claim that the universe is "finite" because your claims are a lot of nothing without it.

---

Thanks
To believe in "Force" is to believe in Love, Wisdom, Intelligence, Force, Agility, and Charm.

ICANT, You fail to understand the point my friend. The big bang model was not summarized until there was evidence to devise it. I also want to mention that if the BB model fails there will be a new model to replace it and it will be based on all the current evidence of the time. The difference between Religion and Science is that Scientific theories/models are based on actual evidence but however such is not the case for Religion. I will be happy to learn about the BB with you =). No. Please reference the entire meaning above but also pay attention to part 2. I can understand your frustration but however just because there is no answer to a question does not mean that a God did it. Science is based on evidence, as mentioned above, and as such the current Scientific understanding simply does not have enough evidence to answer all of our questions at the moment. Will Science understand this supposed "GOD" someday? it may but we have to wait for the evidence.

---

Thanks
To believe in "Force" is to believe in Love, Wisdom, Intelligence, Force, Agility, and Charm.

The CMB data gathered by wmap says the infinite universe model does not fare as well with the data which corresponds to wide-angle temperature fluctuations as the finite universe model.http://www.math.cornell.edu/...4/geometry/finite/finite.htmlThese fluctuations are really necessary for the infinite universe model.Do you have some better information.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,It is my understanding that according to the BB model the universe is finite. I am trying to get IAJ to post references for his claims as he has a tendency to make wild ass assertions. I also want to mention that just because the Bible creation story supports a finite universe does not mean that this is what the authors had in mind. What I mean is that the authors obviously did not mention the words "the universe is finite" or even imply it directly. If the universe is claimed to be finite then that claim must be based on evidence.Edited by Force, : edit

---

Thanks
To believe in "Force" is to believe in Love, Wisdom, Intelligence, Force, Agility, and Charm.

The CMB had been discovered and expansion was accepted which caused the problems in the OP.Guth came up with the idea of inflation in 1981 some 15+ years after the CMB and expansion.So when did inflation become a part of the BBT?Was it before the problems?Or, Was it as a solution to the problem?Inflation is a add on to the Big Bang Theory to fix the problems listed in the OP. What is wrong with, Robert H. Brandenberger, Andrew R. Liddle.
What is wrong with Alan Guth who came up with the idea of inflation?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."

Great suggestion, Ramoss, but what you have to understand (and I'm sure you do) is that ICANT has absolutely no interest in understanding any of this. All he wants is to find gaps, problems, and open questions so that he can believe and declare that his theological "theory" of cosmology is just as valid as that of the world community of cosmologists. He would act exactly the same way at any point in the history or the future of science - look at the front line of research and mock the open questions. Don't forget that every "transitional" fossil find is simply the creation of two new gaps...I wish I had any enthusiasm for addressing this whole issue but ICANT has just sapped me of the will to live - he is the AntiChrist of knowledge. In the unboundless wonders of the Universe, all he can do is say - ooh look, you don't understand this yet, and your model for this isn't quite right.The simple facts are these: Big Bang comsology has a huge array of evidence, from nucleosynthesis, large scale structure of the Universe, Cosmological red-shift/expansion, CMBR, stellar age, etc. Just as importantly, it is predicted by General Relativity, our theory of spcae-time which has passed every test ever thrown at it. This is sufficient for us to accept that the big bang cosmology is very likely an extremely good picture of what has happened. The original BBT does leave some questions, e.g. flatness, horzion, "monopole". These demonstrated that there was something more than the simple, naive dynamics of the original model. But given that the original model was based on the simplistic models of matter and energy content of the Universe, this was obvious.One of the most important contributors to the dynamics of the Universe which was missing in the classical model are scalar fields. The Higgs field is the most "known" of these, but most plausible Planckian physics models are replete with scalar fields. We are already seeing the probable effect of one or more scalar fields in the so-called Dark Energy which is driving the accelerating expansion of the Universe.When the concept of inflation was proposed as the answer to the problem mentioned earlier, it was a real no-brainer. That said, it's not the only solution to the problems, but it does possess some excellent observational evidence. We don't yet have a perfect underlying model of the inflation process, but then these involve guessing the nature of Planckian physics, so it's not too surprising!So, yes, there are open issues in cosmology - that is why we have cosmologists. And I don't see the situation changing for 100 years or so. But when ICANT makes idiotic statements suggesting that the BBT is dead in the water, he's being, well, an idiot.

cavediver,fear can lead people in many directions =).

---

Thanks
To believe in "Force" is to believe in Love, Wisdom, Intelligence, Force, Agility, and Charm.

In part 2 it says real, actual.
In part 3 it says definite. Which means not vague.
In part 4 it says actual physical existence.I have a real, actual, definite, physical pick up truck in my drive-way. Guess what I can observe and touch with my hands.Yep that is tangible. I don't think you can understand my fustration.I am not fustrated that there are no hard and fast answers to the problems. I can accept the fact that there are a lot of unknowns. Some of which we may never have the answers for. I enjoy studying and learning, I love reading, I love looking for answers. But if I want to find answers I must have an open mind. That is the reason I question everything.Now my fustration comes from everyone presenting the BBT as if it is perfect with no problems or flaws.I had the same problem in Seminary.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,Science is more tangible than faith.Edited by Force, : editEdited by Force, : edit 2Edited by Force, : deletion of mute points...

---

Thanks
To believe in "Force" is to believe in Love, Wisdom, Intelligence, Force, Agility, and Charm.

Welcome back, I don't mind being called an idiot.But if you are going to quote me please use the entire statement.My statement was that without inflation the BBT was dead.I think that is the only way I made the statement.You mentioned a couple of other posibility's that are a long way off. I read of several. my e-mail address is available if you would care to put a test together to find out what I have learned from what you have put forth in the last 15 months.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."

Fine, this is an idiotic statement. ICANT, you miserably failed that test the other day when you made your comment of standing on the "balloon" and looking up, seeing "nothing". I should have been howling with laughter but I was kicking in frustration that someone who trys to play hardball with the limits of cosmology would reveal himself such a ignorant fool of the subject. I find it deeply insulting given the time and effort invested.