|
Author
|
Topic: Where did the matter and energy come from?
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
Message 28 of 357 (542820)
01-13-2010 12:47 AM
|
|
|
Skeptics Dilema
Having read the thread so far the question remains in my mind how the expansion could have happened, having no time in which to have happened, no space in which to have existed and no outside of in which to expand.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 29 by Iblis, posted 01-13-2010 1:45 AM | | Buzsaw has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Re: Existence
CS writes: I don't think they "came from" anywhere/thing. Where did god come from? Hi CS. According to the literal reading and implications of the Biblical record, God was eternal. Thus he, existing in the cosmos of the universe, the universe, including all energy and matter. All energy and matter has been eterna in some form or anotherl and eternally managed via work of the supreme creator. The basic laws of heat all applied, subject to work by the designer. This is not the case with BB theory. Thus the mystery of origins relative to this topic.
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 34 of 357 (542920)
01-13-2010 6:29 PM
|
Reply to: Message 29 by Iblis
01-13-2010 1:45 AM
|
|
Re: Skeptics Dilemma
Hi Iblis. Thanks for the thoughtful response.
Iblis writes: Relativity observes the expansion, works its way backwards to the alleged singularity where this no-space no-time infinite-density no-outside stuff might apply, which is really the place where their rewind would arrive at a division-by-zero buffer overflow. And they say Well, we certainly have to stop short of that. Ah Ha! So relativity, relative to the aleged singularity begins in the mind of humans who observe a current expansion in the observable cosmos. Assuming relative (I say relative) uniformity, a hypothesis is advanced to become peered theory, calculating back billions of years when the calculations arrive at T=0, beyond which point the theory fails, having no space for existence of any force, energy or matter, no time to have existed in and no explanation validating the relative uniformity assumptions which rule the day in the science arena.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 29 by Iblis, posted 01-13-2010 1:45 AM | | Iblis has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 48 by Iblis, posted 01-15-2010 1:18 AM | | Buzsaw has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Re: Existence
Briterican writes: We simply have no way of knowing what did or didn't exist or occur outside of our universe, and quite possibly never will. We talk about the big bang theory and the expanding universe because of a preponderance of evidence supporting it. Positing "the supreme creator" doesn't get us any closer to understanding things on a rational basis, and since this is the science forums, I think it is important that we discuss things on a rational basis. Hi Briterican. 1. But the alleged preponderance of evidence supportive of it emphatically alleged that there is no outside of the universe. Thus your theory alleges to know as per alleged evidence. 2. Actually creation as per the Biblical Buzsaw hypothesis is more rational than yours. (Buzsaw unique as discussed in archive search or Buzsaw profile history) A. Unlike yours, there is no outside of problem B. Unlike yours, there is no singularity problem, the universe being eternally managed by the supreme majesty/creator. C. Unlike yours there is no thermodynamics problem as per origin and management of energy and entropy etc. D. Unlike yours, design is explained more rationally in that, as with all human designed things, the product has a pre-planned design. E. Unlike yours, the problem relative to the properties of space's edge/border, apace being allegedly finite. BB theory has no explanation as to how atoms, molecules, particles or forces, comlex systems necessary for expansion and advancement of observed cosmos design, came into existence, nor precisely what property of space allegedly caused it to expand. Briterican, in short, BB theory, reminds me of when mommy asks sonny where the cookies went. Sonny, instead of answering with a few rational words, articulates a lengthy irrational alibi. 
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 37 by Briterican, posted 01-14-2010 2:50 PM | | Briterican has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 52 of 357 (543118)
01-15-2010 1:13 PM
|
Reply to: Message 48 by Iblis
01-15-2010 1:18 AM
|
|
Re: Skeptic's Dilemma
Iblis, thanks very much for kindly taking the time to respond in terms that can be understood. I'm pondering your points an hope to get back to you. I'm intrigued by the 2D thingy. These 2d models relative to a 3D universe appear to be the only ultimate alibi for BB theory. As per my understanding, lleged space curvature appears to be the ultimate (I say ultimate) driving factor for the 2D model.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 48 by Iblis, posted 01-15-2010 1:18 AM | | Iblis has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 56 of 357 (543181)
01-15-2010 10:15 PM
|
Reply to: Message 55 by Taq
01-15-2010 3:55 PM
|
|
Re: Existence
Tag writes: Then please show us how your hypothesis predicted the slight differences in the cosmic microwave background. Hi Tag. I once had a dear friend named Tag when I lived in Ca. His wife's name was Corky. I lost track of them over the years. The Biblical record alleges that God is aware of everything going on in the universe It also alleges that he is the source of all light. His multipresent Holy Spirit is the agent which provided the light before the sun and moon were created, i.e. days one through 3. This light had enough energy to separate/evaporate sufficient waters on the earth to form the atmosphere (likely canopy) over the planet. God via his spirit is operative throughout the cosmos. There is also much other life in the cosmos, invisible to man's eyes, much as various forces and waves known to man but not seen with the naked eye. The Biblical record depicts God as light. In the new Jerusalem to come where the alleged streets of transparent gold and the pearly gates there will be no sun or moon. God will be the light of it. Perhaps the CMB particles have a connection with the multipresent characteristic of God's spirit throughout the universe. I understand that all matter produces some CMB. Likely the aggragate (I say aggragate) amount of CMB in the universe has always been relatively constant, as per my eternal universe model. The science of all of this, of course, is beyond my knowledge. The Buzsaw Hypothesis alleges that Goddidit, but what he did satisfies the observable laws of science.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 55 by Taq, posted 01-15-2010 3:55 PM | | Taq has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 57 by anglagard, posted 01-15-2010 10:24 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
Re: Existence
Briterican writes: In order to have that opinion though, there has to be some point along the logical evidence chain where you disconnect, but where many generations of scientists before you slowly developed their clearer, evidenced position. Everything observed in the universe is moving away from everything else, so it stands to reason that it must have all been packed together at a very distant point in the past. The cosmic background radiation, a remnant of this distant point in the past was predicted in 1948 by George Gamow, Ralph Alpher, and Robert Herman, and finally observed in 1964. The moving away is, according to BB theory, due to expanding space. The BH (Buzsaw Hypothesis) says no. The only property of space is area in which all matter, antimater, forces, gravity, energy, particles, i.e. everything exists. any appearance of separation is things occupying static unbounded space moving apart. Imo, the observed expansion is not necessarily uniform to eternity past. Logically the area of the universe visible to us may be pulsating, having periods of expansion and periods of contraction.
Briterican writes: Somewhere along there... in that last paragraph, you must say "nope, not true, I can't accept that", probably in the first half of the first sentence. A chain could be made all the way down to very basic science like spectroscopy, and at some point you must (in order to hold your opinion) say "nope, I'm not having that, I don't believe that, I don't care what the evidence says". So I'm just curious... at what point do evidenced, rational explanations get disregarded in favour of your particular flavour of religion? Clearly I understand that you don't believe in evolution, but just in terms of pure physics, where is the disconnect? Do you "believe" in the cosmic background radiation? Do you "believe" in radio waves? Light waves? Magnetism? The Goddidit Buzsaw Hypothesis explains the mystery of atoms, particles, molecules, light waves, microwaves, magnetism, and other forces and matter whereas BB theory fails. How so? Where when and how did atoms come to be? How about gravity, light waves, microwaves, particles, photons, molecules, all of which have a degree of complexity and most, if not all, being necessarily effectual and in place for the alleged expansion to have happened, allegedly progressing into what is observed today? Imo, progressing from the alleged singularity to the magnitude of complexity observed today would require an illogical and phenomenal aggregate decrease of entropy; impossible, even. Goddidit, I tell you! 
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 54 by Briterican, posted 01-15-2010 3:51 PM | | Briterican has seen this message but not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 81 of 357 (544870)
01-28-2010 11:03 PM
|
Reply to: Message 61 by Sasuke
01-17-2010 8:32 PM
|
|
Re: Universe = Obsolete Model
Sasuki writes: It's my understanding that the old idea of a "universe" is obsolete. The current idea is that there is a "multiverse" and that "universes" spring into existence from a larger space. This larger space is unstable and this is why "universes" are born from it. Another way universes spring into existence is when energy is pact into a infinately dense state which leads to a expansion. This energy that is packed into a infinately dense state is done via blackholes that exist in a universe and are born from the death of quasars in that universe. When blackholes have fed enough energy into this stored chamber(infinately dense state) the energy has no option but to expand the space it's stored in and when this happens whiteholes are born. Eventually this process leads to an evitable universe like ours born from another universe. Thanks Sasuke P.S. Nothing wrong with saying before the BB with this multiverse model. Hi Sasuki. If that be the case it would seem that conventional science must revise the whole concept of space and BB expansion as it stands. The Buzsaw model of space is that it is static unbounded area in which all forces, energy and matter exist. The multiverse model implies an outside of our universe and space between our universe and other universes. As well, there still remains the question of the origin of the multiverse, it's before and outside of. It appears that all this does is raise additional questions relative to origins.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 61 by Sasuke, posted 01-17-2010 8:32 PM | | Sasuke has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 88 by Sasuke, posted 01-30-2010 6:03 PM | | Buzsaw has replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
MatterWave writes: The excitations of the fields that make up what we label "stuff/matter" in this orderly and comprehensible universe suggest that we and the whole universe are the thoughts of God. This is the nightmare of the atheist physicist. You have a chunk of matter, you split it apart till you get to the atoms, then on to the nucleus, you split the nucleus and you get the "bare" properties that we label "quarks", which are imposible to visualize. Then you realize you only have mathematical objects(virtual messanger particles - virtual gluons and virtual photons) - Numbers. Yep, matter is numbers according to our best understanding and to answer the OP, "matter" didn't come from anywhere. The problem of free will is only solvable if we accept that we are the thoughts of God. How could there be free will? Free from what? From te laws of the universe and your human body? How so? There is more than meets the eye, physicists are joining hands with philosophers on the future GUT. The question - "Where did the matter and energy come from?" will be answered, but not in the way the average Joe would expect. Hi MatterWave. Welcome to EvC. The Biblical model has been the base from which I have hypothesised. This model has it that the universe is eternal, Jehovah god being eternal. The NT states that from him all things came and in him all things exist. I'm not sure I agree that what exists is thought but that it is somehow related to the creator, Jehovah. It does appear that physicists are discovering that matter and energy entails some aspects of the non-visible metaphysical. There appears to be a thin line, if any, between the physical and the metaphysical/supernatural. Perhaps I'm oversimplifying in musings here.
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 89 by MatterWave, posted 01-30-2010 6:16 PM | | MatterWave has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 93 of 357 (545015)
01-30-2010 7:11 PM
|
Reply to: Message 88 by Sasuke
01-30-2010 6:03 PM
|
|
Re: Universe = Obsolete Model
Buzsaw writes: Sasuki writes: . If that be the case it would seem that conventional science must revise the whole concept of space and BB expansion as it stands. All models go through a constant state of revision, this is nothing new. Also, perhaps it is you who needs to be updated. GO regather your data related to the mulitverse concept and perhaps look for new data that your oblivious to... Perhaps you could furnish enough data to address my point. If there is now believed to be space outside of the BB singularity event how does space and time expand within what now appears to be an open system model of space within space?
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 88 by Sasuke, posted 01-30-2010 6:03 PM | | Sasuke has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 114 by Sasuke, posted 02-02-2010 5:02 PM | | Buzsaw has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 105 of 357 (545076)
01-31-2010 5:19 PM
|
Reply to: Message 95 by cavediver
01-31-2010 5:44 AM
|
|
Cavediver writes: If there is one thing that 20th C fundemental physics has taught us, it is that reality is no longer about stuff. It is all about symmetry, consistency, and relationship - otherwise known as mathematics. Cavediver, how do we differenciate between all of this and metaphysics? Who and what determines the line between the two?
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 95 by cavediver, posted 01-31-2010 5:44 AM | | cavediver has not replied |
|
Buzsaw
Inactive Member
|
|
|
Message 177 of 357 (604496)
02-12-2011 6:05 PM
|
Reply to: Message 95 by cavediver
01-31-2010 5:44 AM
|
|
Re: Alike Properties
cavediver writes: An excitation of a field is not a number. A number or any mathematical concept is a property of the field not the field itself. All properties of an electron are contained in its quantum numbers, and the actual nature of the electron via the Pauli Exclusion Principle, shows that there can be nothing more. There is no more "substrate". There is no more lower level stuff. There is no more modelling. That is not to say we are at the deepest level, by no means. But at this point it is mathematics all the way down. If there is one thing that 20th C fundemental physics has taught us, it is that reality is no longer about stuff. It is all about symmetry, consistency, and relationship - otherwise known as mathematics. quote:
There is no more "substrate". There is no more lower level stuff. There is no more modelling.
Mmm, those same properties of the supernatural are disallowed in the science fora. 
BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW. The Immeasurable Present Eternally Extends the Infinite Past And Infinitely Consumes The Eternal Future.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 95 by cavediver, posted 01-31-2010 5:44 AM | | cavediver has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2