Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 52 (9178 total)
7 online now:
Newest Member: Anig
Upcoming Birthdays: Theodoric
Post Volume: Total: 918,107 Year: 5,364/9,624 Month: 389/323 Week: 29/204 Day: 5/24 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   big bang and anguler ejectory
m4hb
Inactive Member


Message 1 of 4 (25761)
12-06-2002 2:40 PM


from what i understand about the big bang is that all the matter was brought together in to SPINNING ball of matter. then there was a cosmic explosion that created all the stars and planets. Well according to anguler ejectory (spelling error) when there is an object that is spinning and it bracks apart thoses parts will spin in the same direction as the original object.
what do you got to say about that.

Replies to this message:
 Message 2 by Coragyps, posted 12-06-2002 3:09 PM m4hb has not replied
 Message 3 by John, posted 12-06-2002 4:39 PM m4hb has not replied
 Message 4 by TrueCreation, posted 12-09-2002 8:43 PM m4hb has not replied

  
Coragyps
Member (Idle past 843 days)
Posts: 5553
From: Snyder, Texas, USA
Joined: 11-12-2002


Message 2 of 4 (25763)
12-06-2002 3:09 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by m4hb
12-06-2002 2:40 PM


Do I smell a Dr Dino? The singularity that led to the Big Bang was dimensionless, and didn't have an axis to spin on.
You are talking about the "law" of conservation of angular momentum, I think. Yes, there is such a thing, and it is conserved, but the mechanisms thought to be responsible for planets "spinning backwards" and the Sun's slow rotational speed don't violate it.
Edit to add: Our solar system is a member of the third generation or so of stars, etc., and formed about eight billion years after the BB. The bang didn't immediately form anything solid at all - it took supernovae of the first stars, a billion (?) years later, to do that.
[This message has been edited by Coragyps, 12-06-2002]

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by m4hb, posted 12-06-2002 2:40 PM m4hb has not replied

  
John
Inactive Member


Message 3 of 4 (25771)
12-06-2002 4:39 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by m4hb
12-06-2002 2:40 PM


quote:
Originally posted by m4hb:
what do you got to say about that.

I say that you've got it all wrong. At least, what you've got bears no resemblance to the actual BB theory.
First, there was no gathering of matter. There was no matter. In fact, at the moment of the BB, it isn't very clear what was, but a tiny fraction of a second later there was enormous amounts of energy. Spacetime expanded, the energy cooled and condensed into particles which became atoms of hydrogen, mostly. The hydrogen accumulated into massive clouds which eventually ignited (nuclear) due to pressure and in the process created the rest of the elements in the periodic table. The stars burned out and exploded throwing these various elements into space. This new dust accumulated into more stars, which exploded. This dust accumulated into more stars. We orbit at least a second generation star but probably third or fourth generation.
------------------
No webpage found at provided URL: www.hells-handmaiden.com

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by m4hb, posted 12-06-2002 2:40 PM m4hb has not replied

  
TrueCreation
Inactive Member


Message 4 of 4 (26111)
12-09-2002 8:43 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by m4hb
12-06-2002 2:40 PM


--I went through a brief analysis on ther merit of this notion back in this post:
http://EvC Forum: Evolution Disproven. -->EvC Forum: Evolution Disproven.
------------------

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by m4hb, posted 12-06-2002 2:40 PM m4hb has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024