| THEORIES WITH PROBLEMS - THE BIG BANG THEORY -> Big Bang! | Start A New Topic | Reply |
| Post Info | TOPIC: Big Bang! |
| Posted By: Carl Rofe Posted On: Dec 21, 2002 Views: 2057 | Big Bang! For those of you who can't see it, or just can't be bothered seeing it, the universe has a minimum energy level (this goes far beyond einstein and the big bang theory)! This idea goes straight to the CRUNCH of the idea and punches its lights out! This idea (very convincing theory) stems from the fact that electrons cannot collapse in atoms, because there exists a minimum amount of energy one can have in its orbital for the atom to exist at all! If the electron has a minimum energy level, then the multiverse MUST also, therefore there was no such thing as the big bang, and there will not be a big crunch! These ideas, I should add, are very basic LOGIC ones! When I say multiverse, I don't mean more than one universe, because there can only be one! That concept is far beyond most peoples understandings! |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Dec 22, 2002 Views: 2052 | RE: Big Bang! Hi Carl, I find your comments very confusing. You say: "When I say multiverse, I don't mean more than one universe, because there can only be one!" Maybe its because of your immense brain power - as per your other comment - but that to me is gibberish. How can a 'multiverse' be the only universe? You do know what 'multi' means I take it? You say the universe has 'a minimum energy level'. As far as Einstein, and every other serious physicist is aware, the universe has only one 'energy level' which is the energy it started out with. You finish with 'That concept is far beyond most peoples understandings!' Has it never once occurred to you that perhaps just maybe you are over-rating your own 'immense brain power' - just a tad? Keith |
| Posted By: Carl Rofe Posted On: Jan 1, 2003 Views: 2043 | RE: Big Bang! Keith, carl here! Immense brain power: I'm not trying to over rate myself, it just seems that way! When i talk to most people, about the universe, they talk about what's likely, and not always what's logical! When I say multiverse is a universe...i mean the universe is the sum of all multiverses! Okay, so I could have been a little less wordy, i admit that. I am not trying to promote myself, just the idea. To me, concepts like the big bang, don't fit. They don't fit simply because when I applied the idea that's it's just energy, energy can't be created, etc, etc. That's where my problem with modern theories party stems from! Problem; Ask anyone how they physically define them selves, as MULTI-DIMENSIONAL energy, and the mind goes num! I mean, I know our limitations, but in general, that should be a simple one! I know about black holes, quantum fluctuation zero-point energy, and all that stuff, and even have question to task, but somethings, in theories, they just don't fit. I had the thought of defining all energy in terms of fields, but relativity made the job that much harder! Anyway, I guess I have to agree to some extent with you. Sometimes things are just...well...self evident (which helps)! |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jan 2, 2003 Views: 2038 | RE: Big Bang! Carl, You say:- >>Problem; Ask anyone how they physically define them selves, as MULTI-DIMENSIONAL energy, and the mind goes num!<< You're making my mind go 'num'. Stop kidding on like you're smart, you're coming across as a bit of a prat. Go pester someone else. |
| Posted By: Carl Rofe Posted On: Jan 2, 2003 Views: 2035 | RE: Big Bang! I many ways, i wish i didn't come on this site on that day, and be a nusciance. If it had been another day, i could have got through a lot, but ignorant me! So i'll start with what i should have ASKED! Thoughts? Opinions? Appreciated! If you know the conceptual solution, GREATLY appreciated! That's one less headache! About the big bang: Idea: Say you have a point, which is 0-dimensional. A point has no dimensions, therefore it does not exist as such, because nothing can exist in it!? It is a position, location (frame of reference if the like)! Now, using the analogy idea, think of this "point" as a 2 dimensional plane. This plane is static and it's energy is conserved, but, because it is a point, nothing exists yet, right!? Here's problem: Apply a "force" at right angles to the plane, and you get a potential difference. Think of the plane as the universe and the force as the energy it contains. The universe still doesn't change, but all the energy it is made up of is increasing!...i know this sounds twisted... If the dimensional potential difference (the energy) is increasing, in some way (some where) it must also be decreasing! This implies another existence of something to me! Another verse? another universe in the entire-verse? When you say uni-verse, you mean 1-verse it assume. When i say it, i mean entire-verse (1 is 100%). I tend to think about the entirety of things for this concept. Is there by any chance a common definition for this? Or have i missed something obvious? If I shouldn't be asking stuff like this here, let me know! |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jan 4, 2003 Views: 2030 | RE: RE: Big Bang! You are postulating a nonsense scenario and then questioning why it doesn't make sense. You cannot have a point of zero dimensions, then think of it as a two dimensional plane, and then say it doesn't exist! So yes, you have missed something, its called logic. |
| Posted By: Carl Rofe Posted On: Jan 5, 2003 Views: 2026 | RE: Big Bang! 0-dimensional plane not 2-d plane! Use the analogy because how can you apply a force at right-angles to a point! Nonsense!? Metaphorically replace the idea! Not saying it doesn't exist! Is it possible for us to contemplate the existence of "nothing"? "Nothing" is nothing right! No, "nothing" is "nothing"!? If you have 0-dimensions you have "nothing"! If "nothing" doesn't change, "nothing" is conserved!? "Nothing" is no energy!? "Nothing" is a "quantity" of no energy!? Therefore, "nothing" exists!? |
| Posted By: Carl Rofe Posted On: Jan 5, 2003 Views: 2022 | RE: Big Bang! Annoying aren't I! Well, bye, and best of luck with site! Good one! |
| Posted By: Bryon Severns Posted On: Jan 10, 2003 Views: 2012 | Big Bang(s)? Space may be infinite while the matter from the Big Bang is finite. If the Big Bang happed once then why not twice? If it happened here then perhaps there was a different one elsewhere. I think there are many finite explosions or "Big Bangs" and each one needs a name. What do we call ours? |
| Posted By: Carl Rofe Posted On: Jan 10, 2003 Views: 2009 | RE: Big Bang! Alllright. Bryon about your big bang comment. Nice thought. When you say "space may be infinite", i guess it is, but that's probably because we can't exist withtout it. Your argument supports a closed universe in some ways, by that i mean a finite but unknown amount of energy could exist, but this energy is transferred between "universes" in order to maintain the equilibrium. So another universe might be contracting to allow ours to expand (like wave motion). If there is more than just a few, then the wave effects (like those in a fish tank) become more evident. Like a naming part. Why else do you think this might be so? Any thoughts anyone? |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jan 30, 2003 Views: 1988 | RE: Big Bang! Hi Carl, Why do you say that Byron's view "supports a closed universe in some ways"? You say that space may be infinite because we can't exist without it. So you reckon space has to be infinite for our survival? And the reason for this is?( I take it that you don't mean we can't live without space? That would be just too dumb to mention) You talk about there being lots of 'universes'.I take it you mean lots of Big Bangs within the one Universe, as there can only be one universe by definition. You say that "energy is transferred between "universes" in order to maintain the equilibrium." We all know that energy cannot enter or leave the Universe, it is completely self-contained and permits of no 'exchanges'. Anyway, what 'equilibrium'? This is just something you have made up. You say that as our Universe expands others will have to contract. Why is that, why don't we contract when we collide with them? When the other universes contract, to make room for us - how nice of them - it has nothing to do with their mass and rate of expansion then, it's because they have been hit! This is all the harder to explain as your first comment said there was no Big Bang and there will be no big crunch. I have heard some daft ideas, but this one is in a class all of its own! |
| Posted By: Carl Rofe Posted On: Jan 30, 2003 Views: 1986 | RE: Big Bang! Keith, you keep going back to the big bang model. I don't support it! I don't like it! I use some of it's ideas, but i reject a lot of them. I don't care how much you believe in it, i don't! Until someone can logically explain how to get something out of nothing, to perfection, i won't! 3 spacial dimensions + time is simple. Try 7! The universe is all there is, so who's to say all we believe there is IS all there is!? Based on our current technological ability, which is puny! We don't event fully understand magnetism, let alone what's out there! We only believe it, so don't make the assumption it is! Unless you can prove it...beyond ALL doubt! Read Newton Graphic Science and then you'll be heading down my lane. I am NOT religious! If you want to make a new topic about god, i'll show you a great article that puts things in perspective a bit. |
| Posted By: Carl Rofe Posted On: Jan 30, 2003 Views: 1983 | RE: Big Bang! What i don't understand is how you can't understand that EVERYTHING is energy! That's bloody obvious! Dimensions included...ALL of it!!! On the assumption, as you say, that the universe exists. Existence IS energy!!! Non-existence is nothing! If not energy, then what the hell is it? And don't say, JUST dimensions! I say crap! Let me put it another way: what's a dimension? You cannot remove a shirt from the clothing it is made of! Does anyone READ quantum science?? That's revelant here. Why hasn't anyone brought it up yet? |
| Posted By: Keith Mayes Posted On: Jan 31, 2003 Views: 1981 | RE: Big Bang! So you don't believe in the Big Bang because you don't believe anything could come from nothing. Fair enough. How was your Universe created then if it did not come from nothing? If it came from something, what is it and where did that come from? If your Universe was not created by a Big Bang, then how was it created? Why is the Universe expanding if not from the Big Bang? How do you explain cosmic microwave background radiation without a Big Bang? It's all very well saying you don't like the Big Bang, but you will be unable to explain the observations that we have without it. Please feel free to explain, as so far all you have said is that the Big Bang is wrong,and you have made no attempt to explain your alternative theory. At least the Big Bang has a great deal of experimental and observatiopnal evidence to support it. Your colliding universes on the other hand are nothing more than something you just happened to think up, and of course has nothing whatsoever to support it except your own imagination. You say: "Non-existence is nothing! If not energy, then what the hell is it? And don't say, JUST dimensions! I say crap!" What is this all about please??? Please also explain what aspect exactly of quantum theory is relevant to your ideas? A word of advice Carl. Don't go throwing wild ideas around if you can't back them up, and don't think that by throwing in the odd remark about quantum cosmology, extra dimensions, and so on, that we will all think you are as super smart as you first claimed to be. Most of what you say is in fact total crap. Now prove me wrong. I note that you failed to answer a single point I raised in my previous message, you just reply you don't like the Big Bang. Try again, try giving some explanations. |
| Posted By: yicheng Posted On: Feb 26, 2003 Views: 1949 | multiverse? universe? r u sure? "there can only be one?" inflation theory (I heard popular science magazine call it "The Big Burp")says there is a progeny of bubble universes, and ours is just one. Inflation theory solves a load of questions nice and easily, and while it has no proof, it has no disproof either. I suppose your immense brainpower enables you to know it's wrong? |
| Pages [ 1 2 3 ] Next Page -> |