Big bang and Gases

wondering if someone can tell me 2 natural Gases which ignite when put together ?
can find anything on the internet about this

"At the right temperature, sodium is a gas, and it'll react quite nicely with gaseous oxygen at that temperature."can these 2 gases be found in space ?i'm just trying to learn not doubting any theory behind the big bang or agree i just want to broaden my knowledge....

How hard are you going to squeeze them?that depends how hard they can be squeeze in space before there was anything there to squeeze them.....

nice one thing is i would like you to tell me ?

i saw that coming.... lol so that means there was no big bang i guess no firework show no creator it was already therebecause if before there was nothing then there wouldn't have been a big bang there wouldn't have been gases rocks planets no place for a god to live nothing would have lived no nature no space no universe,however this stuff could have already been there and the big bang was only the creation of our own solar system the rest was already there just it expanded evolved if you likeno words to support this however just it the more believeable story wouldn't you agree

No it doesn't. It means we don't know what happened at the moment of and before the BB.Then why are people preaching the BB like its a fact that took place?______________________________________________________________________Maybe you should learn a bit about physics before singing your victory song.Why when i have only contradicted your own statements ?
______________________________________________________________________The BB was the creation of our solar system? See aboveTell me what i am meant to be looking at ?
______________________________________________________________________

well gases go bang when ignited hence big bang when there is alot of gas, 2 gases that can ignite when put together could be a theory couldn't it ?well i thought Scientists looked at all aspecs of the subject they was studying,i guess you didn't d'oh.... , why else would i bring it up?[This message has been edited by Lemming, 11-13-2002]

there fore you can infer up to the moment but can not infer at the point could that means something could have happen and possibly didn't ??? ........ You think i contradicted my misunderstandings of what you think are the implications of what you said.i think you contradicting your misunderstandings of what you think are the implications of what i said works both ways nothing clever about that ...... Physics i know enough to say you can't divide something by 0 so why are you even trying to do that if something has the value of 0 it means theres nothing however some people would like to tell me other wise i think that your that type of person

lmfaoFifteen billion years ago, the entirety of our universe was compressed into the confines of an atomic nucleus. Known as a singularityIf all matter was confined to an atomic nucleus your 2 gasses scenario is hardly very relevant is it?what does atomic mean ? and also can something atomic be a gas? also can you have 2 types of atomic gases ?first proposed by Einstein in 1924[This message has been edited by Lemming, 11-14-2002]

1 + -1 = 0 = -1 + 1 i agree it doesn't look right but lets do this sum under the exsistence of itemsLemmings cookiesLemming has 1 cookieJohn has -1 CookiesJoz has a entire pack of cookiesif i was to give you john my cookie it would mean you would have 0 but i gave you a cookie so you should have 1 because you can't have -1 cookies this is where you could be wrong to have -1 cookies you must have borrowed 1 cookie and ate it but in the theory of the big bang no one has beable to rule this exsistence of anything out so its possible you could have borrow a cookie of joz now the cookie i have gave you now is in joz's hands so the maths now look like thisLemming 0 cookiesJohn 0 Cookiesjoz a pack + 1 cookieSo does this mean you should looking at exsistence before the BB ?

am i right to say Atom's can do exactly what i did with those cookies?

Technically laughting your butt off is not possible unless you add other things to its conclusion lets see rotton flesh then its possibleif you add thingas to a theory that are logical its can become possible but we knew that ..... and the maths which you stated is only possible in the way i stated Right or its only logical in the way i explainned it

no i didn't just do that
let me explain it this wayjohn had borrowed a cookie and ate it or did something to it to make in disappear this gives him 0 cookies but he had to give it back to the person who borrowed it him giving john -1 cookiesi had 1 cookie which i gave john meaning he has 1 cookie and plus i gave it him meaning he doesn't have to give me it back but because john borrowed a cookie he has now got to give that backthe reason for joz's pressence is that john borrowed his first cookie off joz and then gave back the cookie in which i gave john making the sum add upThat means you have got to look at the exsistence of something else to make what you are trying to say logicalnow should you be looking at exsistence before the big bang ?[This message has been edited by Lemming, 11-14-2002]

playing dumb and avioding or to ignore something that was perfectly Logical is totally stupid wonder if those scientists studying some of these things do what you have just done because it seems like it[This message has been edited by Lemming, 11-14-2002]

John only take part in this discussion if you have something to say you are confused in you own problem i simple added something to your sums and gave a logical meaning to them if you fail to see that then why are you taking part on this forum to understand and learn correct?????????? then pay attention and answer the question or atleast give a answer of some degree or mention a fact that i might have over looked to help me learn too