Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9162 total)
6 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 916,353 Year: 3,610/9,624 Month: 481/974 Week: 94/276 Day: 22/23 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Re-Problems With The Big Bang Theory
onifre
Member (Idle past 2970 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 246 of 273 (473474)
06-29-2008 7:26 PM
Reply to: Message 239 by IamJoseph
06-29-2008 7:55 AM


Re: THE BEST PRE-UNIVERSE SCENARIO?
There can be only one truth about the universe origins, not many truths.
Yeah but I doubt society will ever agree on any ONE truth.
Then you should see the inner light of logic.
I do see the logic, the logic is what removes the meta-physical.
Its enough to drive you potty.
Pot drives me potty, nothing else

All great truths begin as blasphemies
I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 239 by IamJoseph, posted 06-29-2008 7:55 AM IamJoseph has not replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2970 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 247 of 273 (473514)
06-30-2008 11:34 AM
Reply to: Message 242 by IamJoseph
06-29-2008 8:59 AM


Re: THE BEST PRE-UNIVERSE SCENARIO?
That there was an event which caused an expansion, also says there was something pre-universe, because there had to be something which caused a single primal particle to 'expand', and this would have to be a product lingering from pre-BB phase.
As I understand it, if its just expantion that you are talking about and the cause for it, it has been predicted to be the Higgs field that caused the expantion itself. The particles went from massless to acting as if they had mass, causing the expantion.
This is post-BB, nano-seconds post but, post none the less.

All great truths begin as blasphemies
I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 242 by IamJoseph, posted 06-29-2008 8:59 AM IamJoseph has not replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2970 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 250 of 273 (473565)
06-30-2008 5:58 PM
Reply to: Message 248 by tesla
06-30-2008 5:11 PM


Re: Why 137?
it is NOT meant for such a theory to be accepted, because it is not a tested proven law.
General Relativity IS a law. GR goes perfectly with the BBT.
and such as it is, but a stepping stone in the right direction with some truths and half truths on to the path of the hopeful : TRUTH.
If you are going to define truth as ONLY what your faith helps you believe, then no amount of evidence will ever suffice.
have not yet participated with a debate on this topic in which the debaters where searching for a greater understanding by :
a: identifying and acknowlodging faults.
What faults?
c: searching for a way to check or double checked the observed new answers by experimentation or mass logic.
Mass logic? LOLOLOLOLOLOLOLOL
it should not be surprising that on questions with which a guess must be made because you lack understanding of the question, or data, that the guesses of the majority are almost always the correct answer. but that is : almost always.
You do understand that you are making a case against the belief in God with that statement right?
the singularity is inevitable
Not with all theories, some theories don't have a singularity.
which, as long as two forces are, the question "before that" is relevant.
First you need to devote a long time to studying what the 'forces' are before you can just guess where they came from or how they act.
T=0 is inevitable.
You do understand that T=O isn't the moment when time began right?
the fault, is the arrogance, and unwillingness, of science as a whole to endorse God.
Shouldn't that read , "the fault, is the arrogance, and unwillingness, of science as a whole to endorse the CHRISTIAN God."
What if science endorses Zeus, would you be ok with that?
"ALL HAIL ZUES THE MIGHTY CREATOR OF T=O", how would that work?
which is: that God is.
Let me understand you right, you say that science is incomplete with its theories and mathematical predictions and then turn around and give this statement, 'God is'!!! What does that mean? Can you clarify any of that? Do you have any experiments or observable tests to justify that statement?
You can't argue sciences incompleteness with 'God is'.
With your logic anything 'just is'. That clarifies nothing.
your consciousness to live in a body that lasts forever more,
Thats your ego talking there, YOU think you last forever. Typical ego-centric religious babel.
so for that: it is those who believe who will see. and not the other way around.
What will you see?
i hope one day you or perhaps others who debate the topic of the start of the universe and all things; will debate honestly.
We are trying to but, that entails us excluding superstitions about invisible beings who duel in the minds of the delusional
and look for the truth by observing.
Without speaking metaphorically how have you observed God?

All great truths begin as blasphemies
I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 248 by tesla, posted 06-30-2008 5:11 PM tesla has not replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2970 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 256 of 273 (473726)
07-02-2008 12:32 PM
Reply to: Message 253 by Agobot
07-01-2008 7:23 AM


Re: Singularity's Size
How does the BBT come up with a conclusion that the size of the singularity must have been about pea-size?
The BBT didn't come up with a conclusion, physicist came up with equations based on observations.
Because even if we were able to condense matter(sqeezing the atoms so that electrons and the nucleus become one body), wouldn't we get a singularity 1 billion times greater in size than our Sun?
You are thinking conceptually when to understand it you would need to understand the mathematics behind it, it cannot simply be explained by analogies. However, heres a short but but detailed history on what was observed and how they came to their calculations,
Create a Website | Tripod Web Hosting
According to my calculations, the Earth could be shrinked to just 100 metres.
Could you show how you came to that calculation?

All great truths begin as blasphemies
I smoke pot. If this bothers anyone, I suggest you look around at the world in which we live and shut your mouth.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 253 by Agobot, posted 07-01-2008 7:23 AM Agobot has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 257 by Agobot, posted 07-02-2008 2:47 PM onifre has replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 2970 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 262 of 273 (474308)
07-07-2008 2:23 PM
Reply to: Message 257 by Agobot
07-02-2008 2:47 PM


Re: Singularity's Size
Thanks

This message is a reply to:
 Message 257 by Agobot, posted 07-02-2008 2:47 PM Agobot 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