A question concerning Evolution

Will I understand this once I know what FLRW means? Most descriptions of the Big Bang and inflation that I've read describe the expansion of space as causing greatly increased separation of regions of space, including the matter resident in that space. Did I misunderstand?--Percy

I knew someone addressed issues like this in a paper I read once. I just found it. It is here:http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/9803/9803097.pdfFLRW = Friedmann - Lemaitre Robertson Walker universe.Friedmann-Lemaitre is the common GR equation describing the dynamic evolution of a perfect fluid approx. to the universe. Roberston-Walker is the metric describing the spacetime of a homogeneous isotropic universe of this fluid. It is the common model used.Yes - when you are talking about inflation the expansion is very rapid and the energy for this is provided by the quantum field driving the expansion. Where this field comes (and exactly what form it takes)from is unknownNote that I answered you earlier in terms of a present epoch - i.e. applying standard GR solutions. Inflation is something altogether different.

So inflation isn't just a more rapid manifestation of the same phenomena as the current expansion of space? In other words, we know that the dark energy thought to be causing the current expansion is a different beast altogether from the quantum field that drove inflation? How do we know the current expansion is caused by dark energy and not a quantum field?--Percy

Correct inflation is not the same as the current expansion.The dark energy is an unknown. There are quantum field models and of course the cosmological constant but we don't really know what it is.

cruising the net and found this..."With many there tends to be a presupposition that God can be known by human beings. This is a proposition that is not altogether self-evident, and in fact on that is problematic in both Eastern and Western religious thought. For God is not simply one being among other beings, even if God is conceived of as the "supreme being," for "supreme" asserts merely a quantitative difference between God and the world. But God is rather qualitatively different from any and all finite being. God is the "totally other," and various images have been used to try to express this qualitative difference, however inadequately. God is said to be no a being, but the source and ground of being, or God is the horizon within which all beings exist, or, as this latter image comes to expression in scripture: "In him we live and move and have our being" Acts 17:28.If the reality of God is qualitatively different from all other reality, then it follows that God must be known in a way qualitatively different from our knowledge of all other realities. Otherwise, in our knowledge God would be reduced to the level of these other realities and what we would be knowing would not really be God, but a human construct, an idol. If knowing finite realities is a process of grasping or comprehending them, God must be known rather as that which lies beyond all of our capacities to comprehend and grasp. God is known precisely as what we cannot comprehend, as the incomprehensible, as the "known unknown," as mystery. Indeed, it is easy enough to get a sense that all of our knowing in the sense of what we comprehend is but a little island in a vast sea of the unknown, that if we push all of our most limpid clarities far enough they trail off into obscurity, and that the more we know the more we realize how little we know. Our sense of mystery, and with it our sense of awe and wonder, does not decrease as our knowledge increases, but rather increases. Human beings are never far from mystery, the mystery that in Christian terms we call "God," and "awareness" is the process by which we get in touch with this reality.The reality of God lies beyond all human ideas, concepts, and language, and if we forget this our God-talk can degenerate into idol (and idle) talk, however sublime and religious it might be. "...maybe once you find your dark energy source you can ask it if it prefers to be called GOD

However utterly mad the supposed science that we get posted here, somehow the theological ideas manage to top it.

---

Common sense isn't

it's a mad mad world and i'm just the messenger......please don't shoot before asking questions

Then I have no clue what you are talking about.

---

Common sense isn't