I am a fan of science, but the Big Bang doesn't seem realitstic to me.

a reply to: Raggedyman

Phage is far from the only one, as you can see from the stars he got for that post. People care about things that matter. The beginning and end of the universe are not among those things.

Something to be interested in, to speculate about in idle moments, to discuss among friends or in a forum, but nothing to care about. Surely.

You seem very angry about that. Why?

a reply to: chr0naut

If we have some sort of eternal existence (with or without God), then the fate of a finite universe will directly affect us all.

But it will be a common fate and there is nothing we can do to alter it. So why bother?

originally posted by: Bedlam

originally posted by: chr0naut
As a first cause explanation, it fails.

Only if you don't understand the creation operator.

Particle pairs happen all the live long day.

So, it's obvious that this can happen. It's really not even that hard to arrange, so you can see it - I used to catch these on my cloud chamber as a yoot.

Can matter be created then, yes. It's butt simple to cause.

As a "first cause", it's just a bit bigger occurrence. But it's no biggy with branes intersecting. The bigger issue is that it only happens once, and that there's no one about to record it.

Yes, virtual particles are strongly attested through observation. Not denying that.

So, energy CAN be created or destroyed in an isolated system? Because matter has mass which is equivalent to energy and if there was no matter (at all) and then there was, then energy must have been created.

Please remember these branes that banged together (and a universe fell out), have never been observed and cannot be tested. Is that good science?

Still, where did the branes come from? You haven't convinced me that you've gotten to first cause yet.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: chr0naut

If we have some sort of eternal existence (with or without God), then the fate of a finite universe will directly affect us all.

But it will be a common fate and there is nothing we can do to alter it. So why bother?

Not according to several major religions where God replaces this universe with another one.

originally posted by: Raggedyman

originally posted by: dragonridr
a reply to: chr0naut

Well there is part of your misunderstanding I see during the big bang matter didn't travel faster than light. Shocked by that aren't you??what,happened is the space between matter expanded. Oddly the distance between objects doesn't change at all unless they are in motion. BUT THE SPACE BETWEEN TWO OBJECTS CAN EXPAND. So even say galaxies are in the same relative position from everything else since the beginning.

And we take your word for that
Any evidence or is that just a faith statement you want others to adopt because you believe it
Yes the space between objects can expand, so where is the proof of a Big Bang and why did it happen

It's almost insanity to suggest others believe that, I know you are religious, but...come on.

Well this may help you on your quest.we know it happened as for the why we may never know.

map.gsfc.nasa.gov...

originally posted by: chr0naut

Yes, virtual particles are strongly attested through observation. Not denying that.

So, energy CAN be created or destroyed in an isolated system?

It can be rearranged, that's pretty obvious, as you say.

Please remember these branes that banged together (and a universe fell out), have never been observed and cannot be tested. Is that good science?

Still, where did the branes come from? You haven't convinced me that you've gotten to first cause yet.

Are you looking for a live 'person' that did it? "let there be light" et al? I haven't seen Him yet. A lot of 'take it on faith'. But no bothering to show up and explain anything.

a reply to: droid56

the big band theory makes sense if we look at "M theory which kind of links into string theory" otherwise yes it don't make sense to me either.

Dark energy and dark matter- this is a bit a deception as we don't even know its "Matter" we just know something is there. to call it "Matter" means we kind know what it is. but we don't. someone decided to call it "matter" and since then we think its matter. truth is we don't have a clue what it is.

a reply to: Astyanax

Phage is far from the only one, People care about things that matter.

Thats why we here at the "Project for a New Cosmological Ideology", realized that in absence of some sort of catalyzing event, the transformation to a new hypothetical concept will likely be a long one...

a reply to: droid56

Most lay people will agree with you (and me), but scientists must invent something from nothing to explain everything otherwise, they have no basis for existence. Funny, though, how they create the Big Bang theory to explain us but deny the reality of UFOs. I think that tends to show how humans are stuck on seeing themselves as masters of the universe despite gross ignorance of the same.

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: droid56

Most lay people will agree with you (and me), but scientists must invent something from nothing to explain everything otherwise, they have no basis for existence. Funny, though, how they create the Big Bang theory to explain us but deny the reality of UFOs. I think that tends to show how humans are stuck on seeing themselves as masters of the universe despite gross ignorance of the same.

I think you've never done any science nor met a scientist.

originally posted by: Astyanax
a reply to: Raggedyman

Phage is far from the only one, as you can see from the stars he got for that post. People care about things that matter. The beginning and end of the universe are not among those things.

Something to be interested in, to speculate about in idle moments, to discuss among friends or in a forum, but nothing to care about. Surely.

You seem very angry about that. Why?

Not angry at all, just wondering why there was a big dampener put an another persons question
And I will ask again, why the negative nelly from phage, why is he motivated in a thread he is clearly not (so he stated) interested in
Let twilight zone music play now

Yeah he got lotsa stars, wow, that means millions and millions of people believe what ever, that's sarcasm

It's common knowledge in philosophy, two basic positions, Spiritual and secular, it's philosophy after all

I am glad you are defending phage, I am sure he is as well...

originally posted by: lSkrewloosel
a reply to: droid56

the big band theory makes sense if we look at "M theory which kind of links into string theory" otherwise yes it don't make sense to me either.

Dark energy and dark matter- this is a bit a deception as we don't even know its "Matter" we just know something is there. to call it "Matter" means we kind know what it is. but we don't. someone decided to call it "matter" and since then we think its matter. truth is we don't have a clue what it is.

String theory is crap and there is 0 evidence for it
M theory, I will have to have a look at that

Why bring up such stupid theories when there is nil evidence like it has any validity to science
Grasping at burning straws, most scientists think it's stupid, they have to accept it because it's harmonious with stupidity

originally posted by: droid56
So the whole future universe existed on less than the head of a pin.

And life wasn't present, but then there it was.

And dark energy and dark matter make up 95% of all matter but we cant see it. OK. Really?

I suspect we live in a computer simulation so all of the rules of physics do not apply.

The universe might be expanding too quickly but that might be a product of a simulation.

I buy the computer simulation theory as well, however I think your thinking about the Big Bang wrong.

If I'm right the tiny pinprick doesn't really come from nowhere..if I'm right the explosion comes from 2 dimensional membrains that seperate 2 universes clashing.

The Big Bang also bothered me with the explosion of hydrogen part...

Why hydrogen?? Why not lead or any other element??

Becaose it wasn't an explosion of hydrogen...

It was an explosion of protons and electrons and a big chunk merged in the explosion forming what we call hydrogen..

a reply to: droid56

Well yeah... When you grossly oversimplify scientific concepts like this they do sound unbelievable.

originally posted by: ManFromEurope
a reply to: Raggedyman

Is that the best reply to my posting you could manage?

Because, yes, it can be tested.
Via simulations.
Just like your car - that would be tested in computersimulations, too, before the first prototype would be built.


Come on, bring a better argument next time.

No, not nearly the best I got

Here we go,

Show me and prove it

Go back to europe

My car and the big bang, seriously, you should hang your head in shame
Please, education, try moocs courses, they are free, please

a reply to: Aliensun

With the greatest possible respect, you are talking out of your arse.

scientists must invent something from nothing to explain everything otherwise, they have no basis for existence.

This is the most unmitigated nonsense I have ever heard, from any other mouth than that of Donald Trump, or the simpering glove puppet Spicer.

Let me break down for you, precisely what is wrong with this statement.

Scientists did not "invent" the something from nothing nature of the beginnings of the universe. They observed these things by continuously looking further, and further back into history, by looking further and further out into the universe. They studied the cosmic microwave background, they tallied up as many stars and galactic features as they could, made measurements to establish how they move relative to other objects in space and how quickly, in what direction, and came to some conclusions based on the aggregated data they accumulated.

They did not just say one day "Heres a funny idea, lets just tell everyone that there really was nothing at one stage, and then time began with an event we shall call "The Big Bang" (which itself was a derogatory term for it, employed by one of the scientists who did not believe, initially, that it could be the case)! That will be a right laugh!".

No. The theory came about after years of probing at the matter using logic, calculus, obervation of the universe via various methods of telescopy, and the like.

And another thing. Your assertion about UFO is false. Scientists do not deny that they are a real thing, but they do deny that any of the theories about what they might be, have any weight to them, and they do that because those theories are arrived at on the whole, without any actual scientific methodology or knowledge being applied to them, leave alone bloody peer review!

originally posted by: Phage
a reply to: Raggedyman

Booyakasha is right, there are basically just two ideas, two ideals

False.

For example, I don't care how the Universe started or how it will end.

I care a lot about my daughter, family, and friends. I think that what I do has effects beyond those which I observe and I care about that. I think about that. But I don't care how the Universe started or how it will end.

And, I know for a fact that I am not the only one who thinks that way.

That seems like a very bad example to me.

You say you don't care. That's Indifference.
Is indifference really an ideal? I see it more as a non-ideal or an anti idea.
I don't really think you can call it a third ideal to stand along side the two basic ones that were mentioned.

originally posted by: Aliensun
a reply to: droid56

Most lay people will agree with you (and me), but scientists must invent something from nothing to explain everything otherwise, they have no basis for existence. Funny, though, how they create the Big Bang theory to explain us but deny the reality of UFOs. I think that tends to show how humans are stuck on seeing themselves as masters of the universe despite gross ignorance of the same.

The reason they know the Big Bang is real is because of light having a finite speed..

we can track the universes growth nearly from the beginning. If you look back 3 billion light years away, you see the universe as it was 3 billion years ago..


So it was quite easy to track its progress over the eons.. with the Big Bang they are only really speculating about the initial cause and very earliest parts..

After that we can literally just look far away and see what was happening.

a reply to: JoshuaCox

Heck. Thanks to the Cosmic Neutrino Background, we can see all the way back to a few seconds after it started. We could only get to within hundreds of years of it with the Cosmic Microwave Background.

a reply to: TrueBrit

Clearly the British education system has failed some people
With all due respect, what?

Where is the evidence, EVIDENCE
Don't talk nonsense, show the evidence true Brit or look like a fool, serious a fool

Show me the LOGIC! CALCULATIONS TELESCOPY CALCULUS, any bloody thing
ANY BLOODY THING! ANY BLOODY THING

Nonsense, ther is nothing scientific, nothing valid, it's imagination

Do your homework trubrit and head off to youtube

Seriously, it's better to keep your mouth shut and have people think you are a fool than...