Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 26 to 50 of 64
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: Flat universe and the big bang theory

  1. #26
    Mongo is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    26

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Once again your post is filled with red herring arguments and avoidance of the question.

    First off the universe is defined for all of us since it is a wrod in the english vocabulary. There are other words for what your point (multiverse, branes, bubbles etc.) The definition of universe is very clear and your efforts to cloud it is a logical fallacy of argument on your part.

    There might be more questions, and in fact most likely be. But that is another logiacl fallacy on your part to try and avoid the question before us. This type of argument is like you refusing to answer my question "What is your name" with a response "If I answer you might ask me where I live so I won't answer".

    What is fairy tale about logical choices? This is an association type of logical fallacy. Avoidence of the question and then claiming it is 'fairy tale'.

    Listing the possibilites does explain or answer anything. It is just LISTING THE POSSIBILITIES.

    Then you finish with a non sequiter. I'm going to borrow a line from the movie Braveheart "Just answer the freanin question".

    It is not hard. I and many physicists say there are just two logical options for the universe. You claim this is wrong. So therefore, provide the additional options. No matter what mechanism the universe used for comming into existence it MUST and can ONLY be due to two options. It was designed/created or it happened through luck/chance. There are NO option options possible. If I'm wrong then tell us what other logical option is there?

  2. #27
    littleroundman is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    17,072

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    What are you saying ?

    Human "logic" is all there is ??

    Scientific "logic" has never been wrong

    It's called the big bang THEORY for fun ??

    Humans know everything ??

    "AT OUR CURRENT LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING" there are only two possible options.
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  3. #28
    Mongo is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    26

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    What are you saying ?

    Human "logic" is all there is ??
    Mathmatetics and logic are not human based. Dead or alive, is that human based? A positive or negative charge, is that humna based.

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    Scientific "logic" has never been wrong

    It's called the big bang THEORY for fun ??
    This is NOT related to the BBT. Instead of BBT it can be steady state, quasi-steady whatever. My question is based on the an extremely simple question.

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    Humans know everything ??

    "AT OUR CURRENT LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING" there are only two possible options.
    Humans don't matter. Any sentient being in any universe will come up with EXACTLY the same question. But at least you admit that there are only two options, even if you incorrectly think there might be more options at some future point in time.

    But now that you have leaped over that hurdle we can actually move forward.

    What does it mean that the universe was created/designed or it came about through luck/chance.

    Contrary to popular belief our universe being created doesn't mean it is a God that did it. According to Einstein's General Relativity theory there exists black holes, singularities and white holes. Some physicists have psotualted that white holes or singularites are really other universes as the matter leaving our universe is ejected into a different universe. It has also been postulated that way in the future a sufficiently advanced race can create a black hole by focusing enough energy at a point in spacetime and creating a tear that leads to a black hole.

    Now let's do a hypothetical. Say way off in the future a race from this universe actually creates a black hole and the singularity in that black hole is the big bang for a new universe. If that universe ends up having sentient life and they ask if there was a creator would they be correct if they answered "yes" to that question? If not, why not?

  4. #29
    Edmund129 is offline Banned
    Join Date
    Mar 2013
    Posts
    140
    Blog Entries
    1

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Why is the speed of light the ultimate speed limit of the universe? Seems somewhat arbitrary that the maximum speed limit is 186,282.396 miles per second in a vacuum. Just asking... Could it be the entire universe is caught in some sort of massive black hole so big it isn't obvious that we are in one. But there being a speed of light limit seems to suggest something is jerking the strings somewhere.

  5. #30
    littleroundman is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    17,072

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    But at least you admit that there are only two options, even if you incorrectly think there might be more options at some future point in time.
    Gosh,

    I haven't seen that tactic used since my high school debating class.

    I am NOT saying there are only two options.

    What I AM saying is we don't know and can't know how many options there are because we are constrained by the fact we are humans

    We can theorize, we can speculate and we can pontificate, BUT, until we know all there is to know, we CANNOT declare anything to be absolute.
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  6. #31
    NikSam is offline AntiCon Artist
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Posts
    2,253

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Agree with LRM

    Mongo how about an option it was never created, but existed all the time, just passing through infinite number of transformation processes? Enough headaches for you ?

    let the unknown alone, possibilities can vary to the limits of human imagination.

  7. #32
    littleroundman is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    17,072

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    I wonder.

    Is ∞ infinity an abstract concept or a mathematical reality ??
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  8. #33
    ProfHenryHiggins is offline Elite Scambuster
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Posts
    2,822

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Both, I would say, LRM. Abstract, in that like quarks it is exceedingly hard to observe directly. Real, in that it appears quite often in formulas describing physical things - as a break point, or paired with a negatve infinity to cancel out and remain hidden at the macroscopic level.
    If you are in Prosper With Integrity, and do not like that your personal information has been published here, please talk to these good people: http://www.attorneygeneral.gov http://www.ic3.gov http://www.fbi.gov

  9. #34
    Mongo is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    26

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    "AT OUR CURRENT LEVEL OF UNDERSTANDING" there are only two possible options.
    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    Gosh,

    I haven't seen that tactic used since my high school debating class.

    I am NOT saying there are only two options.
    Not a tactic at all. You were the one that wrote the first line.

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    What I AM saying is we don't know and can't know how many options there are because we are constrained by the fact we are humans

    We can theorize, we can speculate and we can pontificate, BUT, until we know all there is to know, we CANNOT declare anything to be absolute.
    Until we know all there is to know we can't declare anything? Stop the presses and fire all the physicists.

    The real reason you refuse to accept it is because you don't like the choices. A designed universe offends you and random chance means we are a fluke. But don't worry you are not alone. Many hope there is another option and fight off reality. BTW I have no clue why you are afraid to admit this. Physicists like Hawkings, Penrose, Smolin and many others have already said what I have laid out here.

    Quote Originally Posted by NikSam View Post
    Agree with LRM

    Mongo how about an option it was never created, but existed all the time, just passing through infinite number of transformation processes? Enough headaches for you ?

    let the unknown alone, possibilities can vary to the limits of human imagination.
    Not at all you just described the luck/chance side. "Passing through infinite ..." means it eventually hits a set of laws where sentient life exist. This perfectly describes the luck/chance option.

    I noticed that neither wanted to answer my question on if an advanced civ creates a black hole that starts a BB, that has life are they correct to say there was a creator?

  10. #35
    littleroundman is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    17,072

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    HeHe,

    You know I relish the opportunities provided by engaging in discussion with the "Mongos" of this world

    Without fail, within one or two pages, "Mongos" has reverted to the ad hominem " A designed universe offends you and random chance means we are a fluke" arguments" as if he/she has the slightest idea what "offends me"

    Actually, "Mongo" on the contrary.

    I look at commonly accepted known "facts" like the oldest known meteorite fragments found on earth being approximately 4.5 BILLION years old and the oldest so far known evidence of "life" being Microbial mats of coexisting bacteria and archaea dated at being around 3.5 BILLION years old, and I am filled with wonder and awe.

    Given the surface area of the planet, what are the chances, would you estimate of finding 4.5 BILLION year old meteorite "fragments" much less being able to say with any certainty there are not some 5.5 BILLION years old only a short distance away.

    As for the chances of finding 3.5 BILLION year old bacteria, forget about it.

    Pick a man made structure/s, Mongo.

    Any size or shape you like.

    Then tell us with any certainty what will remain of it/them in a BILLION years.

    Then try for 4.5 BILLION years.

    For goodness. sakes, Mongo, we are STILL finding previously undiscovered Egyptian artifacts today, and we KNOW approximately where they are and the Egyptian civilization was only around four or five THOUSAND years ago.

    It's all right to say you simply don't know, Mongo.

    Non of us will hold it against you.
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  11. #36
    Mongo is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    26

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post

    Pick a man made structure/s, Mongo.

    Any size or shape you like.

    Then tell us with any certainty what will remain of it/them in a BILLION years.

    Then try for 4.5 BILLION years.

    For goodness. sakes, Mongo, we are STILL finding previously undiscovered Egyptian artifacts today, and we KNOW approximately where they are and the Egyptian civilization was only around four or five THOUSAND years ago.

    It's all right to say you simply don't know, Mongo.

    Non of us will hold it against you.
    Who is talking about man made structures? Or are you saying the universe is man-made? Why do you go off on these tangents?

    But if you want to know what the Earth's surface will look like in 100 million years that can be done fairly easily with computer models based on tectonics. They have models that show what the Milky Way will look like in a few billion years after the collission with Andronama. So we do know or at least predict some things.

    But as usual this is NOT waht the question is. The question is about the PAST. What were the causes for the BB.

    Now I'm going to post this link to show you that while you try to evade the question, actual physicists don't. Why Some Scientists Embrace the 'Multiverse' | RealClearPolitics

    Here are some nice quotes:
    "Paul Davies, professor of theoretical physics at Adelaide University: "The really amazing thing is not that life on Earth is balanced on a knife-edge, but that the entire universe is balanced on a knife-edge and would be total chaos if any of the natural 'constants' were off even slightly."

    "After all, with an infinite number of universes, a universe with parameters friendly to intelligent life is more likely to arise somewhere by chance."

    Either there is a multiverse or there is not. Now since our universe exists we know for a fact that at least this one does exist. Now there is only the possibility that more exist or that they don't. There are NO OTHER OPTIONS and no matter how long you want to wait this will never change. We either exist in a single universe or a multi-verse.

    Now since all these very smart people aren't afraid of stating this simple fact why should you be? The universe is either designed or is here by chance. (single universe or multi-verse, or a single that is here by chance).

    And please stop with the silly and non-relevant comparrisons to man made stuff. I'm referring to the universe itself.

  12. #37
    littleroundman is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    17,072

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Yeah, yeah, again with the verbal gymnastics.

    First you convince us you have any concept of what could have happened without leaving a trace in the billions of years we know the planet has been here, then perhaps we can talk.

    As for "computer models"

    Would they be anything like the "computer models" used by weather bureaus all over the world ???

    Are "computer models" infallible now ???

    Once again, it's called the Big Bang THEORY for a very good reason
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  13. #38
    Mongo is offline Junior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2013
    Posts
    26

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    Yeah, yeah, again with the verbal gymnastics.

    First you convince us you have any concept of what could have happened without leaving a trace in the billions of years we know the planet has been here, then perhaps we can talk.
    You have so little logic it's amazing. I can flip a coin and ask you what the possibilityies are and you'll still not know or say that they might increase in the future.

    And what does your second sentence even mean?

  14. #39
    littleroundman is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    17,072

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    You have so little logic it's amazing. I can flip a coin and ask you what the possibilityies are and you'll still not know or say that they might increase in the future.

    And what does your second sentence even mean?
    What does YOUR "logic" have to do with not knowing what has happened over the past 4.5 BILLION years ??

    You don't know,

    I don't know.

    You are prepared to guess or rely on computer modelling of what "could" have happened

    I'm not.

    No need for "logic"
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  15. #40
    nomaxim's Avatar
    nomaxim is offline Archæologist
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Stow, Ohio, Sol III
    Posts
    242

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    Once again, it's called the Big Bang THEORY for a very good reason
    Kinda like Newton's theory of gravitation?
    Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science. -C. Darwin

  16. #41
    littleroundman is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    17,072

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by nomaxim View Post
    Newton himself released his then "Theory of Universal Gravitation" in the 1680s because it was a "theory" at the time.

    The Big bang "Theory" may very well go on to become a universally accepted principle in time.

    But, as it stands, it is a "theory" at this moment in time.
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  17. #42
    nomaxim's Avatar
    nomaxim is offline Archæologist
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Location
    Stow, Ohio, Sol III
    Posts
    242

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    The Big bang "Theory" may very well go on to become a universally accepted principle in time.

    But, as it stands, it is a "theory" at this moment in time.
    Correct.
    The name 'Big Bang Theory' actually comes from the press.
    As far a science is concerned it is still a hypothesis.
    Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge: it is those who know little, and not those who know much, who so positively assert that this or that problem will never be solved by science. -C. Darwin

  18. #43
    littleroundman is offline Administrator
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    17,072

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    And "theory" was the word used by the OP when he titled the thread:
    "Flat universe and the big bang theory"
    The only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good men to do nothing

  19. #44
    okosh's Avatar
    okosh is offline Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Tassi Australia
    Posts
    3,289

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by littleroundman View Post
    HeHe,

    You know I relish the opportunities provided by engaging in discussion with the "Mongos" of this world

    Without fail, within one or two pages, "Mongos" has reverted to the ad hominem " A designed universe offends you and random chance means we are a fluke" arguments" as if he/she has the slightest idea what "offends me"
    You found a live one there....This should be fun to watch you tear his ridiculous BS to shreds....

    POP CORN TIME!!!!
    ʎɐqǝ uo pɹɐoqʎǝʞ ɐ ʎnq ı ǝɯıʇ ʇsɐן ǝɥʇ sı sıɥʇ

  20. #45
    Whip's Avatar
    Whip is offline Anonymous. As are you all
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    5,907

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by nomaxim View Post
    Correct.
    The name 'Big Bang Theory' actually comes from the press.
    As far a science is concerned it is still a hypothesis.
    and a damn funny show.

  21. #46
    Beacon is offline Antiauthoritarian skeptic
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Is Eireannach mise
    Posts
    1,231

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    I claim there are two possible logical explanations for the start of THIS universe (no multiverse).
    those being 1 Created or 2. happened by chance
    this is very along the lines of greek logic on which mathematics and much of "western "science is grounded

    But in the case of 2 we might have a problem since what does "happened by chance" mean?
    We know in the Shrodinger's Cat analogy that the idea of logical opposites e.g. a live cat or a dead cat
    don't sit well with probablity theory in which the cat is some sort of not black or white live or dead cat but a fuzz of greyness. The concept of causality is also tested here.

    also "chance" and "happened" may presuppose laws of chance or probability as well as laws of physics. It may well be that no such laws exits and the physics we have arrived at is only an approximation. we know Newton's Law aer sufficient to explain gravity as a cosmological whole but we also know them to be wrong. Likewise the Bohr model of the atom, and later models all became "refined". Sadly the "refinements" of BB cosmology e.g. inflation seem very blunt instruments.

    To go back to the idea of civilization before 4.5 billion years. I would consider this very unlikely as the during the Hadean Period File:Geologic Clock with events and periods.svg - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    there was no water on earth and is was fairly much all volcano.

    We know it is this old AFAIK based on four dating techniques dendrochronology extending in to fossilised trees which go to millions of years , the geological column, radiometric dating and I think therewas some use of Moon crater impacts

    As for the BB and flat universe again ther are two or three pieces of evidence.
    1.We can explain how all the other stuff came from Hydrogen and Helium but the original universe is not much different today with a 3:1 Hydrogen to Helium ratio making up almost everything ( of normal matter). The physics for the Early BB explain how the H/He ration came to be.

    2. the observed Universe seems to be basically flat

    3. the rate of expansion can be measured and theories fit this

    4. the cosmic Microwave Background ( see 2) suggests an even spread of matter. Yes I accept that the Sun has most of the matter in the solar system and galaxies have more matter than the space between them but on a grand scale I mean. a bit like saying we know ther are clumops of salt or icebergs but on a grand scale water and salt are fairly evenly spread ( alright I know they arent and some oceans are fresher and some saltier but the universe isnt saltier or at least we assume it isnt that is called homiogenity and yes it is an assumption!)

    5. the other assumption isotropism that the universe is the same in all directions takes into account the "laws" ( yes I know above I suggest they might not exist but for the purpose of this point they do) of physics are the same everywhere and we don't for example have inverse cube gravity or an electron having a double negative charge in some exotic corner of the universe)

    Anyway some interesting points raised

  22. #47
    Beacon is offline Antiauthoritarian skeptic
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Is Eireannach mise
    Posts
    1,231

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by nomaxim View Post
    Correct.
    The name 'Big Bang Theory' actually comes from the press.
    As far a science is concerned it is still a hypothesis.
    Actually AFAIK it was coined by Fred Hoyle who was an opponent of the BB theory and proposed a Steady State Theory. I think in an interview he said something like "People want you to assume the a Big Bang caused it all..." and the phrase stuck!

  23. #48
    Beacon is offline Antiauthoritarian skeptic
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Is Eireannach mise
    Posts
    1,231

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by Mongo View Post
    Either there is a multiverse or there is not. Now since our universe exists we know for a fact that at least this one does exist. Now there is only the possibility that more exist or that they don't. There are NO OTHER OPTIONS and no matter how long you want to wait this will never change. We either exist in a single universe or a multi-verse.
    Or other universes could have existed and now do not exist.
    your dichotomy might also assumes time flows at the same rate in different universes. Since "we exist" assumes a "now" which has a one-to-one correspondence with a "now" in another universe.
    Also even if they exist how do we know they do if we have no way of measuring anything about other universes?

    So it appears there ARE other options but even with two options they exploration of them as options may be impossible or pointless.

  24. #49
    Beacon is offline Antiauthoritarian skeptic
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Is Eireannach mise
    Posts
    1,231

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    Quote Originally Posted by Edmund129 View Post
    Why is the speed of light the ultimate speed limit of the universe?
    good question. It is an assumption that it is since assuming it isnt violates a principle of relativity.

    We can observe things travelling faster than light e.g. a beam from a lighthouse sweeping along a distant cloud could "sweep over" the cloud faster then light if the cloud is far enough away. The think is we can send information faster then light and electro magnetic radiation does not travel faster than c.
    Also there is no cosmological medium or "ether" like sound travelling through water or air. Light ( in empty space - and yes I know it isnt empty from a quantum point of view but for this argument it is) travels in all directions at the same speed.

    If you imagine light travelling at different speeds in empty space then you violate special relativity and simultaneous events might become simultaneous again. You could also chose to violate the OTHER assumption of relativity that whenever you do an experiment you get the same result in other words two different observers see the same thing. the i.e. no privileged reference frames
    Special relativity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
    Relativity of simultaneity - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

    you might also consider of Mach's principle: "Local physical laws are determined by the large-scale structure of the universe."
    Mach's principle - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

  25. #50
    stacy532 is offline Senior Scambuster
    Join Date
    Nov 2015
    Posts
    652

    Re: Flat universe and the big bang theory

    i have been staying up late watching debates on this subject . im not the most religious person but I do believe in a creator . in God
    to say that all this we have and what we are happened by some strange accident is preposterous. if thats the case jump out of an airplane and throw every human on the face of the earth off of a cliff and after a few million years see if we evolve and adapt and grow wings.. or how about this light a firecracker on a pile of dirt and see if life just suddenly and accidentally forms due to the explosion. all of this is intelligent design and whether it was done by beings smarter than us or God as we think of him is irrelevant it is not just some dumb accident.. I have watched some great videos . from the arrogant Richard Dawkins to Lawrence Krauss. not one atheist makes a case any stronger than what the religious creationist already have .


    great set of videos i watched on does god exist.. in my opinion anyway
    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FbxD...cruTEBwRf87I7E

    Lawrence Krauss & Richard Dawkins - Conversation • July 22, 2015
    https://youtu.be/B1doH8xgfgQ

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

Disclaimer: Opinions expressed on this website are solely those of their respective authors.

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42