EvC Forum: Creation cosmology and the Big Bang

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Creation cosmology and the Big Bang

JonF

Member (Idle past 196 days)

Posts: 6174

Joined: 06-23-2003

Normal Thread Display

(2)

Message 131 of 305 (665267)
06-10-2012 7:59 PM

Reply to: Message 126 by zaius137
06-10-2012 4:52 PM

Re: Bozo Boson

I take it you have no response?

I simply do not accept the authority of a commentary over peer review in this case.

Don't accept the authority. Address the challenge. But you have no response because you're just paper-bombing. You have no understanding whatsoever of the math of "quantized" red shift.

I believe I answered all other objections and corrected the misunderstanding of several misused quotes.

You haven't answered or even addressed a one of 'em. But I certainly understand why.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 126 by zaius137, posted 06-10-2012 4:52 PM		zaius137 has not replied

JonF

Member (Idle past 196 days)

Posts: 6174

Joined: 06-23-2003

Normal Thread Display

Message 165 of 305 (665878)
06-19-2012 8:22 AM

Reply to: Message 163 by zaius137
06-19-2012 1:33 AM

Re: Big Bang violates physics

Energy is not conserved globally in a universe described by FLRW metric. Lack of energy conservation defies the materialistic rationalist view of the universe.

The universe is not required to conform to your concept of a "materialistic rationalistic" view. FYI, a materialistic rationalist has no difficulty accepting the universe the way it is, without "global energy conservation".

This message is a reply to:
	Message 163 by zaius137, posted 06-19-2012 1:33 AM		zaius137 has not replied

JonF

Member (Idle past 196 days)

Posts: 6174

Joined: 06-23-2003

Normal Thread Display

Message 192 of 305 (666207)
06-24-2012 6:30 AM

Reply to: Message 191 by Son Goku
06-24-2012 3:27 AM

Re: Energy

Then provide the proper mathematics, if you must, because a Newtonian treatment is simply insufficient.

Why? What I showed above is the proof that in the FLRW Big Bang spacetim momentum is conserved. There isn't another "more advanced proof", it's actually the proof. Plus even if there was, a proof is a proof.

Note that our friend was unable to detect that your proof was relativistic.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 191 by Son Goku, posted 06-24-2012 3:27 AM		Son Goku has seen this message but not replied

JonF

Member (Idle past 196 days)

Posts: 6174

Joined: 06-23-2003

Normal Thread Display

Message 194 of 305 (666213)
06-24-2012 12:58 PM

Reply to: Message 193 by onifre
06-24-2012 10:50 AM

Re: Big Bang violates physics

There was continuous creation.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 193 by onifre, posted 06-24-2012 10:50 AM		onifre has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 195 by onifre, posted 06-24-2012 1:13 PM		JonF has not replied

JonF

Member (Idle past 196 days)

Posts: 6174

Joined: 06-23-2003

Normal Thread Display

(1)

Message 205 of 305 (666258)
06-25-2012 10:13 AM

Reply to: Message 201 by zaius137
06-25-2012 1:43 AM

Re: Big Bang violates physics

What about the local observer principle, one in our galaxy and one in a distant galaxy moving apart at or near the speed of light. Does the measurement of the speed of light stay consistent with SR? This given, is our length of measure contracted as described by Lorentz—Fitzgerald? And the galaxy that is traveling faster than light have a length of zero?

Wowee kerzowie, you're pretending to participate in a discussion of cosmology and you are asking those questions?

The answers are yes, yes (well, sort of), and there are no galaxies traveling faster than light through space.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 201 by zaius137, posted 06-25-2012 1:43 AM		zaius137 has not replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

3 online now:	kjsimons, PaulK, Taq
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,850 Year: 4,107/9,624 Month: 978/974 Week: 305/286 Day: 26/40 Hour: 0/4

Summations Only