Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 64 (9164 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: ChatGPT
Post Volume: Total: 916,889 Year: 4,146/9,624 Month: 1,017/974 Week: 344/286 Day: 0/65 Hour: 0/1


EvC Forum ⇒ Science Forums ⇒ Big Bang and Cosmology ⇒

The Big Bang is NOT Scientific

Thread ▼ Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Big Bang is NOT Scientific
ramoss
Member (Idle past 640 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 74 of 301 (297239)
03-22-2006 8:03 AM 		Reply to: Message 70 by Genghis Khan II
03-21-2006 9:29 PM

Actually, the thought that the big bang was an 'explosian' is very much wrong.
​
Thing of it as an expansion, more than explosian.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Genghis Khan II, posted 03-21-2006 9:29 PM Genghis Khan II has not replied
ramoss
Member (Idle past 640 days)
Posts: 3228
Joined: 08-11-2004

Normal Thread Display
Message 171 of 301 (299356)
03-29-2006 1:11 PM 		Reply to: Message 166 by CCXC
03-29-2006 11:02 AM

Re: models and kalam
But those things that will come into being will probably have a cause. The cure for cancer hasn't come into being yet but if it does (or when it does) it will probably be caused (discovered by scientists, or chemists, or whoever). This is a pretty consistent pattern if not a standard for the way things come to exist.
​
There are events that do not appearently have causes. QM describes a number of them.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 166 by CCXC, posted 03-29-2006 11:02 AM CCXC has not replied
Date format: mm-dd-yyyy
Timezone: ET (US)
  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024