Page 1 of 4 123 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 31
Like Tree1Likes

Thread: Big Bang wrong?

  1. #1
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    126

    Default I want to delete this thread, please.

    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.
    Last edited by Eleftherios Karagiannis; 06-04-2015 at 09:41 PM.

  2. #2
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    222

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    The big bang is wrong in my opinion. Sure there was a bang but it was small compared to an infinate universe. Search big bang vs 4d black whole and find out y.

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

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    From other posts on this forum the Big Bang is just an extension of us seeing redshifted galaxies. If those galaxies are indeed moving away from us ( and the red shift is not caused by something else ) then going back in time the universe was closer together. That theory is that everything is moving away from everything else and there is no center of the universe.

  4. #4
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Jun 2012
    Location
    Santa Barbara, CA
    Posts
    2,761

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    The "Big Bang" depends on the Friedmann solutions (or similar) to GTR. I would argue that STR is all you get, with red shift corresponding to the loss in energy due to the one-way trip of a photon from a far galaxy to ourselves, due to photon on photon (spin/polarization) interaction along the way. This interaction can't be observed; one can only observe the difference between the photon that arrived and a local standard (Blackbody at local temperature).

    The Penzias-Wilson noise is NOT this cosmological density, but rather local photon-on-photon interaction in the electromagnetic environment on the surface of the earth (which is not subject to earth's gravitation, since the interactions are averaged out by the time they reach the detector (except for the very minor differences observed).

    GTR coordinate system is irrelevant, although one can hypothesize "distances", they depend on comparing local temperatures to those created under very different conditions... Astrophysics can make sense if the extrapolation is not taken too far, but the farther out one fantasizes, the less that can actually be observed....

    So the real question is not Galilean velocity v=r/t (since the motion of photons is independent of that of the source in STR) , but

    where the "times" are scaling factors on relative photon masses.

    Is the far galaxy intrinsically colder than ours, or was some energy lost by the photons we observe (which contribute to an unobservable CMB) where VT' from the Lorentz transform is actually the mass "Boost" at the source required to get the photon through the intervening density.

    These ideas require a precise analysis of the Lorentz transform compared to the "time dilation" equation, including the Lorentz force; that said, it is important to remember that GTR and STR apply ONLY to light, not ponderable mass. Any GTR reference to mass as curvature is only in terms of light on light interaction, NOT (e.g.) earth/sun relationship since the effect of photons on Newtonian orbits is insignificant. (One can invoke a deBroglie correspondence, but one had better be prepared for a massive change in h).


    1. Consider the interpretation of a circle in space-time, that models only light at the circumference.
    2. the concept of Einstein moving with a photon puts Einstein at the center of that photon, but only god can see the circumference.

    That is, the "scope of validity" for GTR is really the energy of the collapsed local standard photon compared to a similar photon that is colder than the local standard. Newtonian/Maxell's physics applies to the rest (astrophysics) ... insofar as the relations can be actually observed and it makes sense to refer such observation to local constants.
    Last edited by BuleriaChk; 10-19-2015 at 01:21 PM.
    _______________________________________
    "Flamenco Chuck" Keyser
    The Relativistic Unit Circle Updates 03/02/2017 12:07 PM PST
    Proof of Fermat's Last Theorem Updates 03/19/2017 8:23 PM PST
    Ignore List -The Peanut Gallery.

  5. #5
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2015
    Location
    USA
    Posts
    126

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    The point that is believed the big bang occurred is actually a point of magnetism. We are being pushed from that point, including light, and if we could see beyond that point, we would see objects pulled to that point, explaining how everything is coming from that point. The furthest image that is seen is all the objects ripped apart when they entered that point. An explanation that solves eternity was once a single point, making eternity limited, which proves itself wrong. True eternity has no borders, like nothing. The point of magnetism is the strongest, or the fastest, the further away it weakens, or slows until it turns back to the point. It is the same as a tiny magnet on my kitchen table. The pulling side speeds up as it gets closer to the point. The pushing is the strongest at the point and weakens further away to the point of stop. The speed of light is not constant, proven by water. It is possible we are being pulled to a different point of magnetism or will eventually be pulled back to the original point. The furthest image seen is not the beginning, but faster than light past that point.

    My best guess, makes sense to me, but so do many things that end up wrong, for me.
    Sometimes, the logical answer defies logic....Stupid accident.

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

  6. #6
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    222

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    There may be a center to the universe but u would have to prove me wrong. Let's look at a universe like a rain drop in the sea. Makes a ripple, just like the radiation wave that we can't see past. Just a drop in the sea of the infinite universe.

  7. #7
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    222

    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. Let's look at a universe like a rain drop in the sea. Makes a ripple, just like the radiation wave that we can't see past. Just a drop in the sea of the infinite universe.
    Opion 2 pls. But I have Whiteholes in my model.

    What happened before the Big Bang?
    Last edited by Jason me; 01-03-2016 at 02:23 AM.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    222

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    So u r thinking Tom that that donut has a center, midpoint. It may have one but first I'd make it an 8 and flip it on its side. In the middle of that put another circle or 3. And directly the center your might have your center of the infinite universe... only if u believe. Mere drop in the pond, sea.
    Last edited by Jason me; 01-03-2016 at 02:26 AM.

  9. #9
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2015
    Posts
    222

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    Have to take this back. Y would one wormhole/backhoe lead to another. Is it possible that they all connect, yes is it probable, I don't think so. Y would they?

  10. #10
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    Dec 2014
    Posts
    2,082

    Default Re: Big Bang wrong?

    Quote Originally Posted by Jason me View Post
    Have to take this back. Y would one wormhole/backhoe lead to another. Is it possible that they all connect, yes is it probable, I don't think so. Y would they?
    If you believe you have a theory, why not post it in the ATM section. But if you don't outline it in general and only post links, I for one will not bother.

Page 1 of 4 123 ... 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
  •