Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 48 (9179 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: Jorge Parker
Post Volume: Total: 918,232 Year: 5,489/9,624 Month: 514/323 Week: 11/143 Day: 1/10 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Universe Race
onifre
Member (Idle past 3066 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 10 of 410 (456874)
02-20-2008 2:17 PM
Reply to: Message 1 by Crooked to what standard
02-13-2008 7:29 PM


Ok Ichthus i'll bite...lets say you're right in your analogy, which you fail to include a variety of additional elements but, how then would that 'prove' God exists? Please explain. I'd rather reply to your explanation than to your analogy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 1 by Crooked to what standard, posted 02-13-2008 7:29 PM Crooked to what standard has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 11 by New Cat's Eye, posted 02-20-2008 5:20 PM onifre has not replied
 Message 12 by Crooked to what standard, posted 02-20-2008 5:28 PM onifre has replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 3066 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 14 of 410 (456919)
02-20-2008 5:53 PM
Reply to: Message 12 by Crooked to what standard
02-20-2008 5:28 PM


Ichthus
Sorry but I fail to see how thats proof for God...if anything, and again I don't agree with your analogy, you are making a case against our equipment for detecting stars and the physics behind it. If thats your case then im sure many on this site would be all ears if you have any mathematical additions to Einstiens field equations and/or Friedmanns(FLRW)equations. If you're going to make the analogy you did then you have to show your work using all the factors found in the universe, one major one being GRAVITY.
Also can anyone help me, I don't know how to quote someone.
And yes Bill Hicks does rule...

All great truths begin as blasphemies

This message is a reply to:
 Message 12 by Crooked to what standard, posted 02-20-2008 5:28 PM Crooked to what standard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 15 by AZPaul3, posted 02-20-2008 6:42 PM onifre has replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 3066 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 16 of 410 (456933)
02-20-2008 7:00 PM
Reply to: Message 15 by AZPaul3
02-20-2008 6:42 PM


Use "peek" button in the bottom right of any message and you can see the characters used to make the quote box.
Thanks...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 15 by AZPaul3, posted 02-20-2008 6:42 PM AZPaul3 has not replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 3066 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 20 of 410 (456952)
02-20-2008 9:47 PM
Reply to: Message 19 by Crooked to what standard
02-20-2008 9:05 PM


If matter didn't form from the Big Bang, then what was the point of the Big Bang? I read that the BB created both matter and antimatter.
Matter is composed of atoms and molecules right? Ok, in the moments after the Big Bang and for nearly about 400 milleniums(400,000yrs) after it, space was way too hot, naked atomic nuclei with no electrons were all there was. Ninety percent of the nuclei were hydrogen, most of the rest were helium...not untill the ambient temp in the expanding universe cooled down from trillions of degrees kelvin to about 3000 degrees kelvin did the nuclei capture electrons turning themselves into atoms, as the atoms gathered they formed the first molecules thus creating MATTER. And, since the first molecules were hydrogen gas is was only a matter of space and time before those gas clouds collapsed by their own gravity, the first Star was born...one hundred times larger than ours. This Sun eventually blew up into a massive supernova and spread all of the elements that were forged inside of it into the awaiting universe to repet the process over and over again drawing matter to them and creating solar systems. After billions of years passed one of those solar systems in a far off galaxy was able to retain water H2O, basic elements, and that sparked life. Billions of years after that you and me are discussing it all online. Cool huh???
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

All great truths begin as blasphemies

This message is a reply to:
 Message 19 by Crooked to what standard, posted 02-20-2008 9:05 PM Crooked to what standard has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 26 by cavediver, posted 02-21-2008 5:30 AM onifre has replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 3066 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 27 of 410 (456995)
02-21-2008 8:12 AM
Reply to: Message 26 by cavediver
02-21-2008 5:30 AM


400,000 years after the big bang that recombination occured, where electrons recombined with the bare nuclei to form neutral hydrogen and helium. This gave rise to the CMBR. It was much much later, when the first energetic objects started to form (quasars probably) that the gases were re-ionised. However, the Universe was sufficiently large by this time that the re-ionisation did not return the Universe to an opaque state, as it had been in prior to recombination. By the time we get to 400 million years, we're into the first star formation.
My bad on the time figures, I meant to write 400 millenia, but I was thinking in the millions. Thanks for catching that i'll edit it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 26 by cavediver, posted 02-21-2008 5:30 AM cavediver has not replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 3066 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 58 of 410 (457079)
02-21-2008 1:28 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by ICANT
02-21-2008 1:11 PM


Re: Re-Planck volume
Hi ICANT,
How much gravitational pull would be necessary to suck the universe into something the size a of pea?
Alot...
How much gravitational force do you think is beyond the event horizon of a black hole?
After the Big Bang 90% of the nuclei were hydrogen(the rest was helium,), all other elements came after stars blew up into supernovas. All the matter that is present today in this universe was created after the first star was created so you don't need to imagine this universe compressed to the size of a pea.
Now, how many hydrogen nuclei can you fit into a pea?

All great truths begin as blasphemies

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by ICANT, posted 02-21-2008 1:11 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by ICANT, posted 02-21-2008 4:47 PM onifre has replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 3066 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 80 of 410 (457211)
02-21-2008 6:36 PM
Reply to: Message 74 by ICANT
02-21-2008 4:47 PM


Re: Re-Planck volume
Since matter and energy can not be created, I assume you are referring to energy being converted into matter.
So you have not eliminated the necessity for everything you see and everything you don't see in the universe being present at inception.
It would just be in a different form.
Im having alot of trouble understanding your questions and statements...when you say 'anything you see' are you refering to all of the physical planets, stars, asteroids etc...and that some how all these objects were being physically compressed in some manner into the size of a pea?
If this is your concept of it then you are not understanding the Big Bang, everything you see today is a result of the Big Bang, if we were to rewind the clock and start all over it would not layout in the same way, you probably wouldn't have an Earth as we know it, or people for that matter. This universe was not compressed like a snowball and then bang it all goes everywhere, thats ridiculous to think and thats a total mis-understanding of the theory. You are making it very hard to explain it to you because your concept is so way off. Physical matter as you see it today was not present at the start, it is a result of that start.

All great truths begin as blasphemies

This message is a reply to:
 Message 74 by ICANT, posted 02-21-2008 4:47 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by ICANT, posted 02-21-2008 6:54 PM onifre has replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 3066 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 86 of 410 (457230)
02-21-2008 8:01 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by ICANT
02-21-2008 6:54 PM


Re: Re-Planck volume
I have stated several times that everything you can see and everything you can not see had to be present at T=O in some form.
Unless energy and matter can be created. This can not happen, according to science.
I understand what you have stated, but you are not listening to what is being said. Everything you see was NOT present, i'll try to walk you backwards. This solar system and the Milky Way Galaxy came to be because of an explosion from a supernova that sent all of the elements it forged in its core(stellar-fusion)into this awaiting space, if you continue to rewind the clock in the order from new to old(galaxies), using the process I just gave you, you get all the way back to a the FIRST star converting hydrogen to helium(and all of the other elements on the periodic table up to Iron) and waiting to explode into the FIRST supernova. If you rewind some more then all you have to do is break down that Sun/Star, that can be broken down to a simple hydrogen atom. So you see all the matter that exists today was not present, only hydrogen was present, and at the initial moment after the Big Bang only hydrogen nuclei without electrons were present all bundled up into a pea size..for about a nano second.

All great truths begin as blasphemies

This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by ICANT, posted 02-21-2008 6:54 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 88 by ICANT, posted 02-21-2008 8:19 PM onifre has replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 3066 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 92 of 410 (457242)
02-21-2008 8:59 PM
Reply to: Message 88 by ICANT
02-21-2008 8:19 PM


Re: Re-Planck volume
OK I will play along and see where you go.
Where did the hydrogen nuclei come from?
I don't know. If you do please share.

All great truths begin as blasphemies

This message is a reply to:
 Message 88 by ICANT, posted 02-21-2008 8:19 PM ICANT has not replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 3066 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 95 of 410 (457254)
02-21-2008 10:30 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by ICANT
02-21-2008 9:12 PM


Re: Pull
That pea has to contain the observable universe, which has a visible mass of about 10^52kg
Dude really??
Its been explained, are you doing this out of a need to just be difficult?
Are you that kid who was always told he couldn't do something so you now feel the need to challenge everyone on everything?
This is getting redundant...

All great truths begin as blasphemies

This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by ICANT, posted 02-21-2008 9:12 PM ICANT has not replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 3066 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 150 of 410 (457522)
02-23-2008 9:29 PM
Reply to: Message 149 by ICANT
02-23-2008 7:20 PM


Re: Re-T=O
So in this thread which starts a race at the T=10^40. I have been trying to find out what caused this miniature universe to start to expand.
Esentially what you're getting at is that something got the wheels in motion, so to speak. Ok.
Now you choose to answer that with God. Ok.
Why?
Even if the race had to "get started" so to speak, why would you answer the natural causes that "got it started" with something even more complicated than the question itself? It can't be answered with physics, and thats all anyone can give you is a math equation.
I think understanding the descriptions that everyone has been kind enough to give you, and I leared a great deal from it as well, is suffice, your need for a causation is a personal question that won't be explained thru physics, and for that matter won't be debunked thru physics either.

All great truths begin as blasphemies

This message is a reply to:
 Message 149 by ICANT, posted 02-23-2008 7:20 PM ICANT has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 151 by ICANT, posted 02-23-2008 10:21 PM onifre has replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 3066 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 152 of 410 (457537)
02-23-2008 10:52 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by ICANT
02-23-2008 10:21 PM


Re: Re-T=O
Hi ICANT,
Makes more sense than: It came from an absence of anything.
I don't remember reading anyone say "an absence of anything". I believe what is being said is that its unknown what there was at T=O or prior to that, let alone knowing if what there was was actually capable of being a cause for anything, but it must be since we are here. I believe the question of "what was prior to T=O" is beyond the realm of science...at the moment.
Here I am conceding a miniature universe to be in imaginary time. So if it is there I want to know what starts the process of expansion.
Your still holding on to the literal sense of expantion, it is there where you need to change your way of thinking.
This miniature universe sitting in imaginary time is doing nothing At T=O. There is no real time or real space here, only an absence of anything.
If we are talking about a miniature universe in an imaginary time, then I would say you'd need to ask the person imagining it, maybe the laws of physics change completely in his/her imagination. As for our universe, there was no cause for the start because there was no start, it just is.
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.
Edited by onifre, : No reason given.

All great truths begin as blasphemies

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by ICANT, posted 02-23-2008 10:21 PM ICANT has not replied

onifre
Member (Idle past 3066 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 204 of 410 (458151)
02-27-2008 1:59 PM
Reply to: Message 199 by McCartlennstarrison
02-27-2008 11:45 AM


You don't know, and you refuse to make any assumptions, and are simply waiting for the "facts". The thing is, you'll never know, and if somehow we did figure out with "undeniable" scientific proof I guarantee you it is not the true way. It is simply the evil one clouding your fragile human mind with convincing lies. If you rely totally on your senses and logic you will play right into his hands. Stop trying to make human reason equal with God. Accept that there are things that will not and can not be explained, except through Him. Think with your heart. In the biggest of pictures, science is nothing but an organized system of ignorance. This will all be clear to every one of us when the time comes.
Is any of this an assumption or is this a fact?
Should I take you on faith that you've read and interpreted all of the scriptures and are now stating facts about the universe?
Are any of the opinions you just gave based on evidence or your own personal belief?
The reason I ask is because you make a pretty bold statement about science and post death events and I just wanted to know what kind of credentials you had for making these clams and not stating them as an opinion but stating them as facts?
Also if you could provide us 'ignorant' science followers with evidence for "the evil one clouding your fragile human mind with convincing lies" that would be useful too.
PS. Not all atheists are assholes but, most are frustrated with people who make claims about the universe that are based on primitive beliefs and expect equal time in educated conversations, such as the ones on this thread that were interupted by a condesending...well, asshole I guess.
-Oni

All great truths begin as blasphemies

This message is a reply to:
 Message 199 by McCartlennstarrison, posted 02-27-2008 11:45 AM McCartlennstarrison 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