|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
EvC Forum active members: 65 (9164 total) |
| |
ChatGPT | |
Total: 916,422 Year: 3,679/9,624 Month: 550/974 Week: 163/276 Day: 3/34 Hour: 0/1 |
Thread ▼ Details |
|
|
Author | Topic: The problems of big bang theory. What are they? | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Maartenn100 Member (Idle past 4613 days) Posts: 39 From: Belgium Antwerp Joined: |
yes, you are right. I don't know what the meaning could be with the model I have.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Portillo Member (Idle past 4182 days) Posts: 258 Joined: |
I never said that every atheist believes that the universe is eternal. Many people do and by doing so they are going against all the scientific evidence pointing to the big bang.
Edited by Portillo, : No reason given.And the conspiracy was strong, for the people increased continually - 2 Samuel 15:12
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Pressie Member Posts: 2103 From: Pretoria, SA Joined: |
I never said that every atheist believes that the universe is eternal. Very few atheists would even think of the Big Bang. Atheists are atheists because there is absolutely no evidence for any kind of god. That's it.You still are confusing the words "atheism" and "science". They are two different things. Many people do and by doing so they are going against all the scientific evidence pointing to the big bang. If a person doesn't know what the Big Bang Theory actually is, is it their fault. Not the fault of science. I, for example, find the physics and maths behind the Big Bang way to difficult to comprehend. I wouldn't have a clue whether or not the Big Bang Theory relates to "eternity" or "non-eternity" at all. My fault, not the fault of science. There still is absolutely no objective evidence for any kind of god at all. None. Even if the whole Big Bang Theory somehow is wrong, there still is no objective evidence for any kind of god. Your logical fallacies (special pleading and straw-man arguments) would still be very bad arguments. Edited by Pressie, : Fixed spelling mistakes and added a sentence.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Portillo Member (Idle past 4182 days) Posts: 258 Joined: |
I used the word atheist for lack of a better word. The point I was trying to make is that many people refuse to believe in the scientific evidence for the big bang because it doesnt fit in with their worldview.
And the conspiracy was strong, for the people increased continually - 2 Samuel 15:12
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
I used the word atheist for lack of a better word. The point I was trying to make is that many people refuse to believe in the scientific evidence for the big bang because it doesnt fit in with their worldview. Yeah. They're called "creationists". This would be a much, much better word than "atheists", what with creationists not being atheists.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Portillo Member (Idle past 4182 days) Posts: 258 Joined: |
The big bang actually fits with theism, since theists have long since believed that the universe had a beginning.
Edited by Portillo, : No reason given.And the conspiracy was strong, for the people increased continually - 2 Samuel 15:12
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 306 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
The big bang actually fits with theism, since theists have long since believed that the universe had a beginning. And yet the people who deny it are in fact by an overwhelming majority creationists. Edited by Dr Adequate, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Maartenn100 Member (Idle past 4613 days) Posts: 39 From: Belgium Antwerp Joined: |
The Big Bang is an 'interpretation' of the facts. It's a theory to explain the measured facts.
God is just a name, a word. That's all. There is no definition for it (or many different ones). Thests can't see that there can be an eternel universe. It's very illogic to think that there can be an eternal god, but not an eternal universe. Very strange thinking. Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given. Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Maartenn100 Member (Idle past 4613 days) Posts: 39 From: Belgium Antwerp Joined: |
In my theory I start with a whole (set of) different postulate(s):
Spacestretch is the gravitational equivalent of lengthcontraction of an object (= spacestretch for observer).Because of a timedifference. Or even better: If spacestretch for the observer is involved, timedifference must be involved too. (and motion) (lengtcontraction of object can also be seen as spacestretch for the observer) It's the observer-triangle When you see motion, you see timedifference and spacestretch.When you see timedifference, you see motion ans spacestretch When you see spacestretch, you see motion and timedifference A second postulate: your time ticks always normal for you.your clock is the norm, the criterium for distortions elsewhere. And You ARE a clock. So space, time and motion will change, given your postion, given your clock. (relativistically spoken). That's relativity. The curvature of spacetime from the universe as a whole I know, it's a bit an abstract concept. I talked about 'the curvature of the universe as a whole'.This curvature can only be seen from a distance. Can you see the curvature of spacetime caused by our galaxy?No, not at all. Because you are a part of it. So, distance make you see 'a whole' and its influence on other 'wholes'.galaxies on other galaxies, clusters on clusters, local groups on eachother etc. These are, what I call: emergent systems. Wholons.These systems curve spacetime too, as whole 'objects'. So, at a certain point, you will see the influence of the curvature of the universe as such a whole on the objects in it. That causes the perception of 'an expanding universe'. Spacestretch. But, that's just a relativistic perception - given your position, given your clock.Space does strange things because of this curvature. (motion and timedifference will be involved too) So: it's not about the facts. It's about the interpretation of the facts. (the theory) Edited by Maartenn100, : No reason given.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Portillo Member (Idle past 4182 days) Posts: 258 Joined: |
There seems to be alot of people here who arent creationists and dont believe in the big bang.
And the conspiracy was strong, for the people increased continually - 2 Samuel 15:12
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3734 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Portillo writes:
Who exactly are you referring to? There seems to be alot of people here who arent creationists and dont believe in the big bang. Always remember: QUIDQUID LATINE DICTUM SIT ALTUM VIDITUR Science flies you into space; religion flies you into buildings.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Portillo Member (Idle past 4182 days) Posts: 258 Joined: |
Just looking at previous pages it seems as though some people are not willing to accept that the big bang theory is scientific fact. Its a hypothesis but its backed up by solid scientific evidence.
Edited by Portillo, : No reason given.And the conspiracy was strong, for the people increased continually - 2 Samuel 15:12
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3734 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Portillo writes:
That statement is very different to saying:
Just looking at previous pages it seems as though some people are not willing to accept that the big bang theory is scientific fact.Portillo writes:
You have changed the word 'Alot' for 'Some' and have abandoned the 'non-creationist' aspect of your claim. There seems to be alot of people here who arent creationists and dont believe in the big bang. But your new statement is kinda self-evident.If there weren't 'some' people that don't accept the BBT then this thread would be very short: "The problems of big bang theory. What are they?" followed by silence. Edited by Panda, : No reason given.Always remember: QUIDQUID LATINE DICTUM SIT ALTUM VIDITUR Science flies you into space; religion flies you into buildings.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Portillo Member (Idle past 4182 days) Posts: 258 Joined: |
What I want to know is do people reject the big bang theory because the scientific evidence does not point towards it or because they dont agree with the view that the universe had a beginning.
And the conspiracy was strong, for the people increased continually - 2 Samuel 15:12
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
bluescat48 Member (Idle past 4211 days) Posts: 2347 From: United States Joined: |
from what I can see, they reject it because it doesn't agree with their creation myths.
There is no better love between 2 people than mutual respect for each other WT Young, 2002 Who gave anyone the authority to call me an authority on anything. WT Young, 1969 Since Evolution is only ~90% correct it should be thrown out and replaced by Creation which has even a lower % of correctness. W T Young, 2008
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024