The Big Bang

Ahnimus
Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
edited December 2006 in A Moving Train
I've always had trouble buying this theory. Sounds like a load of crap to me.

One alternative, of course, being a solid-state universe.

Any thoughts?
I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
Post edited by Unknown User on
«134567…10

Comments

  • angelica
    angelica Posts: 6,038
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I've always had trouble buying this theory. Sounds like a load of crap to me.

    One alternative, of course, being a solid-state universe.

    Any thoughts?
    What is a solid-state universe?
    "The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr

    http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta

    Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    angelica wrote:
    What is a solid-state universe?

    A universe with no beginning or end, no start and no finish.

    It's just infinity.

    Some theorize that galaxies change and give birth to new galaxies.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6545246
  • yosi1
    yosi1 Posts: 3,272
    Ahnimus wrote:
    I've always had trouble buying this theory. Sounds like a load of crap to me.

    One alternative, of course, being a solid-state universe.

    Any thoughts?

    Yea. The odds of something like the Big Bang happening are so fucking small, that it is mind boggling that something like that could really happen. But there sure seems to be quite a lot of evidence to support it.
    you couldn't swing if you were hangin' from a palm tree in a hurricane.
  • trappedinmyradio
    trappedinmyradio Posts: 1,189
    angelica wrote:
    What is a solid-state universe?

    static rather than dynamic in nature...always present...never changing...always exisiting

    and, also, the topic of the day for the ole boy...it's survey time.
    I'll dig a tunnel
    from my window to yours
  • cornnifer
    cornnifer Posts: 2,130
    Not even Stephen Hawking cam remove singularity without the use of imaginary numbers.
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • trappedinmyradio
    trappedinmyradio Posts: 1,189
    Ahnimus wrote:
    A universe with no beginning or end, no start and no finish.

    It's just infinity.

    Some theorize that galaxies change and give birth to new galaxies.

    infinity has a starting point...but no end point.
    I'll dig a tunnel
    from my window to yours
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    farfromglorified wrote:
    http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6545246

    lol

    Big Hole theory.

    Brian Greene is an interesting character.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • trappedinmyradio
    trappedinmyradio Posts: 1,189
    cornnifer wrote:
    Not even Stephen Hawking cam remove singularity without the use of imaginary numbers.

    imaginary numbers...maybe just beyond comprehension at this level of development.
    I'll dig a tunnel
    from my window to yours
  • angelica
    angelica Posts: 6,038
    Ahnimus wrote:
    A universe with no beginning or end, no start and no finish.

    It's just infinity.

    Some theorize that galaxies change and give birth to new galaxies.
    If the idea of "holons" works in a theory of everything, everything is a whole while also being a part of another whole. Therefore each "universe" is a whole in of itself, while also being a part of another whole. Of course it gets a big weird when we are going beyond just science and the purely physical for our understanding in order to conceptualize "what is". Obviously the limits of our imaginations play a part in what we imagine.
    "The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr

    http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta

    Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    trappedinmyradio wrote:
    imaginary numbers...maybe just beyond comprehension at this level of development.

    The problem is, Big Bang theory has had to undergo all kinds of changes throughout history. There are now at least 3 imaginary substances in the universe.

    Not to mention, a big mass of matter had to evolve from nothing in a very specific configuration to allow for the universe to exist. Any slight variation in the configuration would have caused the universe to collapse, even with the imaginary numbers.

    To me, it sounds like an attempt at proving God through Cosmology.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • angelica
    angelica Posts: 6,038
    trappedinmyradio wrote:
    infinity has a starting point...but no end point.
    It can't have a starting point, because viewed backwards it's not then infinite. Infinity has to work both ways to be infinite, doesn't it?
    "The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr

    http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta

    Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    trappedinmyradio wrote:
    infinity has a starting point...but no end point.

    Oh reaaaaaly?

    So you suggest that the term "infinity" implies a finite starting point? Interesting.
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire
  • chopitdown
    chopitdown Posts: 2,222
    angelica wrote:
    It can't have a starting point, because viewed backwards it's not then infinite. Infinity has to work both ways to be infinite, doesn't it?

    yep
    make sure the fortune that you seek...is the fortune that you need
  • cornnifer
    cornnifer Posts: 2,130
    trappedinmyradio wrote:
    imaginary numbers...maybe just beyond comprehension at this level of development.
    Hawking once conceptualized a theory of the universe that seemed to eliminate singularity. He used imaginary numbers. When numbers were converted back to real ones, singularity reappeared. Hawking is regarded, perhaps rightfully so, as the most brilliant cosmologist ever alive so...
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • farfromglorified
    farfromglorified Posts: 5,700
    The Big Bang theory doesn't suggest an origination point. It's simply one event in a chain of events.
  • cornnifer
    cornnifer Posts: 2,130
    Ahnimus wrote:

    To me, it sounds like an attempt at proving God through Cosmology.

    Perhaps, i'm mistaken, but wasn't Big Bang theory once used in attempt to DISPROVE God? Doesn't really work, so now some attempt to tear down the theory and replace it with something else. Actually many, many something elses.
    "When all your friends and sedatives mean well but make it worse... better find yourself a place to level out."
  • angelica
    angelica Posts: 6,038
    chopitdown wrote:
    yep
    whew. I thought my sad lack of math knowledge was about to catch up to me.

    And infinity goes not just both ways but all ways....


    I think where most of us have problems is imagining what it means that our physical dimensions are set into time. We seem to assume because we have three dimensions that we perceive in time, then the nature of the universe hinges on this time, and therefore on beginnings and endings which are time-constructs. If we take our own logical minds into consideration--our minds that must perceive beginnings and endings in order to be linear, logical and analytical, maybe we're just seeing what we want to see, rather than what is there: unbroken wholeness, without start and finish.
    "The opposite of a fact is falsehood, but the opposite of one profound truth may very well be another profound truth." ~ Niels Bohr

    http://www.myspace.com/illuminatta

    Rhinocerous Surprise '08!!!
  • Collin
    Collin Posts: 4,931
    cornnifer wrote:
    Perhaps, i'm mistaken, but wasn't Big Bang theory once used in attempt to DISPROVE God?

    I think you are mistaken.
    THANK YOU, LOSTDAWG!


    naděje umírá poslední
  • Ahnimus
    Ahnimus Posts: 10,560
    I have a hard time believing the universe is just 14 billion years old.

    And before that there was nothing.

    So I always theorized that the universe fluctuates. I was aware of the theory that the universe is expanding, I thought it was this woman, Henrietta something, that figured out a way to measure distance to stars. This is true, called "red shift" and the observations suggest it is so, but some observations apparently contradict that theory.

    However, my theory was that although the universe may be expanding, it doesn't exactly mean that it was once nothing.

    Perhaps the universe is the beginning. You can't make a painting without a canvas, right?
    I necessarily have the passion for writing this, and you have the passion for condemning me; both of us are equally fools, equally the toys of destiny. Your nature is to do harm, mine is to love truth, and to make it public in spite of you. - Voltaire

Categories