Science and Technology news... :: View topic

Zanthius · Guest

http://www.archania.org/flaw.htm

Guest

On 25 Jul, 20:26, "Hagar" <ha...@sahm.name> wrote:
[quote]The difference is this: In a pulsating Universe, the expansion, just like a
bullet, has its greatest velocity in the fist seconds of travel. Then it
slows down to a momentary equilibrium and then, with ever increasing speed,
collapses back unto itself, setting up the next Big Bang.
[/quote]
I am not talking about that primitive idea. There is no bing bang and
big crunch in my pulsating universe. When the universe starts to
expand it is already huge, and only huger when it starts to decrease
in size.

Zanthius · Guest

On 25 Jul, 18:50, Plonk <pl...@die.hard> wrote:
[quote]go pegging out, moron
[/quote]
Morons replies with insults, and not with scientific argumentation.

Hagar · Guest

"Zanthius" <zanthius_of_dxun@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:9c3f4114-811f-4134-b753-44ec7023d048@u36g2000pro.googlegroups.com...
[quote]http://www.archania.org/flaw.htm
[/quote]
The difference is this: In a pulsating Universe, the expansion, just like a
bullet, has its greatest velocity in the fist seconds of travel. Then it
slows down to a momentary equilibrium and then, with ever increasing speed,
collapses back unto itself, setting up the next Big Bang.

Since the observable Universe is expanding at an ever increasing rate, it
must be open ended. Instead of another Big Bang, there will be a Silent
Fizzle and the lonely Black Holes will evaporate, one particle at a time,
likely for eternity.

Plonk · Guest

go pegging out, moron

Zanthius · Guest

On 25 Jul, 20:26, "Hagar" <ha...@sahm.name> wrote:
[quote]The difference is this: In a pulsating Universe, the expansion, just like a
bullet, has its greatest velocity in the fist seconds of travel.
[/quote]
Only if you believe that some of the energy which is driving the
universe to expand comes from the Big Bang. I believe that all of the
energy which is driving the universe to expand comes from dark energy.
I also believe that this dark energy is circulatory movement in a
higher dimension, which is manifested as pulsation in 3 dimensional
space.

Guest

On 26 Jul, 04:59, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com>
wrote:
[quote]Uh huh. And you>re smarter than all the PhDs and graduate students
working on the problem, too.
[/quote]
Maybe I am, maybe I ain>t, but accepting someone merely on authority
is dogma, just like believing in whatever Jesus said just because
Jesus said it.

I don>t think it is a good argument that whatever Jesus said must be
true, just because Jesus said it.

I don>t believe in anyone merely on authority.

Timberwoof · Guest

In article
<4f40eb0d-9ee0-4597-863c-534b0240d1d6@m45g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
Zanthius <zanthius_of_dxun@yahoo.com> wrote:

[quote]On 25 Jul, 20:26, "Hagar" <ha...@sahm.name> wrote:
The difference is this: In a pulsating Universe, the expansion, just like a
bullet, has its greatest velocity in the fist seconds of travel.

Only if you believe that some of the energy which is driving the
universe to expand comes from the Big Bang. I believe that all of the
energy which is driving the universe to expand comes from dark energy.
I also believe that this dark energy is circulatory movement in a
higher dimension, which is manifested as pulsation in 3 dimensional
space.
[/quote]
Uh huh. And you>re smarter than all the PhDs and graduate students
working on the problem, too.

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don>t blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.

Saul Levy · Guest

You mean: It>s the force, Luke! lmao!

Saul Levy

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 18:57:00 -0700 (PDT), Zanthius
<zanthius_of_dxun@yahoo.com> wrote:

[quote]On 25 Jul, 20:26, "Hagar" <ha...@sahm.name> wrote:
The difference is this: In a pulsating Universe, the expansion, just like a
bullet, has its greatest velocity in the fist seconds of travel.

Only if you believe that some of the energy which is driving the
universe to expand comes from the Big Bang. I believe that all of the
energy which is driving the universe to expand comes from dark energy.
I also believe that this dark energy is circulatory movement in a
higher dimension, which is manifested as pulsation in 3 dimensional
space.[/quote]

Saul Levy · Guest

Nothing Jesus said was written down BEFORE he died. Making it very
easy to claim that he said anything at all. I>m sure his followers
have claimed he said many things that he didn>t.

One problematic thing is how liberal Jesus was. Why?

Saul Levy

On Fri, 25 Jul 2008 20:18:56 -0700 (PDT), zanthius.dxun@gmail.com
wrote:

[quote]On 26 Jul, 04:59, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com
wrote:
Uh huh. And you>re smarter than all the PhDs and graduate students
working on the problem, too.

Maybe I am, maybe I ain>t, but accepting someone merely on authority
is dogma, just like believing in whatever Jesus said just because
Jesus said it.

I don>t think it is a good argument that whatever Jesus said must be
true, just because Jesus said it.

I don>t believe in anyone merely on authority.[/quote]

Zanthius · Guest

On 26 Jul, 10:40, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com>
wrote:
[quote]I>m not sure how to answer that. First, faith in Jesus is religious
because it is about claims that cannot even in theory be verified
experimentally. I believe what scientists tell me for several reasons:
One, their basic textbooks often contain experiments I can do myself to
verify what they say. Two, I know some of them, and they>re honest
people who think like I do. Three, the work they>ve done has improved my
live a whole lot, so they>re doing something right.
[/quote]

Is there more evidence for dark energy being related to the expansion
of the universe, than there is evidence for the big bang being related
to the expansion of the universe? Yes.

Is expansion of the universe evidence that the universe originates
from a point/singularity? Nope.

Can it be verified experimentally that the universe originates from a
point/singularity? Nope.

Are all scientists necessarily honest people? Nope.

Timberwoof · Guest

In article
<a9e15609-1134-4dd5-ba04-2d89081530e6@x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com>,
zanthius.dxun@gmail.com wrote:

[quote]On 26 Jul, 04:59, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com
wrote:
Uh huh. And you>re smarter than all the PhDs and graduate students
working on the problem, too.

Maybe I am, maybe I ain>t, but accepting someone merely on authority
is dogma, just like believing in whatever Jesus said just because
Jesus said it.

I don>t think it is a good argument that whatever Jesus said must be
true, just because Jesus said it.

I don>t believe in anyone merely on authority.
[/quote]
I>m not sure how to answer that. First, faith in Jesus is religious
because it is about claims that cannot even in theory be verified
experimentally. I believe what scientists tell me for several reasons:
One, their basic textbooks often contain experiments I can do myself to
verify what they say. Two, I know some of them, and they>re honest
people who think like I do. Three, the work they>ve done has improved my
live a whole lot, so they>re doing something right.

So you can invent your own speculations if you want to, but since
they>re not even up to the level of what I can read in Scientific
American, they>re not worth very much.

--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com
"When you post sewage, don>t blame others for
emptying chamber pots in your direction." ‹Chris L.

Guest

On 26 Jul, 20:08, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com>
wrote:
[quote]You seem to be saying that scientists are lying about the Big Bang.
[/quote]
Yes, I don>t there is sufficient evidence supporting the hypothesis
that the universe once was a point/singularity.

If the expansion was driven by energy from the big bang, then it would
be decelerating, not accelerating.

The expansion of the universe is driven by dark energy, not by energy
from the big bang.

That is why the expansion is accelerating and not decelerating.

Guest

On 26 Jul, 22:00, "Hagar" <hs...@surewest.net> wrote:
[quote]Except for one pesky little fact: the Cosmic Microwave Background
Radiation, also known as CMBR, is proof enough for real scientists (as
opposed to you, the hack) to conclude that its origin came from one single
event, appr. 13.5B years ago.
[/quote]
There were many astrophysicists who believed in alternate cosmology,
like in the steady state model, who predicted the cosmic microwave
background before it was discovered. Even with a higher accuracy than
the predictions made by the big bang believers.

Of course we know a lot more about the cosmic microwave background
today, and it seem to fit pretty well with the inflationary Big Bang
model, but I don>t think it is the only model capable of fitting with
the observed cosmic microwave background.

I think there has been used a lot of resources on making the Big Bang
model fit with the observed cosmic microwave background, and that you
easily make the model of a pulsating universe fit with the observed
cosmic microwave background as well.

Guest

On 26 Jul, 21:45, Timberwoof <timberwoof.s...@inferNOnoSPAMsoft.com>
wrote:
[quote]I think you don>t know as much about this as you think you do. At what
university did you study physics? What makes you any kind of authority
on this subject? What makes your opinion worthwhile?
[/quote]
Sometimes the authorities are a little too stuck in their models to
see beyond them.

Some things you see more clearly when you see from the outside of the
model.


www.GetXFactor.com Leading Technology, Science, Agriculture News and information	Part of the Identityscape.com network... getxfactor.com jmoodmusic.com smartbusinesschoices.com mintdepot.com lowfaresalways.com evangelicalview.com shoppingpodder.com soproudlywehail.com webnews.ws currenthumor.com

Science and Technology news... Forum Index -> Astrology - Amateur Forum	Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7 Next
Page 1 of 7