Big Bang Decked Again.

[98cwitr]

Now we are back to SS theory...just saw this on the history channel this evening. Big Bang never set right with me...even as an agnostic.

 

[theFijian]

Now we are back to SS theory...just saw this on the history channel this evening. Big Bang never set right with me...even as an agnostic.

And steady-state theory sits better?

 

[Sam Conley]

I personaly have always seen science as the explanation "to us" on how God made it all happen. They think their proving something that not only allready existed but had always been a part of existence prior to humans, we were just lucky enough to figure it out. It is also hard for me to theorize the big bang, I do like the idea of singularity howeverand had some thought on it. If mass and energy were compressed and uniformed into a singularity, the motions from each individual mass would perpetuate that of the others. Possibly this would be percieved like to the mass that nothing was moving at all, but everything was spinning close to the speed of light. Or rather no point of referance to gain your bearrings. If the big bang was a sudden and instant expansion of that singularity, something would of had to of changed to cause that break. My question is how could something thats essentialy perpetuating itself unravel without a foreign body being introduced?

 

[busterdog]

And steady-state theory sits better?

A. Big Bang. Answer: No.
B. Steady State: Answers: No.
C. Something Else: Answer: Yes.

Any questions.

 

[98cwitr]

A. Big Bang. Answer: No.
B. Steady State: Answers: No.
C. Something Else: Answer: Yes.

Any questions.

Can you elaborate on that?

 

[busterdog]

Can you elaborate on that?

Big Bang is not the consensus.

It is a theory with holes, as demonstrated in the OP.

One needn't embrace a steady state theory to realize that BB is just one among other theories worth discussing.

 

[shernren]

A. Big Bang. Answer: No.
B. Steady State: Answers: No.
C. Something Else: Answer: Yes.

Any questions.

I hear that those, what's their name, Satanists think the atheists are a bunch of crackpots and fools.

I'm pretty sure you might want to check out the Wiccans too. I'm sure they'll make wonderful allies in your crusade against irreligiosity.

The Native Americans' beliefs will be pretty useful in demonstrating that evolution isn't a consensus. And why don't you throw in Harun Yahya while you're at it.

Meanwhile, the rest of the world will go right on evaluating the importance and usefulness of theories based on whether or not they work, not some crazed ideological agenda that consists of hiding in whatever the latest fashion is like a hermit crab who doesn't care how much poison is in his new shell as long as it protects him from the Big Bang Bogeyman.

 

[Cabal]

Big Bang is not the consensus.

It is a theory with holes, as demonstrated in the OP.

One needn't embrace a steady state theory to realize that BB is just one among other theories worth discussing.

And no-one is implying otherwise.

Point is, for another idea to stick, you need evidence, not just a keen attitude.

 

[excaliber736]

No offense meant, but I'm almost positive that none of you have actually studied the theory and physics relating to the big bang in depth, so I don't really think that you are qualified to comment on it's verity.

 

[98cwitr]

Big Bang is not the consensus.

It is a theory with holes, as demonstrated in the OP.

One needn't embrace a steady state theory to realize that BB is just one among other theories worth discussing.

it is the world's consensus at this point, you see it every where. I'm an avid watcher of the History Channel, and it's all they mention when "The Universe" is airing.

 

[shernren]

No offense meant, but I'm almost positive that none of you have actually studied the theory and physics relating to the big bang in depth, so I don't really think that you are qualified to comment on it's verity.

I wrote a 25-page report on singularity theorems not too long ago. Now if you really want to know something, why not just ask nicely?

 

[rcorlew]

I wrote a 25-page report on singularity theorems not too long ago. Now if you really want to know something, why not just ask nicely?

25 pages, is that all?

I bet I could have gotten at least 40

 

[rcorlew]

it is the world's consensus at this point, you see it every where. I'm an avid watcher of the History Channel, and it's all they mention when "The Universe" is airing.

I believe that the most widely held theory is now string theory, based on the multi-verse the most recent accepted theory I do believe is the inflationary theory, caused by the outer membranes of two universes near in proximity to each other actually touching for a moment causing an infinite amount of energy to be spontaneously created forming a new universe. This new universe is then inflated beyond the speed of light through hyper-space in it own dimensional vibration, also called a "string"

 

[shernren]

25 pages, is that all?

I bet I could have gotten at least 40

Ahhh, but brevity is the essence of wit.

 

[Assyrian]

...and a small font size.

 

[98cwitr]

I believe that the most widely held theory is now string theory, based on the multi-verse the most recent accepted theory I do believe is the inflationary theory, caused by the outer membranes of two universes near in proximity to each other actually touching for a moment causing an infinite amount of energy to be spontaneously created forming a new universe. This new universe is then inflated beyond the speed of light through hyper-space in it own dimensional vibration, also called a "string"

how does string theory explain the creation of our universe? Or at least the matter within?

 

[rcorlew]

how does string theory explain the creation of our universe? Or at least the matter within?

Well there are two parts, how the energy became expanding matter and the other is the formation of the energy in the first place.

On the expansion of energy

This type of solution to the flatness problem was proposed in the 1980s by cosmologist Alan Guth. The model is called the Inflationary Universe. In the Inflation model, our Universe starts out as a rapidly expanding bubble of pure vacuum energy, with no matter or radiation. After a period of rapid expansion, or inflation, and rapid cooling, the potential energy in the vacuum is converted through particle physics processes into the kinetic energy of matter and radiation. The Universe heats up again and we get the standard Big Bang.

http://superstringtheory.com/cosmo/cosmo41.html

The other is one proposed method for the creation of the energy is the membranes of adjacent universes which are contained in the "multi-verse" touching briefly and at the point of intersection the raw energy for our universe is created.

In M-theory our universe and others result from collisions between membranes in this 11-dimensional space. Unlike the universes in the “quantum multiverse”, these universes can have completely different laws of physics – anything is possible; all potentials can be realized.

“The Universe is Obsolete” - A Gallery of Multiverse Theories

For more about M-Theory

Membrane (M-Theory) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I am not an expert by any stretch of the imagination, I am however inquisitively curious on this particular topic.

 

[rcorlew]

...and a small font size.

Better not be one of those "stupid" small fonts or else I would never read it!

 

[Assyrian]

Better not be one of those "stupid" small fonts or else I would never read it!

ok

 

[shernren]

...and a small font size.

C'mon Assyrian. If anything, students live to please their eyesight-impaired professors. Don't you know that their dream format specifications would be 18-pt font, double-spaced, odd pages only?