Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 31
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: Big Bang wrong?

  1. #11
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    222

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    What's the ATM section. Why don't u like links doesn't that prove right and wrong if it's scientifically proven already. Would u just take my word for it, that the big bang is wrong?

  2. #12
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,082

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jason me View Post
    What's the ATM section. Why don't u like links doesn't that prove right and wrong if it's scientifically proven already. Would u just take my word for it, that the big bang is wrong?
    Against The Mainstream. I want to see if it's worth spending bandwidth on.

    N' u wud lok smrtr if u cut de juvy lingo.
    Last edited by Lazer; 01-24-2016 at 07:54 AM.

  3. #13
    tom
    tom is offline
    Administrator tom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,652
    Blog Entries
    4

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    What I never understood is that if we went back in time enough, using current big bang logic, then wouldnt all matter be inside a schwarzschild radius? and if so how could this matter escape to current time where it is outside of a schwarzschild radius? If that matter could someone escape, then why couldnt any matter escape a black hole in a similar way?

  4. #14
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    222

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    Quote Originally Posted by Lazer View Post
    Against The Mainstream. I want to see if it's worth spending bandwidth on.

    N' u wud lok smrtr if u cut de juvy lingo.

    Hey Lazer,

    I felt a bit bad for correcting u ever time we spoke. However I no longer feel that way. One of the most problematic issues regarding astronomy is the fact that too many scientist can't explain what they are trying to say. Just so u know I never want to sound smart, I am however smart. I won't (will not) include you in this because I don't (do not) think you deserve it. I think k4g and Chk speak only in their world, they act and talk smart. I don't think they are, if they are and can't explain the ideas they have without cussing or attempting to explain why they have these ideas, how could they be considered smart. Shots fired lol.

  5. #15
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    222

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    Quote Originally Posted by tom View Post
    What I never understood is that if we went back in time enough, using current big bang logic, then wouldnt all matter be inside a schwarzschild radius? and if so how could this matter escape to current time where it is outside of a schwarzschild radius? If that matter could someone escape, then why couldnt any matter escape a black hole in a similar way?
    Hey Tom,

    Could u briefly explain the Schwarzchild radius. I am unfimilar with this theory. I believe and enjoy the EAgames theory (Challenge Everything).

    From what I herd about time travel is that u can go back but never forward. Just theories not proven.

  6. #16
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,082

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jason me View Post
    Hey Lazer,

    I felt a bit bad for correcting u ever time we spoke. However I no longer feel that way. One of the most problematic issues regarding astronomy is the fact that too many scientist can't explain what they are trying to say. Just so u know I never want to sound smart, I am however smart. I won't (will not) include you in this because I don't (do not) think you deserve it. I think k4g and Chk speak only in their world, they act and talk smart. I don't think they are, if they are and can't explain the ideas they have without cussing or attempting to explain why they have these ideas, how could they be considered smart. Shots fired lol.
    Well, if you were smart and wanted a discussion you would make your presentation user friendly...

    The Schwartzschild radius is the radius where the escape velocity for a given mass equals the speed of light. This is the classic measurement for a black hole. For instance if you compress earth to about 1/2 inch it becomes a black hole.

  7. #17
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Oct 2011
    Posts
    1,951

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    Quote Originally Posted by tom View Post
    What I never understood is that if we went back in time enough, using current big bang logic, then wouldnt all matter be inside a schwarzschild radius? and if so how could this matter escape to current time where it is outside of a schwarzschild radius? If that matter could someone escape, then why couldnt any matter escape a black hole in a similar way?
    The basic logic of the big bang is that matter didn't have (higgs field) mass until after the universe had expanded enough that it wasn't dense enough to have black hole issues. That said, the non uniformity of density intrinsic in the logic of forming differentiated matter allows local concentrations that were dense enough to be black holes when matter acquired mass. They may have been the locations that became the nuclei for galaxies. The present model of galactic black hole formation doesn't fit galactic formation timewise. The problem is there had to have been supermassive black holes before galaxies were large enough to have formed them.
    Last edited by astrotech; 03-07-2016 at 10:59 AM.
    Lies have the stench of death and defeat.

  8. #18
    Moderator Neverfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utopia Planetia, Mars
    Posts
    1,784

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    Quote Originally Posted by tom View Post
    What I never understood is that if we went back in time enough, using current big bang logic, then wouldnt all matter be inside a schwarzschild radius? and if so how could this matter escape to current time where it is outside of a schwarzschild radius? If that matter could someone escape, then why couldnt any matter escape a black hole in a similar way?
    The short answer is, "no."
    It cannot be inside of a schwarzschild radius because a schwarzschild radius is something that exists within the properties of SpaceTime itself, not "outside of the Universe" if you will. The physical effect we observe as a schwarzschild radius is simply a property of SpaceTime and the interactions within it.
    This is similar to how far distant galaxies from ours can be receding from us at faster than light speeds from our relative point of view. Because it is the accumulation of expansion over the magnitude of distance of SpaceTime itself that is pushing us apart. The constant "c" is a property of SpaceTime. This constant "c" applies to any object traveling through SpaceTime but does not apply to SpaceTime itself.

    Quote Originally Posted by Eleftherios Karagiannis View Post
    To have balance, an explosion would have to have a maximum and minimum. Not possible allows balance to happen. If the Big Bang is right, the maximum will continue for eternity and the minimum would eventually collide into itself, no balance. Also, if we are being stretched, there are interactions between different objects, slowed and sped up, that would change the rate of stretching. That does not happen in reality, balance exists in reality.
    Some of your wording is misleading, making your descriptions not match what it is you are trying to describe or trying to fathom.
    First, the "big Bang" name of the Lambda CDM model makes an implication that is not accurate. The expansion of the Universe is not modeled as an Explosion is modeled. The Big Bang does not match the description of an explosion.
    The assumptions within your questions are based on the assumption that the expanding universe follows the same properties of an explosion. Since the Lambda CDM model does not match the model of an explosion, you must remove your assumptions. Then formulate your questions.

    Jason me,
    Nothing you said makes any sense at all
    --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

  9. #19
    Moderator Neverfly's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Utopia Planetia, Mars
    Posts
    1,784

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jason me View Post
    There may be a center to the universe but u would have to prove me wrong.
    It is highly illogical to attempt to "prove" a negative. There is no method for doing so. It is more logical to attempt to support a hypothesis or a working theory with evidence.
    This means that the onus is on you to support any assertion you make with evidence. Show the readers why you assert your ideas or hypothesis. Simply stating it as such and then asking others to show why your assertion is NOT so is a futile effort for everyone.
    To clarify: How do you know that the life and world you perceive is real and that you are NOT in a padded cell in a straight jacket drooling all over yourself with the fantasy that you perceive as your life beamed into your head by aliens? All of the evidence you have at your disposal suggest that your life is actual, but you cannot "prove" that you are not, in fact, being deceived by whimsical aliens.

    Quote Originally Posted by Jason me View Post
    One of the most problematic issues regarding astronomy is the fact that too many scientist can't explain what they are trying to say.
    As I observe astronomers, they have little difficulty in explaining what they say. In fact, there is a great wealth of astronomical information readily available to anyone that wants it.
    Rather, it does appear that you are having great difficulty in saying what you wish to say.
    I do not say that to offend you. But I am definitely having difficulty understanding you.
    Quote Originally Posted by Jason me View Post
    From what I herd about time travel is that u can go back but never forward. Just theories not proven.
    Other way around. Due to the effects of Relativistic Distortion, a traveler moving near 'c' will experience time at a much slower rate relative to an observer in a more stationary position to the traveler. In that sense, the near 'c' moving traveler can return to his point of origin, and a speed at which that origin travels bringing both of their relative views of time and velocity to equal numbers and find that a much, much greater amount of time has passed on the origin scale than on his travel scale.
    In essence, he can move into our "Future."

    There is no known way postulated, however, of moving backward in time. In order to move backward in time, the traveler would need to revert the entire Universe and everything in it back to the same state and position of everything within relative to eachother as that of the the time period he wishes to visit.
    uhhh... which is impossible...

    Quote Originally Posted by Jason me View Post
    What's the ATM section.
    ATM = Against The Mainstream.
    Mainstream theories are those theories that are accepted by hundreds of thousands of scientists and working theoreticians internationally as the Most Well Supported Models by current evidence.
    Against The Mainstream Hypothesis are hypothesis or theories that are not accepted as the most well supported working models.
    Just as teaching Creationism, YEC, Intelligent Design and such concepts in a class about Evolution would be confusing, muddling, misleading and absurd, the discussion of ATM ideas must be done outside of the normal Physics Discussion threads. This is because internet users will often find a site like this searching for an answer to a question and a non-confusing direct and clear resource is necessary.
    Only Well supported Mainstream ideas should ever be discussed in science questions and answers forums.

    However, ATM ideas should be vigorously discussed in the proper forum for it, allowing the healthy questioning of ideas and the constant testing of our models to ensure the greatest accuracy in them and best understanding of why the Scientific Method Works, baby!
    Last edited by Neverfly; 04-17-2016 at 09:16 PM.
    --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

  10. #20
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    126

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    Quote Originally Posted by Neverfly View Post

    Some of your wording is misleading, making your descriptions not match what it is you are trying to describe or trying to fathom.
    First, the "big Bang" name of the Lambda CDM model makes an implication that is not accurate. The expansion of the Universe is not modeled as an Explosion is modeled. The Big Bang does not match the description of an explosion.
    The assumptions within your questions are based on the assumption that the expanding universe follows the same properties of an explosion. Since the Lambda CDM model does not match the model of an explosion, you must remove your assumptions. Then formulate your questions.
    I am not a scientist of any kind; I am not surprised that I don’t make sense. I am trying.

    Thank you for taking the time to try and help me. I don’t think enough time exists based on the help I need.
    Sometimes, the logical answer defies logic....Stupid accident.

    If my thoughts are math, how can I be wrong?

Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 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
  •