Results 1 to 6 of 6

Thread: What is wrong in BB if anything?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    109

    Default What is wrong in BB if anything?

    Let us try to make it simple.

    BB is based on the GR. If there is some real problems in BB, there is most probably some problem already in GR. I think that the problem is in the proposition that the whole space of the universe has time- space. When this is presupposed, of cause from the equations follows that there are the beginning points for the time of the universe and for the space of the universe, and the expanding of the universe follows. This understanding does not need any higher mathematics.

    The beginning and the expansion are the things which are wrong in the BB- model. This is a rational fact because the universe is eternal and its space infinite (limitless). This maybe not is a logical fact, but very near to it, and it needs not any empirical confirmation. As long as possible the empirical findings must be made to fit with it.

    In the 20- ties it was found the redshift of the galaxies, and it was interpreted that this is a proof of the fact that galaxies were moving from each others and the farer the faster. This was interpreted as an expansion of the universe. And the expanding universe did win over the static one in the minds of the cosmologists. Also because it did fit well with the GR.

    Let's go back to this point in the history without looking the further developments of the BB.

    Was it right to abandon the static model, the eternity and infinity of the universe? It was wrong, because we can put the redshift in the static model if we make enough effort. This has not been done in the cosmology.

    It can be done, if we think that the space of the universe has no time- space. The time- space is only for the particles in a space without time. And when we think that the redshift somehow follows from the limitlessness of the space of the universe.

    This has been opposed in forums because of the fact that this kind of model has not been made yet, and because empirical evidence point to other direction. Is it possible to make this kind of model and does it fit with evidence? In the static models there has not been thought these two things.

  2. #2
    Moderator Neverfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utopia Planetia, Mars
    Posts
    1,782

    Default Re: What is wrong in BB if anything?

    Quote Originally Posted by Olli S View Post
    The beginning and the expansion are the things which are wrong in the BB- model. This is a rational fact because the universe is eternal and its space infinite (limitless). This maybe not is a logical fact, but very near to it, and it needs not any empirical confirmation. As long as possible the empirical findings must be made to fit with it.
    Let's start with just this part... because this really is the basis of where you stand in your whole proposal.
    I'm going to alter your statement slightly in order to demonstrate the underlying nature of your statement.
    Note: Actual quote above.
    Altered (bold) quote below:
    Quote Originally Posted by Olli S; Altered Quote Demonstration
    The beginning and the expansion are the things which are wrong in the BB- model. This is a rational fact because the universe is the eternal infinite Mind of Deity as described in the Holy Texts. This maybe not is a logical fact, but very near to it, and it needs not any empirical confirmation. As long as possible the empirical findings must be made to fit with it.
    Can you see how very unscientific the statement is?
    -It demands that the foundation of premise be accepted without any evidence.
    -In fact, it demands that it is a "fact" that needs no confirmation, support, evidence or theory. That's GOD, pure and simple.
    -It demands that the findings of evidence must be forced to fit the preconceived belief.
    You stated these things clearly on your own. The altered quote merely exaggerates it slightly in hopes of you seeing it.
    What about the above quotes seems rational, to you?
    Is there anything that seems irrational, to you?
    --Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges--
    “Science needs the light of free expression to flourish. It depends on the fearless questioning of authority, and the open exchange of ideas.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

    "When photons interact with electrons, they are interacting with the charge around a "bare" mass, and thus the interaction is electromagnetic, hence light. This light slows the photon down." - BuleriaChk

  3. #3
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    109

    Default Re: What is wrong in BB if anything?

    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    Let's start with just this part... because this really is the basis of where you stand in your whole proposal.
    I'm going to alter your statement slightly in order to demonstrate the underlying nature of your statement.
    Note: Actual quote above.
    Altered (bold) quote below:

    Can you see how very unscientific the statement is?
    -It demands that the foundation of premise be accepted without any evidence.
    -In fact, it demands that it is a "fact" that needs no confirmation, support, evidence or theory. That's GOD, pure and simple.
    -It demands that the findings of evidence must be forced to fit the preconceived belief.
    You stated these things clearly on your own. The altered quote merely exaggerates it slightly in hopes of you seeing it.
    What about the above quotes seems rational, to you?
    Is there anything that seems irrational, to you?
    Helo, Neverly, again!

    It has nothing to do with gods, here. I'm materialist in the case of the universe. It has always existed, regardless what we think of our beloved God. This is materialist thought, not idealistic. I don't believe that the universe is eternal and infinite (limitless). I suppose it because it is rationally sound, and I ask if the facts can be in concordance with it, with my suggestions, which are new in the cosmology.

    I did learn this humble attitude from you. And it is the right and scientific way.

    It was Hawking, BB theorist, who did speak with Pope and they thought that BB was "Let there be light!" as in the Bible. I think the creation totally differently.

  4. #4
    Moderator Neverfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utopia Planetia, Mars
    Posts
    1,782

    Default Re: What is wrong in BB if anything?

    You keep stating the Infinite Universe and Eternal Universe as "Fact."
    Now, I understand what you are doing... You are philosophizing and therefor, supposing the statement as fact as a starting point.
    "If we assume the Universe is Eternal and Infinite then does ___Such and such logic____ follow?"
    While this can operate for meta-philosophy, it does not work for Meta-physics. This is because the physics deals with Theory: That which is tested to be acceptably accurate. The philosophy deals only with supposition and hypotheses.
    For cosmological physics, by necessity, the starting point must be verifiable through observation. Because assuming a state to the Universe and leading philosphy from that starting point is a naturalistic fallacy, you must start where you can verify the initial conditions.
    Rather than,
    "If we assume an eternal Universe..."
    We need to start with, "IS the Universe Eternal or Finite in age?"
    From there, we make observations. The visible universe is limited to about 13.5 to 13.8 billion years of light travel. An eternal Universe would not show this effect.
    An eternal Universe would fill the sky with light, since all light produced in every direction would have had an eternity to reach Earth. We most certainly do not see this effect...
    A Universe that "always was" raises more questions than answers and would require a lot of force-fitting and exotic explanations.
    BUT... what if the Universe had a Beginning, but no end? What if the Universe began, but is eternal from that point onward?
    That has no contradictions in observation and is permissible to continue speculating about.
    The universe may be eternal, but in only one direction, not both.

    This Humble attitude is something that we all must deal with in order to really appreciate scientific pursuit. On a daily basis, living our lives, you and I are undoubtedly very similar. We do some work, we post on a forum, we take care of our families... We drive vehicles and pump gas and pay taxes. You know- the average "good" person that is not murdering, pillaging, raping... No baby killers, here. And we are just as biased. We both are.

    I am as irrational as you are. I am as deluded as you are. I am as fallible as you are.
    And both of us as much as BuleriaChk or Jason_Me or David M.W. or Tom.
    In order to overcome this Bias and find commonground we all can share ideas and views on, we need something to Level The Playing Field.
    And that something is the Scientific Method. IF we all try to follow it (Though we all will on occasion fail at it)... then we can reason out good hypotheses that match observation and create general agreement.
    --Inter Arma Enim Silent Leges--
    “Science needs the light of free expression to flourish. It depends on the fearless questioning of authority, and the open exchange of ideas.” ― Neil deGrasse Tyson

    "When photons interact with electrons, they are interacting with the charge around a "bare" mass, and thus the interaction is electromagnetic, hence light. This light slows the photon down." - BuleriaChk

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    109

    Default Re: What is wrong in BB if anything?

    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post
    You keep stating the Infinite Universe and Eternal Universe as "Fact."
    Now, I understand what you are doing... You are philosophizing and therefor, supposing the statement as fact as a starting point.

    "IS the Universe Eternal or Finite in age?"
    From there, we make observations. The visible universe is limited to about 13.5 to 13.8 billion years of light travel. An eternal Universe would not show this effect.
    An eternal Universe would fill the sky with light, since all light produced in every direction would have had an eternity to reach Earth. We most certainly do not see this effect...
    A Universe that "always was" raises more questions than answers and would require a lot of force-fitting and exotic explanations.
    BUT... what if the Universe had a Beginning, but no end? What if the Universe began, but is eternal from that point onward?
    That has no contradictions in observation and is permissible to continue speculating about.
    The universe may be eternal, but in only one direction, not both.
    If I have said the eternity and others as fact, it is wrong. They are hypothesis, but rationally sound ones, almost logical facts. Not empirical facts.

    You are wrong in the point that we can not easily know from empiria the nature of the universe and its space. It must be thought rationally and then make hypothesis of its nature. This is because we are in the universe and we look it from here. It is so big and not easily understandable thing. We can not put it in the laboratory.

    Of cause it is rationally as difficult to think that the time goes back infinitely or that it has a beginning. But the solution might be that its space has no time at all. Or that the universe has only an everlasting now- time. However we think, it is not a good starting point that the universe has a beginning and expansion. They have too easily accepted in the cosmology.

    I hope somebody who is of the same opinion will discuss this with me. We can find something new. I have no use of your opinion that I must accept the LambdaBB- model or any BB model.

    Visible universe as it is, and the Olbers paradox both fit very well with the eternal and infinite universe. The longest possible distance has been achieved about there because the universe is limitless, not infinite in every sense. We see nothing because somewhere there is nothing.

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2016
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    109

    Default Re: What is wrong in BB if anything?

    The cosmologists have not understood this kind of universe. This kind of space. They can not imagine it. That is the problem.

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
  •