Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
9 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,815 Year: 3,072/9,624 Month: 917/1,588 Week: 100/223 Day: 11/17 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Creation
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


(1)
Message 751 of 1482 (833502)
05-22-2018 12:16 PM
Reply to: Message 748 by NoNukes
05-22-2018 9:20 AM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Why then these dumb ass questions?
Because he understands (note: I did not say believes) more than he lets on and he is trying to make a point.
Besides, it's good for the lurk-o-sphere.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 748 by NoNukes, posted 05-22-2018 9:20 AM NoNukes has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 755 by ICANT, posted 05-22-2018 4:55 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 752 of 1482 (833505)
05-22-2018 1:41 PM
Reply to: Message 747 by AZPaul3
05-21-2018 3:10 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi AZ,
AZ writes:
Therefore, you cannot say everything we see today was somehow squeezed into this pinpoint.
If everything that exists today seen and unseen in the universe was not in the little pinpoint that expanded into the universe we have there is a huge problem.
Matter and energy can not be created or destroyed. Their forms can only be changed.
That would eliminate anything being added to what existed at the pinpoint.
I know Alan Guth proposed a way to do away with those natural laws by introducing the zero energy universe with the ultimate free lunch. I have found very little support for his free lunch, except some here at EvC.
AZ writes:
Instead, we can say this "stuff" was the initial condition of the universe from which "everything" ended up manifesting, evolving, growing out of.
I prefer to say everything we can see in the universe and all that we cannot see existed at the beginning, just not in the form we see it today. That is the reason I believe the universe is very old. Much older than any numbers given at the present for the age of the universe.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 747 by AZPaul3, posted 05-21-2018 3:10 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 756 by AZPaul3, posted 05-22-2018 4:57 PM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 753 of 1482 (833510)
05-22-2018 2:42 PM
Reply to: Message 746 by NoNukes
05-21-2018 9:17 AM


Attitude
Hi NoNukes
When you started posting in 2010 I was glad that there was someone who was knowledgeable enough to post information that a person could learn from.
I still think you have a lot of information that you could share that I and other could learn from. But the snide remarks will not teach anything to anybody.
In Message 745 I asked you:
ICANT writes:
So to get a lot of stuff in a small place requires some packing of the material together. But maybe you know a better way to get everything in the universe that is seen and unseen in an area the size of a pin point or a pea.
I am not the one that believes the universe was the size of a pinpoint or a pea when it began to be spread out into the large universe we have today.
I am not responsible for the pinpoint or pea sized universe that cavediver and Son Goku talked about.
But if it did exist and start expanding above, at or near the speed of light I would like to understand how the universe and everything in it could begin in such a small volume.
I have mentioned how I know it takes pressure to place a lot of stuff in a very small place. I also realize no one want to discuss such a matter as the claim of a pea sized universe sounds impossible so to defend such a position is indefensible.
I asked for your opinion:" But maybe you know a better way to get everything in the universe that is seen and unseen in an area the size of a pin point or a pea?"
You retort:
NoNukes writes:
Even ignoring what I am now convinced is deliberate dishonesty, the point still stands. When was matter created? Does your question about pressure and raisins apply even at 1 nanosecond? The answer is no. You are making nonsense statements and asking nonsense questions and you won't take any correction.
Do you really think I ask a question because I was being deliberately dishonest.
Then you asked a Question: "When was matter created?" The first atoms was not created until 380,000 years after the pinpoint began to expand, as that is when the universe cooled enough for the atoms to be formed.
Then you explain my questioning how my 10 lbs of raisins could get packed into an area the size of a pinpoint was a "nonsense statements and asking nonsense questions"
I think an explanation of how that could happen in a thought experiment would be very vital to understanding how everything in the universe that is visible and invisible could get reduced to the volume required to exist at the pinpoint that began to expand that produced our universe we live in today.
I thought you said one time that you like to know how things work. That is all I was asking. It is science's theory and somebody ought to be able to explain it. If you can't explain it just say so and pass on the question.
NoNukes writes:
I am done with you on yet another topic.
You closed your post with this statement. I would hope you would reconsider and input your knowledge into the thread. But that is your choice.

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 746 by NoNukes, posted 05-21-2018 9:17 AM NoNukes has seen this message but not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 754 of 1482 (833511)
05-22-2018 4:40 PM
Reply to: Message 748 by NoNukes
05-22-2018 9:20 AM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi NoNukes,
NoNukes writes:
Seriously, nobody would assume that a human sperm had half of an 80-year-old man squeezed into it, with the other half squeezed inside an ovum. Why then these dumb ass questions?
This is completely off topic but it is my thread so I would like to have you clarify your statement. As I believe you are comparing the 80 year old man being in the fertilized ovum with the universe being in the pinpoint that began to expand creating our universe.
Fact: Most human cells can not be seen.
All human cells have all the information to build a human.
So why isn't that 80 year old man squeezed into a fertilized ovum?
If he is not in there, where does he come from.
If that fertilized ovum is aborted that 80 year old man/woman would not ever exist.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 748 by NoNukes, posted 05-22-2018 9:20 AM NoNukes has not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 755 of 1482 (833512)
05-22-2018 4:55 PM
Reply to: Message 751 by AZPaul3
05-22-2018 12:16 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi AZ
AZ writes:
Because he understands (note: I did not say believes) more than he lets on and he is trying to make a point.
I am glad someone here understands that you cannot learn unless you ask questions.
cavediver told me the only stupid question was the one that was not asked.
I ask a lot of questions and many may sound stupid to other but when I ask a question there is a point in asking the question and a answer is appreciated.
You are correct that there is a lot of stuff I talk about that I don't believe.
I will give a few.
I do not believe the universe was ever the size of a pinpoint. I do not believe it expanded at the speed of light. I do not even believe it had a beginning to exist. I believe it has always existed in some form just not the form it is in today. If it is not eternal where did the energy come from to create it out of. Laws don't change and energy cannot be created, Therefore it had to exist. I agree with Einstein and others that the universe is eternal, in some form.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 751 by AZPaul3, posted 05-22-2018 12:16 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 757 by AZPaul3, posted 05-22-2018 5:11 PM ICANT has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 756 of 1482 (833513)
05-22-2018 4:57 PM
Reply to: Message 752 by ICANT
05-22-2018 1:41 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
AZ writes:
Instead, we can say this "stuff" was the initial condition of the universe from which "everything" ended up manifesting, evolving, growing out of.
I prefer to say everything we can see in the universe and all that we cannot see existed at the beginning, just not in the form we see it today.
Then we are saying the same thing.
That is the reason I believe the universe is very old. Much older than any numbers given at the present for the age of the universe.
And you may be right. At present our best theories and best evidence indicate a universe just under 14 billion years of age. That may change as theory and technology advance. But until then 14 billion is the best we can realistically say without appealing to tea leaves, charlatans and superstition.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 752 by ICANT, posted 05-22-2018 1:41 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 760 by ICANT, posted 05-22-2018 5:44 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 757 of 1482 (833514)
05-22-2018 5:11 PM
Reply to: Message 755 by ICANT
05-22-2018 4:55 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
If it is not eternal where did the energy come from to create it out of.
We don't know, yet.
Laws don't change and energy cannot be created ...
As far as we can tell, in this universe, that is true. However, if there was a "before," then we cannot say that. We have no idea what physics may have been operating prior to this universe or (maybe) in some other universe from which ours was born.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 755 by ICANT, posted 05-22-2018 4:55 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 761 by ICANT, posted 05-22-2018 5:55 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 758 of 1482 (833515)
05-22-2018 5:24 PM
Reply to: Message 749 by ringo
05-22-2018 11:58 AM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi ringo
ringo writes:
Your questions was "as the outside surface of the balloon". In the analogy, galaxies are "wrinkles" on the outside surface of the balloon, represented by dots.
OK
The analogy is they are the dots on the outside surface of the balloon.
That does not represent reality so the analogy is useless.
ringo writes:
In the analogy, there is no "inside surface". The outside surface of the balloon represents ALL of the universe.
Reality is that the universe does not have an outside. Therefore trying to use the outside of the balloon's surface to represent the universe is useless.
ringo writes:
No they are not. The outside surface of the balloon represents ALL of the universe.
The outside surface of the balloon does not represent any part of the universe that you can see or imagine.
Therefore the analogy is useless to describe the universe.
ringo writes:
No. The outside of the balloon is a surface. The balloon is not the universe. It only represents the universe. Do you understand the difference between a picture and the thing it represents?
Yes I understand the difference between a picture and the thing it represents.
I have a picture of JAWS a very ugly shark with menacing teeth.
I understand that creature looks exactly like the picture and can physically hurt my body. I know a shark looks like the picture as I have seen them in real life. I live 80 miles from sea world.
I also know the picture can't hurt me at all. I can look at it all I want and it will do me no harm. I can even rub the teeth with my finger with no harm. But if I tried that with the real thing I would probably lose my arm or my life. Yet the picture will never hurt me.
Is that what you are talking about me knowing the difference in a picture and the real thing.
A balloon with dots on it does not look like the universe in any way shape or form, except it is maybe a sphere. But no one has ever viewed the outside of the universe.
ringo writes:
Yes. And you didn't mention Jesus' wool or His meat, did you? Why not? because they are not part of the analogy. Similarly, the inside of the balloon is not part of the analogy.
But He was a human lamb he did not have any wool on his body unless you want to say his beard which had never been shaved was wool. I just think it was long hair as was the hair on his head.
Actually the inside of the balloon is not a part of any analogy and neither is the outside of the balloon an analogy of the universe. It is useless as an analogy. The raisin cake is a much better analogy of the universe.
ringo writes:
If you cherry-pick your answers, you can find one you like. Ask another astronomer such as this one, if you're at all honest about understanding.
Where can I find a reference to the balloon analogy on that website?
You did not quote one nor did you point out one. Am I supposed to read the entire website to not find one?
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 749 by ringo, posted 05-22-2018 11:58 AM ringo has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 759 by AZPaul3, posted 05-22-2018 5:41 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 785 by ringo, posted 05-23-2018 8:59 PM ICANT has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 759 of 1482 (833516)
05-22-2018 5:41 PM
Reply to: Message 758 by ICANT
05-22-2018 5:24 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Reality is that the universe does not have an outside. Therefore trying to use the outside of the balloon's surface to represent the universe is useless.
Only if one gets trapped into thinking the analogy is there as a reality. The analogy is there only to present an idea. The idea that space is inflating and that is why it appears the other galactic clusters are moving away from ours with the farthest ones moving away the fastest. Just like the dots all move away from each other on the balloon with the farthest ones moving away the fastest.
Simple. Ignore the balloon. Ignore the surface. Learn the idea of spatial inflation, the expansion of space which explains what we see happening with the other galactic clusters around us.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.
Edited by AZPaul3, : spelin

This message is a reply to:
 Message 758 by ICANT, posted 05-22-2018 5:24 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 765 by ICANT, posted 05-22-2018 7:22 PM AZPaul3 has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 760 of 1482 (833517)
05-22-2018 5:44 PM
Reply to: Message 756 by AZPaul3
05-22-2018 4:57 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi AZ
AZ writes:
Then we are saying the same thing.
You start agreeing with me and you gonna get in the dog house.
AZ writes:
And you may be right. At present our best theories and best evidence indicate a universe just under 14 billion years of age. That may change as theory and technology advance. But until then 14 billion is the best we can realistically say without appealing to tea leaves, charlatans and superstition.
There are some scientist that have used the 20 billion number and some who go as low as 8.5 billion.
I tend to hold my belief because my Hebrew teacher who was a Jew explained the first Hebrew word as it should have been translated as in the beginnings. The noun for beginning has a female suffix added so it matched with the direct object of the subject of the verb as to gender. In other places it has been used as a plural suffix. I find little support for such a view. But since I believe in God and that He is eternal I tend to lean that way. If the universe is only 14 billion years old what did God do for the eons before 14 billion years ago. I know I am letting my imagination get in the way but it is just something I think about.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 756 by AZPaul3, posted 05-22-2018 4:57 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 763 by AZPaul3, posted 05-22-2018 6:02 PM ICANT has replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 761 of 1482 (833518)
05-22-2018 5:55 PM
Reply to: Message 757 by AZPaul3
05-22-2018 5:11 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi AZ
AZ writes:
We don't know, yet.
A great scientific answer.
Not only do we not know but we may never know.
AZ writes:
As far as we can tell, in this universe, that is true. However, if there was a "before," then we cannot say that. We have no idea what physics may have been operating prior to this universe or (maybe) in some other universe from which ours was born.
I don't know of any law that exists that created itself.
My problem is that I believe we have laws in the universe that were created by its creator. I know many who claim nature is that god but I can't find anything nature ever created.
The laws of physics had to be created and many accommodations made for varying conditions.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 757 by AZPaul3, posted 05-22-2018 5:11 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 762 by Modulous, posted 05-22-2018 6:00 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 764 by AZPaul3, posted 05-22-2018 6:19 PM ICANT has replied

  
Modulous
Member
Posts: 7801
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 762 of 1482 (833519)
05-22-2018 6:00 PM
Reply to: Message 761 by ICANT
05-22-2018 5:55 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
I know many who claim nature is that god but I can't find anything nature ever created.
What did god ever create? Your answer to this question is the answer those many you refer to would give to the question 'what did nature ever create?'

This message is a reply to:
 Message 761 by ICANT, posted 05-22-2018 5:55 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 769 by ICANT, posted 05-22-2018 9:32 PM Modulous has replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 763 of 1482 (833520)
05-22-2018 6:02 PM
Reply to: Message 760 by ICANT
05-22-2018 5:44 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
You start agreeing with me and you gonna get in the dog house.
Been worse places.
If the universe is only 14 billion years old what did God do for the eons before 14 billion years ago.
Actually, your god began existing a little under 5000 years ago. Kind of a late-comer in the gods-of-the-ages department.
Shouldn't ask such things of us heathen atheist science types.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 760 by ICANT, posted 05-22-2018 5:44 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 766 by ICANT, posted 05-22-2018 7:34 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
AZPaul3
Member
Posts: 8513
From: Phoenix
Joined: 11-06-2006
Member Rating: 5.3


Message 764 of 1482 (833521)
05-22-2018 6:19 PM
Reply to: Message 761 by ICANT
05-22-2018 5:55 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
I know many who claim nature is that god but I can't find anything nature ever created.
Look in the mirror.
I don't know of any law that exists that created itself.
Physics is our set of human estimates, written in mathematical symbology, of the operations of the things we see around us. The ones that seem most consistent, within the error bars of our technology, we call "laws". And they work very very well. But they are still estimates at best always subject to change in changing environments.
Why these things around us seem to operate in this specific manner and not some other is yet to be determined. Again, without appealing to tea leaves, charlatans and superstition, we do not know why and neither do you.
Edited by AZPaul3, : No reason given.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 761 by ICANT, posted 05-22-2018 5:55 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 767 by ICANT, posted 05-22-2018 7:51 PM AZPaul3 has seen this message but not replied

  
ICANT
Member
Posts: 6769
From: SSC
Joined: 03-12-2007
Member Rating: 1.5


Message 765 of 1482 (833524)
05-22-2018 7:22 PM
Reply to: Message 759 by AZPaul3
05-22-2018 5:41 PM


Re: Speed of Light vs. Expansion of the Universe
Hi AZ
AZ writes:
Only if one gets trapped into thinking the analogy is there as a reality. The analogy is there only to present an idea.
What idea is that?
There is nothing on the outside of the universe. You should have seen the comments to me and about me several years ago when I made a statement about standing of the surface of the universe looking up and what I might see.
cavediver totally convinced me that there was no outside the universe. Regardless of what his buddy said about multi verses.
AZ writes:
The idea that space is inflating and that is why it appears the other galactic clusters are moving away from ours with the farthest ones moving away the fastest.
But all those dots are moving in a arc as they are on the surface of a balloon being expanded with air.
If expansion is true certain things would happen.
That is the reason I imagined my 10 lbs of raisins squeezed into a ball the size of a pin point. Let me dispense with trying to duplicate the early expansion of the universe. I want to change that to just 2,000 raisins.
Ok now I got 2000 raisins squeezed into as small a space as I can get with the pressures of my hands. I am going to make an assumption that I can get the ball of raisins down to a 3" diameter ball.
The space between each raisin begins to expand at the speed of light.
The universe was supposed to have expanded faster than the speed of light which is 186,000 miles per second. I will use the speed of light just to show what expansion would look like.
The space between each raisin expands at the speed of 186,000 mps.
After 1 second the 3 raisins that made up the core of the ball would be 186,000 miles from the location they were at just 1 second earlier. This would create a space of 186,000 miles in any direction from the center of those 3 raisins. The space would be 372,000 miles in diameter. The space between those raisins and the ones touching them would have also have increased by 186,000 miles. The raisins touching the outside of those raisins the space would have increased by186,000 miles. Now this is just 3 raisins. If we run it out to 1000 raisins the 1,000th raisin would have moved 186,000,000 miles. which would make the universe have a diameter of 372,000,000 miles from the original location of the 3 center raisins.
That would mean that the 1,000th raisin had traveled at 1,000 times the speed of light.
If there was enough raisins to have 2,000 spaces that expanded the outside raisin would have traveled at 2,000 times the speed of light.
All of this distance was covered in 1 second.
Do you think this scenario is as preposterous as I do?
Yet that is what we are supposed to think is reality.
AZ writes:
Simple. Ignore the balloon. Ignore the surface. Learn the idea of spacial inflation, the expansion of space which explains what we see happening with the other galactic clusters around us.
I did and it still don't compute. The balloon analogy makes just as much sense as chaotic inflation/expansion.
Lets say the expansion between the raisins was only 1,000 miles per second.
1,001 spaces expanding at 1,000 miles per second would put the outside raisin 10 million miles from the center of the 3 raisins in the core of the raisins. They got there at 5.38 times the speed of light.
What if we did expansion at 100 miles a second?
100 miles a second times 1,001 equals 100,100 miles from the center of the 3 raisins.
Now if there was enough raisins to reach out 2,000 raisins in a line the outside raisin would be traveling at 1.07 times the speed of light.
Notice I have not even considered the sideways expansion of the space.
Can you even imagine how scattered out these raisins would be in 1 second.
With these raisins representing the elements of the universe how could any 2 of them get together and produce anything in the universe. Remember the first atom did not exist until 380,000 years after expansion began.
It really sounds like a fairy tale someone wants me to believe.
Now if you can explain where my thinking is wrong please do.
God Bless,

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

This message is a reply to:
 Message 759 by AZPaul3, posted 05-22-2018 5:41 PM AZPaul3 has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 768 by Modulous, posted 05-22-2018 8:43 PM ICANT has replied
 Message 773 by AZPaul3, posted 05-23-2018 1:27 AM ICANT 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