Science-Technology
See other Science-Technology Articles
Title: Another ‘settled science’ topic is not so settled after all – Big Bang theory questioned
Source:
[None]
URL Source: http://wattsupwiththat.com/2015/02/ ... ll-big-bang-theory-questioned/
Published: Feb 11, 2015
Author: Anthony Watts
Post Date: 2015-02-11 08:10:44 by A K A Stone
Keywords: None
Views: 19914
Comments: 58
We’ve all heard of the claim of “settled science” when it comes to global warming/climate change, and we’ve all heard of the “Big Bang Theory”, and I’m not just talking about the popular TV show. The scientific theory goes all the way back to 1927. This is an artist’s concept of the metric expansion of space, where space (including hypothetical non-observable portions of the universe) is represented at each time by the circular sections. Note on the left the dramatic expansion (not to scale) occurring in the inflationary epoch, and at the center the expansion acceleration. The scheme is decorated with WMAP images on the left and with the representation of stars at the appropriate level of development. Credit: NASA The Big Bang theory is the prevailing cosmological model for the birth of the universe. It states that at some moment all of space was contained in a single point from which the Universe has been expanding ever since. Modern measurements place this moment at approximately 13.8 billion years ago, which is thus considered the age of the universe. After the initial expansion, the Universe cooled sufficiently to allow the formation of subatomic particles, and later simple atoms. Giant clouds of these primordial elements later coalesced through gravity to form stars and galaxies. The Big Bang theory does not provide any explanation for the initial conditions of the Universe; rather, it describes and explains the general evolution of the Universe going forward from that point on. (Source: Wikipedia) Now, it seems there’s a challenge to this ‘settled’ science, and a new quantum equation predicts the universe has no beginning. (Phys.org) —The universe may have existed forever, according to a new model that applies quantum correction terms to complement Einstein’s theory of general relativity. The model may also account for dark matter and dark energy, resolving multiple problems at once. The widely accepted age of the universe, as estimated by general relativity, is 13.8 billion years. In the beginning, everything in existence is thought to have occupied a single infinitely dense point, or singularity. Only after this point began to expand in a “Big Bang” did the universe officially begin. Although the Big Bang singularity arises directly and unavoidably from the mathematics of general relativity, some scientists see it as problematic because the math can explain only what happened immediately after—not at or before—the singularity. “The Big Bang singularity is the most serious problem of general relativity because the laws of physics appear to break down there,” Ahmed Farag Ali at Benha University and the Zewail City of Science and Technology, both in Egypt, told Phys.org. Read more at: phys.org/news/2015-02-big-quantum-equation- universe.html#jCp
Post Comment Private Reply Ignore Thread
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
Comments (1-17) not displayed.
.
.
.
#18. To: Vicomte13 (#15)
Time is tied to mass and energy.
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
Theories are made and disproved all the time. This is how science works.
Not everyone is a moron
By our models, yes. Just like pi is tied to a pie. Mass and energy, and the pie, are real things. Time and pi are merely mathematical relationships, not real things.
I guess I must be, because although I understand that the mathematical relationship that we call "time" "exists" - in the sense that we have labeled it - I do not believe that it has real substance or essence. I suspect the same thing of gravity. I suspect that gravity is a surface effect of objects, and is not a real force-over-distance the way electromagnetism is. I suspect that "gravitational lensing" that we think we see is in fact the electromagnetic redirection of polarized light. But as a moron, I suppose I should keep my peace on such things because who cares what an idiot thinks?
Explain that to a Scuba diver running out of air.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
That's happened a few times,and I saw stars,not daylight.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Not everyone is a moron I agree. Now,how does what you wrote refute what I wrote?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
What if something created time?
The scuba diver is not being affected by time. He is being affected by the lack of air.
Of course something created time. Movement.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
His air isn't regulated by the time he spends breathing it?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
The way I see it, distance and time are properties of a physical realm. In a non-physical realm there wouldn't have to be either time or distance (space).
No, because he "spends" nothing. There is no bank of time with a deciining balance sheet that he trades for other things. There is a process - a whole series of processes, sequences and cycles, that are the biological reactions that sustain life. They require oxygen. When they have completed a given process, they require more oxygen. What drives the air depletion is the "fire" of biochemical reactions. "Time" is not driving anything. Time is a meter stick we could draw to divide up the processes into units of sequence, but it's the process of chemistry that gives rise to the need. What is being used up is not time. Air is being used up, and it's being used up by a process, which uses up the available oxygen in the air. There's no "time" pressing anything forward. Time is what you decide to use as the yardstick to measure the depletion of the air. It's a reference, but neither a force nor an entity.
Our timeline is linear. Gods timeline isn't a line but a circle. He is outside of time. That is the way I see it.
You may be right,but I only live and think in a physical realm. Not really into the theoretical side of things.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
No, because he "spends" nothing. There is no bank of time with a deciining balance sheet that he trades for other things. Isn't that just a 3 dollar way of saying "He doesn't need oxygen if he just quits breathing"?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Yes, outside of time. Able to enter it at any point. Somehow.
Yes, there's plenty to try and figure out in the physical realm.
? And not so much in the religious belief world? What about all those "miracles" by Gautama Buddha, Jesus Christ or Muhammad?
WHAT "miracles" did Buddha or Muhammad perform?
What of the Dream State? Everything there seems real, and physical. People converse, laugh, love, touch, and even cry in their dreams. Once I was so utterly convinced that I was dreaming that in a living room I purposely took the Yellow Pages that was conveniently on top of the end table next to couch, and began reading all the names from it. Sure enough, there were hundreds names. But...but...It was so real! I became bored, left the house (it was empty, had NO idea whose it was), and began walking down a street. BEAUTIFUL sunny morning, (no one outside but me). I was struck by how vivid and colorful all the tall flowers were, how green the grass and plants were, how the scenario were just so free and easy and serene. The details were exact and precise, 3D. It was bliss. A dream. (Hmmm, think I took Vitamin B-12, B-6 and Melatonin before bed.) So were all that appeared in a dream like that, a "reality"? It mimicked the entire physical realm, caressed the senses of touch and sight. Never seen the place before. My point is, that at least one other "physical realm" exists beyond our "awakened state." The moment we pass on, many of us believe in yet another realm of consciousness.
There is something in science known as The Law of Cause and Effect. There is nothing in the Universe that doesn't have a cause behind its existence. As you go back, there can not be an infinite regression. You must eventually reach a very first cause which created the very first effect....OR "movement." (No, God is NOT a giant Timex Watch.)
And what created movement?
What of the Dream State? Nothing in the Dream State is real other than the TIME you spend dreaming.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
And what created movement? Probably heat. What created God?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
That's not real, either internally to the dream or externally. But what IS real is the biochemistry that generates the dream, along with that immaterial thing called the Spirit that is the essence of each of us.
Depends on how you define God. If you define God as that which is omnipotent and omnipresent, then "God" is the Natural Law, and whatever imposed the Natural Law is "God's" god. But if you define God as that which is omnipotent, omnipresent and omniscient, than "God's god" the imposer of the Natural Law, is intelligent, but what created God's god is a complete mystery. However, if you define God as that which is omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient and eternal, the "eternal" part answers the question: nothing and no-one created God, because there was, is and will be no point at which God (as long as "God" is understood to mean what we've called "God's god" - the legislator of Natural Law) did not exist. It becomes a definitional thing. By defining God as eternal, the question becomes meaningless, I would say. (You would say that the question has merely been evaded, not rendered moot.)
God is not a creature. He is the ultimate super-transcendent Source of everything. Or are you saying that the Universe does not have the source or foundation? That it comes into being out of nothing on its own? A strange nothing that is the source of all.
Prove it,Bubba.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Depends on how you define God. More Jesuit spin? I asked YOU a simple question. How do YOU define God and prove he exists?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
Uh,huh. Him and the Easter Bunny. Or are you saying that the Universe does not have the source or foundation? That it comes into being out of nothing on its own? Are you saying that God comes into being out of nothing on his own? You MUST be making that claim since you base your argument on "nothing comes about on it's own."
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
God is not a being, but all beings come from Him. He makes nothingness too - the abyss or outer void where Satan dwells.
Then what is he,a bi-plane?
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
You believe in nothingness,don't you, where you will go after death?
I asked YOU a simple question. How do YOU define God and prove he exists? For God's sake, please stop with the "Jesuit" stuff. I'm not a paid propagandist. I'm a man with an opinion. I wasn't even raised in the Church. It isn't as though I was "indoctrinated from the cradle". I will answer your question this evening. The question is simple, but the answer to it is NOT simple, because it is the most important question in my whole freaking universe, and I have had to have many checks and balances to be sure, in my own skin, that my answer is RIGHT. So, until later, peace.
Time is a creation of God. C.S. Lewis explained it this way, "Draw a line on a napkin. The line represents time, with the napkin representing Christ. He is the Great 'I AM' and time is in Christ. He is present in the past, present, future, and outside of time."
“Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
2.13 ¸µÌÄ·Â, ·Ä¿Â f; ¸µ¹ÌÄ·Â, ·Ä¿Â f; ¸µῖ¿½a, ¿Å n: (derivatives of ¸µÌÂa ‘God,’ 12.1) the nature or state of being God—‘deity, divine nature, divine being.’ ¸µÌÄ·Â: ἐ½ ±ὐÄῷ º±Ä¿¹ºµῖ Àᾶ½ Äὸ À»®Áɼ± Äῆ ¸µÌÄ·Ä¿Â Ãɼ±Ä¹ºῶ ‘in him dwells all the fullness of divine nature in bodily form’ Col 2:9. ¸µ¹ÌÄ·Â: ἀ¯´¹¿Â ±ὐÄ¿ῦ ´Í½±¼¹Â º±ὶ ¸µ¹ÌÄ·Â ‘his eternal power and deity’ Ro 1:20. ¸µῖ¿½a: ½¿¼¯¶µ¹½ ÇÁÅÃῷ ἢ ἀÁ³ÍÁῳ … Äὸ ¸µῖ¿½ µἶ½±¹ ὅ¼¿¹¿½ ‘think … that the deity is like … gold or silver’ Ac 17:29. The expression ‘divine nature’ may be rendered in a number of languages as ‘just what God is like’ or ‘how God is’ or ‘what God is.’ In Ro 1:20 ‘deity’ may sometimes be expressed as ‘the fact that he is God’ or ‘… is truly God.’ In 2 Pe 1:4 ‘to share in the very being of God,’ one may speak of ‘to share in what God is like’ or ‘to become in a measure like God.’ It is important, of course, to avoid the implication that people can become completely God. Louw, J. P., & Nida, E. A. (1996). Greek-English lexicon of the New Testament: based on semantic domains. New York: United Bible Societies. “Let no one mourn that he has fallen again and again; for forgiveness has risen, from the grave.” John Chrysostom www.evidenceforJesusChrist.org
You should take that into consideration when demanding others "prove" that God doesn't exist.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
You must be addressing somebody else. I never, ever demand anybody "prove" God doesn't exist. I don't play logic games regarding God. Rather, I offer the proof that God DOES exist, and offer to discuss. "Prove he DOESN'T exist" is not my form of argumentation. Never has been.
My apologies.
Why is democracy held in such high esteem when it’s the enemy of the minority and makes all rights relative to the dictates of the majority? (Ron Paul,2012)
In no case is there an abstract time. "Time" is not an entity. It has no essence.
#19. To: A K A Stone (#8)
Yes, and morons think some theories that have been dis proven are science
#20. To: sneakypete (#12)
Even morons understand the concept of time
#21. To: GarySpFC (#18)
Time is tied to mass and energy.
#22. To: A Pole (#20)
(Edited)
Not everyone is a moron
#23. To: Vicomte13 (#14)
"Time" doesn't actually DO anything (because it doesn't exist).
#24. To: A Pole (#17)
No, Big Bang will be when you bang your thick skull and you see the light.
#25. To: A Pole (#20)
Even morons understand the concept of time
#26. To: sneakypete (#3)
Nothing has existed forever because time,by definition,begins at a certain instant,and nothing existed before time began.
#27. To: sneakypete (#23)
Explain that to a Scuba diver running out of air.
#28. To: Biff Tannen (#26)
What if something created time?
#29. To: Vicomte13 (#27)
The scuba diver is not being affected by time. He is being affected by the lack of air.
#30. To: sneakypete (#28)
#31. To: sneakypete (#29)
His air isn't regulated by the time he spends breathing it?
#32. To: Biff Tannen (#30)
The way I see it, distance and time are properties of a physical realm. In a non-physical realm there wouldn't have to be either time or distance (space).
#33. To: Biff Tannen (#30)
In a non-physical realm there wouldn't have to be either time or distance (space).
#34. To: Vicomte13 (#31)
His air isn't regulated by the time he spends breathing it?
#35. To: A K A Stone (#32)
#36. To: sneakypete (#33)
#37. To: Biff Tannen (#36)
Yes, there's plenty to try and figure out in the physical realm.
#38. To: Pridie.Nones (#37)
What about all those "miracles" by Gautama Buddha, Jesus Christ or Muhammad?
#39. To: sneakypete (#33)
I only live and think in a physical realm.
#40. To: sneakypete (#28)
Of course something created time. Movement.
#41. To: sneakypete (#28)
Of course something created time. Movement.
#42. To: Liberator (#39)
I only live and think in a physical realm.
#43. To: A Pole (#41)
Of course something created time. Movement.
#44. To: sneakypete (#42)
Nothing in the Dream State is real other than the TIME you spend dreaming.
#45. To: sneakypete (#43)
What created God?
#46. To: sneakypete (#43)
What created God?
#47. To: Vicomte13 (#44)
But what IS real is the biochemistry that generates the dream, along with that immaterial thing called the Spirit that is the essence of each of us.
#48. To: Vicomte13 (#45)
What created God?
#49. To: A Pole (#46)
(Edited)
God is not a creature. He is the ultimate super-transcendent Source of everything.
#50. To: sneakypete (#49)
Are you saying that God comes into being out of nothing on his own?
#51. To: A Pole (#50)
God is not a being,
#52. To: sneakypete (#51)
#53. To: sneakypete (#48)
More Jesuit spin?
#54. To: A K A Stone (#32)
Our timeline is linear. Gods timeline isn't a line but a circle. He is outside of time.
#55. To: A Pole (#51)
(Edited)
God is not a being,
#56. To: Vicomte13 (#53)
The question is simple, but the answer to it is NOT simple, because it is the most important question in my whole freaking universe, and I have had to have many checks and balances to be sure, in my own skin, that my answer is RIGHT.
#57. To: sneakypete (#56)
You should take that into consideration when demanding others "prove" that God doesn't exist.
#58. To: Vicomte13 (#57)
"Prove he DOESN'T exist" is not my form of argumentation. Never has been.
Top • Page Up • Full Thread • Page Down • Bottom/Latest
[Home] [Headlines] [Latest Articles] [Latest Comments] [Post] [Mail] [Sign-in] [Setup] [Help] [Register]