Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 84 (8915 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 07-15-2019 4:12 PM
35 online now:
dwise1, edge, ooh-child, PaulK, Thugpreacha (AdminPhat) (5 members, 30 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: 4petdinos
Upcoming Birthdays: lopezeast0211, Theodoric
Post Volume:
Total: 856,798 Year: 11,834/19,786 Month: 1,615/2,641 Week: 124/708 Day: 58/66 Hour: 1/4


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Time and Beginning to Exist
Percy
Member
Posts: 18577
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.1


(2)
Message 58 of 268 (642281)
11-27-2011 9:00 AM
Reply to: Message 56 by designtheorist
11-27-2011 8:37 AM


Re: Reply to PaulK
designtheorist writes:

The hot big bang is the standard cosmology and it explains how both matter and time began to exist. This cosmology "smacks of divine intervention" or "is compatible with or supportive of the idea of a Universe Designer or Creator God."

More accurately, some people think the Big Bang "smacks of divine intervention" or "is compatible with or supportive of the idea of a Universe Designer or Creator God." Some people don't.

You're again bogging down in arguments about what people say and who we should believe when the discussion should be about evidence.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by designtheorist, posted 11-27-2011 8:37 AM designtheorist has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 61 by designtheorist, posted 11-27-2011 10:03 AM Percy has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18577
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 67 of 268 (642301)
11-27-2011 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by designtheorist
11-27-2011 10:03 AM


Re: Reply to Percy
Hi DesignTheorist,

Interesting debating style. It's looks like you're determined to just continue banging your point home while ignoring any rebuttals.

More accurately again, some theists, atheists and agnostics think the Big Bang "smacks of divine intervention" or "is compatible with or supportive of the idea of a Universe Designer or Creator God." Some don't.

You're again bogging down in arguments about what people say and who we should believe when the discussion should be about evidence.

Would be nice if you switched to discussing the evidence.

By the way, I am preparing for a thread on Hawking's new book. I'm certain you will want to be around for that one!

Well, that depends. Since what some people think is all that seems to matter to you, will you actually be discussing Hawking's book, or just people's opinions of Hawking's book.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by designtheorist, posted 11-27-2011 10:03 AM designtheorist has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18577
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 68 of 268 (642302)
11-27-2011 12:07 PM
Reply to: Message 66 by NoNukes
11-27-2011 11:45 AM


Re: Reply to Percy
NoNukes writes:

For example, most people would agree that the big bang is at least compatible with the "idea" of a creator God. But the same could be said for a steady state model.

The idea of sudden creation ex nihilo is compatible with one specific god, namely the God of the Old Testament, but both the Big Bang and Steady State models seem consistent with the idea of a creator God. The Big Bang is creation of all matter at once, while Steady State is gradual and consistent creation of matter throughout all time.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 66 by NoNukes, posted 11-27-2011 11:45 AM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by NoNukes, posted 11-27-2011 12:57 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 80 by designtheorist, posted 11-27-2011 9:55 PM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18577
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 166 of 268 (642636)
11-30-2011 11:09 AM
Reply to: Message 163 by designtheorist
11-30-2011 10:15 AM


Re: Reply to Son Goku
Hi DesignTheorist,

You did not need to change the subtitle of the message from "The universe did not begin to exist 13.7 billion years ago" to "Reply to Son Goku". If you look at the top right of your message it says, "Reply to: Message 158 by Son Goku".

The "Message 158" portion is a link to that very message. Just click on it and you're instantly taken to that message.

The "Son Goku" portion is a link to Son Goku's thread list.

This information is repeated at the bottom of your message, where it also lets you know whether Son Goku has replied yet.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by designtheorist, posted 11-30-2011 10:15 AM designtheorist has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 168 by designtheorist, posted 11-30-2011 11:16 AM Percy has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18577
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 175 of 268 (642648)
11-30-2011 11:39 AM
Reply to: Message 168 by designtheorist
11-30-2011 11:16 AM


Re: Reply to Percy
designtheorist writes:

If I remember correctly, at one point I clicked on something that allowed me to find all of the comments of a particular poster on that one thread. I have not been able to find it since. Am I remembering correctly? If so, how do I do that again?

Yep, you remember correctly. If you look in the left hand column next to any message you'll see that one of the links is (in the case of this message) Percy Posts Only. This will display all the messages in the thread that are from that member. When in this mode of displaying only the messages of a single member this link becomes Normal Thread Display, and clicking on it returns you to viewing all the thread's messages.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 168 by designtheorist, posted 11-30-2011 11:16 AM designtheorist has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 177 by designtheorist, posted 11-30-2011 11:49 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18577
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 182 of 268 (642667)
11-30-2011 12:40 PM
Reply to: Message 176 by designtheorist
11-30-2011 11:48 AM


Re: Reply to Cavediver
designtheorist writes:

I have read a number of physicists who have described the big bang as a flash of heat and light.

I think you've been reading the wrong physicists. I can't imagine any responsible physicist giving so inaccurate a description. In simplest terms the Big Bang was a period in the early universe when it was very hot and dense, and was expanding very rapidly. Certainly photons were unable to travel freely at the earliest times, so there could be no "flash of heat and light", plus as the universe was very small there wouldn't have been much space to "flash" into anyway.

How many microseconds after the expansion begins would EM be able to appear in your opinion?

Son Goku or Cavediver will have to give the precise answer for when the energy level of the universe dropped to the point where EM appears. But I do know that the evidence indicates that the universe was opaque through its first few hundred thousand years because the energy level was too high for atoms to form. Once electrons, protons and neutrons were able to form atoms and become electrically neutral, photons could travel freely.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 176 by designtheorist, posted 11-30-2011 11:48 AM designtheorist has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18577
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 191 of 268 (642758)
12-01-2011 10:05 AM
Reply to: Message 189 by Son Goku
12-01-2011 9:34 AM


Re: Appearance of Electromagnetism
Hi SG,

So the field is a tuple of (strength, energy) at every point in space? If so, what's the strength correspond to?

And if a "lump" has a non-zero strength but a zero energy, which doesn't manifest as a particle, then what does it manifest as? In other words, if when we observe one of these types of lumps, what is it that we observe?

I don't usually try to understand this stuff, but your explanation was so simple and clear I feel like I almost have a chance.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 189 by Son Goku, posted 12-01-2011 9:34 AM Son Goku has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 192 by Son Goku, posted 12-01-2011 10:43 AM Percy has responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 18577
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 3.1


Message 234 of 268 (643933)
12-13-2011 7:49 AM
Reply to: Message 192 by Son Goku
12-01-2011 10:43 AM


Re: Appearance of Electromagnetism
Son Soku writes:

Please let me know if this is in anyway unclear.

It's not exactly unclear, but I'm left wondering why some things should be so.

So there are two oceans of fields. One ocean is the electroweak field, the other is the doublet field. Don't these oceans occupy the same space? If so, what makes them two different oceans and why aren't they considered one ocean of 8 liquids?

What does "After the doublet field took its value" mean, and why would the fact that it has taken its value cause it to require an infinite amount of energy to make a parcel/particle of just one liquid?

So, before the doublet field took its value, in addition to the single-parcel possibilities, weren't combinations of parcels possible? If not, why not?

Why do you mention particles at one point, but your list of combinations after the doublet field took its value only includes bosons?

Does the name "Spontaneous Symmetry Breaking" imply that the doublet field took its value spontaneously?

Thanks for the help, good deeds never go unpunished, as they say.

--Percy


This message is a reply to:
 Message 192 by Son Goku, posted 12-01-2011 10:43 AM Son Goku has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 235 by Son Goku, posted 12-13-2011 9:40 AM Percy has not yet responded

    
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019