Author
|
Topic: Size of the universe
|
Philip Johnson
Junior Member (Idle past 4834 days) Posts: 24 Joined: 12-29-2010
|
|
Message 41 of 248 (598213)
12-29-2010 4:59 PM
|
Reply to: Message 1 by Calypso 01-29-2010 10:24 PM
|
|
Young or old universe
It is ironic. Evolutionist (who are supposed to believe in an old universe) believe that the universe went from a speck to the size of 50 billion light years in a split second as a result of Inflation. Creationists (who are said to believe in a young universe) believe that it took 6 days for this to occur. The creationists believe it took a trillion+ times longer for the majority of the universe to come into existance than the evolutionists believe. 1 split second vs. 6 days
This message is a reply to: | | Message 1 by Calypso, posted 01-29-2010 10:24 PM | | Calypso has not replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 42 by jar, posted 12-29-2010 5:04 PM | | Philip Johnson has replied |
|
Philip Johnson
Junior Member (Idle past 4834 days) Posts: 24 Joined: 12-29-2010
|
|
Message 43 of 248 (598217)
12-29-2010 5:09 PM
|
Reply to: Message 42 by jar 12-29-2010 5:04 PM
|
|
Re: Young or old universe
I am referring to the time it took for the universe to be 50 billion light years in size. Evolution teaches that as a result of Inflation this occurred in less that a trillionth of a second, whereas creationists say it took several days.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 42 by jar, posted 12-29-2010 5:04 PM | | jar has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 44 by Coragyps, posted 12-29-2010 5:15 PM | | Philip Johnson has replied | | Message 45 by jar, posted 12-29-2010 5:20 PM | | Philip Johnson has not replied | | Message 47 by nwr, posted 12-29-2010 6:16 PM | | Philip Johnson has not replied | | Message 49 by Theodoric, posted 12-29-2010 6:25 PM | | Philip Johnson has not replied |
|
Philip Johnson
Junior Member (Idle past 4834 days) Posts: 24 Joined: 12-29-2010
|
|
Message 46 of 248 (598224)
12-29-2010 5:31 PM
|
Reply to: Message 44 by Coragyps 12-29-2010 5:15 PM
|
|
Re: Young or old universe
I just find it amusing that evolutionists (within the last 30 years) have come to agree with creationists that the universe got to be 75% of it's current size in less than a week. Jar, you can google "cosmology inflation" for more information.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 44 by Coragyps, posted 12-29-2010 5:15 PM | | Coragyps has not replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 48 by jar, posted 12-29-2010 6:20 PM | | Philip Johnson has replied |
|
Philip Johnson
Junior Member (Idle past 4834 days) Posts: 24 Joined: 12-29-2010
|
|
Message 50 of 248 (598244)
12-29-2010 6:26 PM
|
Reply to: Message 48 by jar 12-29-2010 6:20 PM
|
|
Re: Young or old universe
Jar, do you believe that the universe was 75% of the size it is now within a second of the Big Bang? You said you disagreed with my statement that "evolutionists (within the last 30 years) have come to agree with creationists that the universe got to be 75% of it's current size in less than a week". I did not mention stars.
This message is a reply to: | | Message 48 by jar, posted 12-29-2010 6:20 PM | | jar has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 51 by jar, posted 12-29-2010 6:29 PM | | Philip Johnson has replied |
|
Philip Johnson
Junior Member (Idle past 4834 days) Posts: 24 Joined: 12-29-2010
|
|
Message 52 of 248 (598248)
12-29-2010 6:31 PM
|
Reply to: Message 51 by jar 12-29-2010 6:29 PM
|
|
Re: Young or old universe
Jar, I am just asking a question. You can skip the derogatory remarks. Do you believe that the universe was 75% of the size it is now within a second of the Big Bang?
This message is a reply to: | | Message 51 by jar, posted 12-29-2010 6:29 PM | | jar has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 53 by jar, posted 12-29-2010 6:33 PM | | Philip Johnson has replied |
|
Philip Johnson
Junior Member (Idle past 4834 days) Posts: 24 Joined: 12-29-2010
|
|
Message 54 of 248 (598255)
12-29-2010 6:38 PM
|
Reply to: Message 53 by jar 12-29-2010 6:33 PM
|
|
Re: Young or old universe
Jar, the universe is 90+ billion light years in size at present. Do you believe it was 50+ billion light years in size within a second after the Big Bang?
This message is a reply to: | | Message 53 by jar, posted 12-29-2010 6:33 PM | | jar has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 55 by jar, posted 12-29-2010 6:51 PM | | Philip Johnson has replied |
|
Philip Johnson
Junior Member (Idle past 4834 days) Posts: 24 Joined: 12-29-2010
|
|
Message 65 of 248 (598314)
12-30-2010 9:49 AM
|
Reply to: Message 55 by jar 12-29-2010 6:51 PM
|
|
Re: Young or old universe
I wrote: "Do you believe it was 50+ billion light years in size within a second after the Big Bang?" jar wrote: "No idea, but that simply has no meaning anyway." How can you say that question has no meaning. Cosmological Inflation (that the universe expanded to 75% of its current size within a split second of the Big Bang) was conceived to try to answer the classic conundrum of the Big Bang cosmology: why does the universe appear flat, homogeneous and isotropic in accordance with the cosmological principle when one would expect, on the basis of the physics of the Big Bang, a highly curved, heterogeneous universe? Inflation also explains the origin of the large-scale structure of the cosmos. Do you believe in the Big Bang Theory without Inflation, the Big Bang Theory with Inflation, or some other theory concerning the formation of the universe?
This message is a reply to: | | Message 55 by jar, posted 12-29-2010 6:51 PM | | jar has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 66 by jar, posted 12-30-2010 9:59 AM | | Philip Johnson has replied | | Message 69 by cavediver, posted 12-30-2010 11:12 AM | | Philip Johnson has not replied | | Message 70 by Theodoric, posted 12-30-2010 3:54 PM | | Philip Johnson has not replied |
|
Philip Johnson
Junior Member (Idle past 4834 days) Posts: 24 Joined: 12-29-2010
|
|
Message 67 of 248 (598318)
12-30-2010 10:09 AM
|
Reply to: Message 66 by jar 12-30-2010 9:59 AM
|
|
Re: Young or old universe
I wrote: "Do you believe in the Big Bang Theory without Inflation, the Big Bang Theory with Inflation, or some other theory concerning the formation of the universe?" jar wrote: "I say it has no meaning because you have not yet explained what you mean by this Universe." The word "universe" is commonly defined as the totality of all physical matter and energy. So, do you believe in the Big Bang Theory without Inflation, the Big Bang Theory with Inflation, or some other theory concerning the formation of all physical matter and energy?"
This message is a reply to: | | Message 66 by jar, posted 12-30-2010 9:59 AM | | jar has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 68 by jar, posted 12-30-2010 10:18 AM | | Philip Johnson has not replied | | Message 73 by Percy, posted 01-01-2011 8:56 AM | | Philip Johnson has replied |
|
Philip Johnson
Junior Member (Idle past 4834 days) Posts: 24 Joined: 12-29-2010
|
|
Message 75 of 248 (598669)
01-01-2011 6:26 PM
|
Reply to: Message 73 by Percy 01-01-2011 8:56 AM
|
|
Re: Young or old universe
Percy wrote: "Since the diameter of the observable universe grew from effectively 0 light years about 13.7 billion years to about 93 billion light years today." Are you of the opinion that nothing can go faster than the speed of light? Is the radius of the universe increasing by at most 1 light year every year since nothing can go faster than the speed of light?
This message is a reply to: | | Message 73 by Percy, posted 01-01-2011 8:56 AM | | Percy has replied |
Replies to this message: | | Message 76 by Iblis, posted 01-01-2011 6:37 PM | | Philip Johnson has not replied | | Message 77 by Percy, posted 01-02-2011 7:35 AM | | Philip Johnson has not replied |
|