EvC Forum: Re-Problems With The Big Bang Theory

Email This Thread

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Author

Topic: Re-Problems With The Big Bang Theory

New Cat's Eye

Inactive Member

Normal Thread Display

Message 212 of 273 (473053)
06-26-2008 5:47 PM

Reply to: Message 211 by Agobot
06-26-2008 5:33 PM

Re: Infinity

Wouldn't nothingness, that was there before the BB,

False.

BB theory does not postulate that nothingness preceded the Big Bang.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 211 by Agobot, posted 06-26-2008 5:33 PM		Agobot has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 213 by IamJoseph, posted 06-26-2008 9:15 PM	New Cat's Eye has replied
	Message 218 by Agobot, posted 06-27-2008 5:14 PM	New Cat's Eye has not replied

New Cat's Eye

Inactive Member

Normal Thread Display

Message 214 of 273 (473129)
06-27-2008 8:19 AM

Reply to: Message 213 by IamJoseph
06-26-2008 9:15 PM

Re: Infinity

But nor does the term 'nothingness' have any meaning, other than an admission for the motion of a finite universe.

Oh, I'm sure we could come up with some other meanings than that vague load of made up crap

~~The empty bag is not empty - it contains a lot of emptiness.~~ Both nothing and no-things are universal concepts - as is the half empty part of a half full cup.

But the concepts aren't true tothat actual definition of "nothingness". You can't get to nothingness. There's always something.

The empty bag is not empty - it contains a lot of emptiness.

Then its not an empty bag, now is it?

Edited by Catholic Scientist, : Striked misquote (quote #2)

This message is a reply to:
	Message 213 by IamJoseph, posted 06-26-2008 9:15 PM		IamJoseph has replied

Replies to this message:
	Message 215 by IamJoseph, posted 06-27-2008 9:23 AM	New Cat's Eye has not replied
	Message 219 by Agobot, posted 06-27-2008 5:18 PM	New Cat's Eye has not replied

New Cat's Eye

Inactive Member

Normal Thread Display

Message 254 of 273 (473619)
07-01-2008 11:49 AM

Reply to: Message 253 by Agobot
07-01-2008 7:23 AM

Re: Singularity's Size

How does the BBT come up with a conclusion that the size of the singularity must have been about pea-size? Or an atom-size or less? How do we know it must have been infinitely small size?

From the math from Genereal Relativity. They can calculate back to the smallest possible timescale where the math in GR breaks down into a singularity.

Because even if we were able to condense matter(sqeezing the atoms so that electrons and the nucleus become one body), wouldn't we get a singularity 1 billion times greater in size than our Sun? According to my calculations, the Earth could be shrinked to just 100 metres.

Here, maybe that will help, I dunno.

This message is a reply to:
	Message 253 by Agobot, posted 07-01-2008 7:23 AM		Agobot has not replied

Date format: mm-dd-yyyy

Timezone: ET (US)

Newer Topic | Older Topic

Do Nothing Button

2 online now:	Percy (Admin), Taq
Newest Member:	ChatGPT
Post Volume:	Total: 916,850 Year: 4,107/9,624 Month: 978/974 Week: 305/286 Day: 26/40 Hour: 4/3