RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe

RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (Full Version)

All Forums >> [Community Discussions] >> Dungeon of Political and Religious Discussion

Message

mnottertail -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 8:16:59 AM)
well, the idea is fuckin itself, and drawin flies.

DomKen -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 9:50:48 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct I'm sorry, but the current explanation of the Big Bang forming the universe runs into a massive problem termed inflation. Essentially, the universe is larger than its age of some 12 billion years. It's bigger than 12 billion light years across. If the speed of light is a constant- well, then how did this happen? Yeah, I know, somebody starts saying that space has lots of extra dimensions or something, but the physical model of the big bang doesn't make intuitive sense. Furthermore- I know of no way of proving that there wasn't an organizer of the big bang- i.e. some agency shaping the whole thing. This organizer would have been destroyed during the big bang, thus religions which claim that the creator died to give his creation life have got at least a shred of a point. I'm a scientist- I know that no religion has got the explanation for where we came from right, but it doesn't mean that the concept is wrong. These days, I'm more agnostic than anything else- I can't prove or disprove the notion of a creator and I'm OK with that. Sam Inflation isn't really a problem, it's just difficult to grasp how it works. Consider the first second or so after the Big Bang begins. At the very biginning all mass/energy is a singularity. As expansion begins many particles are traveling at nearly C. Therefore after 1 second the universe is a little less than 2 light seconds across. With the conceptual "leading edge" of the universe being photons released at the beginning of the expansion the Universe is therefore roughly twice as big (in light years) as it is old (in years).

samboct -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 10:12:49 AM)
Hi Ken We have the same problem. Your description doesn't work either. If you look at the cosmic microwave background radiation- kind of the hot gas that warmed up everything before the stars formed- its measured in millions of light years (or more) although the universe was only a few minutes old. As far as I can tell, using Newtonian physics- the expansion of matter from the big bang into space had to occur at many thousands faster than the speed of light. Any of the descriptions I've read on inflation (along with some friends of mine) all leave us shaking our heads and figuring that with all the hand waving- with some feathers, these guys would fly- or at least generate enough breeze to spin a wind turbine. They seem to get into a discussion about space not really existing before the big bang or resort to additional dimensions- which still doesn't make sense to me. But hey, I'm only a chemist, I gave up on physics after protons electrons and neutrons- the elemental particle stuff just is way over my head. Cheers, Sam

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 11:16:43 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Termyn8or "If the speed of light is a constant- well, then how did this happen?" Easy one, as long as you discard the notion that nothing can travel faster than C. While C is a constant in a total vacuum, being subject to the Doppler effect disproves the notion hands down. Through spectography they can determine if a star is moving toward us due to the blue shift. The fact that there is a blue shift proves that the light is coming at us at greater than C. You have a profound misunderstanding of red shift/blue shift. It has nothing to do with a change in the speed of light, it is due to changes in the wavelength of the light. The sound from a siren moving toward you is always moving at the speed of sound ("in a vacuum"), it is its changing wavelength/frequency that changes its tone. Many also miss a nuance of C. What Einstein proved is that objects cannot be ACCELERATED to faster than the speed of light. There is nothing prohibiting something moving at faster than the speed of light if it is always moving at faster than the speed of light. Spooky action at a distance is easily explained if there is a particle that does just that.

DomKen -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 11:20:27 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct Hi Ken We have the same problem. Your description doesn't work either. If you look at the cosmic microwave background radiation- kind of the hot gas that warmed up everything before the stars formed- its measured in millions of light years (or more) although the universe was only a few minutes old. As far as I can tell, using Newtonian physics- the expansion of matter from the big bang into space had to occur at many thousands faster than the speed of light. Any of the descriptions I've read on inflation (along with some friends of mine) all leave us shaking our heads and figuring that with all the hand waving- with some feathers, these guys would fly- or at least generate enough breeze to spin a wind turbine. They seem to get into a discussion about space not really existing before the big bang or resort to additional dimensions- which still doesn't make sense to me. But hey, I'm only a chemist, I gave up on physics after protons electrons and neutrons- the elemental particle stuff just is way over my head. Cheers, Sam Well it isn't easy to visualize. As to space before the big bang, there wasn't any. In a very real sense space/time is defined by the presence of mass/energy. I did leave out a part of the explanation above as well (sorry was a little rushed). While all the stuff of the universe is physically moving the space the univers occupies is getting bigger as well. take 2 theoretical fixed points in space, over time the physical distance between them increases. The analogy of two points on the surface of a balloon being inflated is the usual visualization of the effect. So 2 particles may have both traveled x distance since the big bang and the total distance between them may be vastly more than 2x.

Rule -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 11:24:32 AM)
quote: ORIGINAL: Brain lies like if you blow yourself up you go to heaven and will be with 50 virgins. Christianity got rid of its martyrs when it was decided that anyone who commits suicide - i.e. a martyr - goes straight to hell.

mnottertail -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 11:31:49 AM)
Consider what is inside an empty glove. Nothing. It is empty. But look, that probably doesn't easily equate, if you figure quantum foam as one circumstance. But I believe in the eternal shaking of dice, that is...the matter collapses into a singularity which explodes, and expands forever (as we reckon) but at some point collapses again.......forever and ever amen. Randy Travis

samboct -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 11:51:28 AM)
"As to space before the big bang, there wasn't any. In a very real sense space/time is defined by the presence of mass/energy. " Why? Seems to me that there's empty space, and the big bang just diffuses matter into it. If space doesn't exist without matter, then isn't this rather similar to the aether proposed before Michaelson-Morley punctured that balloon. (And they were as surprised as anybody....) Ron- The physicist johnies have now said that space is expanding too fast for gravity to overcome it- so the universe will become an increasingly diffuse place over time. I must admit, I kinda liked the infinite big bang cycle.... Sam

DomKen -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 12:48:56 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct "As to space before the big bang, there wasn't any. In a very real sense space/time is defined by the presence of mass/energy. " Why? Seems to me that there's empty space, and the big bang just diffuses matter into it. If space doesn't exist without matter, then isn't this rather similar to the aether proposed before Michaelson-Morley punctured that balloon. (And they were as surprised as anybody....) Think about it some. how do we measure time and space? By the action of mass and energy. Where there is no mass/energy there is no space/time. Partially I think you misunderstand the central concept of the big bang. It was not an explosion of mass/energy into vaccum. In simple terms the Big Bang theory says, the Universe was once very small. Since then it has expanded.

NoNonsense123 -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 12:52:36 PM)
Well, if that dude in the wheelchair said it, it must be true....

heartcream -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 12:56:32 PM)
It is nice when folks find things that align with theri own pov's. It makes one feel validated and more sure of themselves. In the case of God though there is limitless pov's and some are more valid than others. Truth will out in the end so hang on to your hats folks, it aint over til the fat lady sings.

joether -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 1:15:36 PM)
So you guys are arguing over a book, you have not read yet, because it hasn't been released?

samboct -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 1:43:52 PM)
"Think about it some. how do we measure time and space? By the action of mass and energy. Where there is no mass/energy there is no space/time. " Sorry-don't buy it. This is if the tree falls in the forest and no one hears it- did it make a sound? argument. I know of no equations for the existence of vacuum that require either time or space. If we remove matter and energy from a region- does it cease to exist? Don't think so... As far as I'm concerned- this whole inflation aspect of the early universe just violates the speed of light, and nobody's come up with an explanation of how, so there's this nonsensical hand waving.... Cheers, Sam

hertz -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 2:04:05 PM)
In other news:: Famous scientist Whatshisface Hawking admits: 'I did it for the publicity.' 'Ever since I did my first book, loads of other other scientists have got in on the act, and no-one talks about me any more..' he continued. 'Please pay attention to me. I'm a genius'.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 2:11:06 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct "Think about it some. how do we measure time and space? By the action of mass and energy. Where there is no mass/energy there is no space/time. " Sorry-don't buy it. This is if the tree falls in the forest and no one hears it- did it make a sound? argument. I know of no equations for the existence of vacuum that require either time or space. If we remove matter and energy from a region- does it cease to exist? Don't think so... As far as I'm concerned- this whole inflation aspect of the early universe just violates the speed of light, and nobody's come up with an explanation of how, so there's this nonsensical hand waving.... Cheers, Sam Your problem is similar to the misunderstanding about traveling faster than the speed of light vs. accleration beyond the speed of light. Nothing in general relativity prevents traveling faster than the speed of light, only "propogation of information" faster than the speed of light. Inflation at faster than the speed of light doesnt violate anything, as long as expansion of matter and energy into the inflated universe is no faster than the speed of light. Of course, since information from the observable universe is constrained by the speed of light, the gap between that horizon and the actual limits of the universe can never be experimentally established. Propogation/conservation of information was of course the center of the Hawking black hole paradox, and he ultimately conceded he was wrong. Its also interesting to note that surveys of physicists dont even rank Hawking in the top 10 of theoretical physicists. Much like Susan Boyle his physical attributes engrandize his actual contributions.

mnottertail -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 2:44:27 PM)
Heres the ultimate thing, if it moves faster than the speed of light, it wont do us a fuckin bit of good, it does not exist in our universe as far as we are concerned, we will never discern its mechanism cuz we got nothing.... It is a sort of resultant logical consequence of heisenberg.

samboct -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 2:46:44 PM)
Wilbur The problem with what you propose is that it violates Newton's laws of momentum. Momentum is ALWAYS conserved and is calculated by mass x velocity. Let's say you've got a 100 kg blob traveling at 100 times c. Well, if this blob slows down to 0.1 C, it's got to increase in mass by 1000 times for its momentum to be conserved. I haven't seen anything that shows that the mass of the universe increased dramatically after the big bang. When you combine this with Einsteins most famous physics equation of all, i.e. E= mass x c(sqrd), if the mass of your 100kg lump has to change that much, the energy is going to change too. Last time I checked, energy can be neither created (well, after the big bang) or destroyed. I'm sorry, but there's a lot going on here that just doesn't make physical sense to me. Sam

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 2:47:16 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: sirsholly come on fellas.....the plans for the universe were drawn in Penne... Penne from heaven?

luckydawg -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 2:52:23 PM)
You are confusing the inflation of Space/Time with movement through Space/Time. They are not the same thing.

willbeurdaddy -> RE: Hawking: God Did Not Create Universe (9/3/2010 3:10:50 PM)
quote: ORIGINAL: samboct Wilbur The problem with what you propose is that it violates Newton's laws of momentum. Momentum is ALWAYS conserved and is calculated by mass x velocity. Let's say you've got a 100 kg blob traveling at 100 times c. Well, if this blob slows down to 0.1 C, it's got to increase in mass by 1000 times for its momentum to be conserved. I haven't seen anything that shows that the mass of the universe increased dramatically after the big bang. When you combine this with Einsteins most famous physics equation of all, i.e. E= mass x c(sqrd), if the mass of your 100kg lump has to change that much, the energy is going to change too. Last time I checked, energy can be neither created (well, after the big bang) or destroyed. I'm sorry, but there's a lot going on here that just doesn't make physical sense to me. Sam First, if youre thinking in a Newtonian framework you'll never get there. It just doesnt apply at quantum/cosmological distances. WRT "creation/destruction" of energy, again there is no problem, and you dont even need the "well, after the big bang" qualifier. Gravitation is negative energy, and the net sum of gravitational energy and positive energy is zero. (It is a requirement of conservation that the net sum of anything that is conserved is zero.) Creation of positive energy/matter doesnt violate conservation as long as there is a corresponding increase in gravity. Even in the physical world you can see where that would happen, since intuitively the more matter there is, the more gravitation there must be because of all of the additional gravitational interactions between the "new matter". While the emergence of a universe from nothing via the creation of matter/anti-matter pairs appears to be a violation of conservation, Heisenbergs Uncertainty Principle permits it in very small quantities. This was experimentally proven in the late 90s. However, it only takes a very small quantity..ie 1 particle anti particle pair to create a universe out of nothing. The unique thing about our universe is that conservation (or symmetry, which accounts for conservation laws) rules to begin with.

Page: << < prev 1 [2] 3 4 5 next > >>

Collarchat.com © 2024

Terms of Service

0.1640625