Big Bang in Trouble

dad · May 24, 2020

Evangelicalhumanist said:
Well, yes, adding to "something unknown" does seem to be attractive to you -- although the mathematician might point out that if you don't know what you started with, no matter how much you know about what you added, you still don't know what you've got. And hunches won't help.

Great, so when you know, get back to us.

Revoltingest · May 24, 2020

dad said:
We learn about creation. We do not predict how God creates.

This is a difference between religion & science.
The latter has predictions based upon theories.
They're tested in the material world, & either
disproven or verified as useful under the particular
test conditions. This is explanatory power.

An example.....
Metals work harden when undergoing strain.
Possible explanations....
1) God did it.
2) Crystal dislocations accumulate at grain boundaries & precipitates.

The first explanation isn't useful.
The 2nd gives insight into how to create stronger metals,
eg, researching new treatments & alloys.

TransmutingSoul · May 24, 2020

dad said:
Your tablet is where, in hiding?

I can't argue with people admitting ignorance.

The link is active. It is apparent you choose not to pursue the wisdom contained within.

Thus, You reply, was admitting, you are ignorant of what was offered.

Regards Tony

Twilight Hue · May 24, 2020

dad said:
Your statements of faith aside, you do not know anything of the sort.

You do not even know why light appears red shifted in deep space.

Of course, redshifting is the decrease of the wavelength of light as an object is further away, while Blue shifting is an increase of the wavelength of light for objects that are closer. You can consider it as the Doppler effect of visible light. You've pretty much proven the big bang just by that alone.

You probably don't even know that the cosmic microwave background is in fact the oldest light in the universe.

Thanks for sharing.

dad · May 25, 2020

Revoltingest said:
This is a difference between religion & science.
The latter has predictions based upon theories.

In origin sciences those theories are beliefs. The bible has predictions too. You do realize there were failed predictions in science? The bible predictions are 100% accurate.

They're tested in the material world, & either
disproven or verified as useful under the particular
test conditions. This is explanatory power.

Now you've drifted off into la la land. No prediction involving a same nature in the past exists that was verified.

An example.....
Metals work harden when undergoing strain.
Possible explanations....

That is actual science and deal with how things work now and are observed now.

dad · May 25, 2020

Tony Bristow-Stagg said:
The link is active. It is apparent you choose not to pursue the wisdom contained within.

Thus, You reply, was admitting, you are ignorant of what was offered.

Regards Tony

Then show us in your link where we find this tablet? Unless you do it is not I that was ignorant of what was 'offered'.

dad · May 25, 2020

Nowhere Man said:
Of course, redshifting is the decrease of the wavelength of light as an object is further away,

Prove that stars are getting further away without using redshift? I have no reason to assume that out in unknown deep space, there are factors that affect light that we do not know about.

"The observational consequences of this effect can be derived using the equations from general relativity that describe a homogeneous and isotropic universe.

To derive the redshift effect, use the geodesic equation for a light wave, which is

d s 2 = 0 = − c 2 d t 2 + a 2 d r 2 1 − k r 2 {\displaystyle ds^{2}=0=-c^{2}dt^{2}+{\frac {a^{2}dr^{2}}{1-kr^{2}}}}

7f5cf01702557114f8e9c8e08d612a1d8393293d

where

ds is the spacetime interval
dt is the time interval
dr is the spatial interval
c is the speed of light
a is the time-dependent cosmic scale factor
k is the curvature per unit area." Redshift - Wikipedia

Time is an integral part of what we use to determine what Redshift is all about. If time were changing, we could see wave lengths change! From the observation point of earth, it would not be known what caused the shift.

while Blue shifting is an increase of the wavelength of light for objects that are closer. You can consider it as the Doppler effect of visible light. You've pretty much proven the big bang just by that alone.

On earth and in this area, yes. Once again, we could use a different belief to interpret the observation in deep space!

You probably don't even know that the cosmic microwave background is in fact the oldest light in the universe.

It isn't. Sorry you did not know that! Earth was here first! Your religious models are wrong and are NOT science at all in any real sense.

I kid you not.

IndigoChild5559 · May 25, 2020

dad said:
Is the Big Bang in crisis?
Stubborn problems with dark matter, dark energy, and cosmic expansion have some astronomers rethinking what we know about the early universe.

"...cosmologists have struggled — if not outright failed — to understand essential facets of the universe. We know almost nothing about dark matter and dark energy, which together make up more than 95 percent of the total energy in existence today. We don’t understand how the universe’s protons, electrons, and neutrons could have survived the aftereffects of the Big Bang. In fact, everything we know about the laws of physics tells us that these particles should have been destroyed by antimatter long ago. And in order to make sense of the universe as we observe it, cosmologists have been forced to conclude that space, during its earliest moments, must have undergone a brief and spectacular period of hyperfast expansion — an event known as cosmic inflation. Yet we know next to nothing about this key era of cosmic history."

.."scientists generally assume that space expanded steadily during the first fraction of a second, without any unexpected events or transitions. It is entirely plausible that this simply was not the case."

"they know relatively little about the first seconds that followed the Big Bang — and next to nothing about the first trillionth of a second. When it comes to how our universe may have evolved, or to the events that may have taken place during these earliest moments, we have essentially no direct observations on which to rely."

Is the Big Bang in crisis?

Creation is a better explanation.

The Big Bang is NOT in trouble. Are there unanswered questions? Always. But that doesn't spell trouble. All the facts that we know of support the Big Bang.

viole · May 25, 2020

dad said:
The fact being discussed here is how they admit they know almost nothing!

True. Yet, they still outperform creationists

Ciao

- viole

TransmutingSoul · May 25, 2020

dad said:
Then show us in your link where we find this tablet? Unless you do it is not I that was ignorant of what was 'offered'.

The link in the post went right to the Tablet.

Here it is again - Tablet of the Universe

The opening passages tell us how God spread out the Spiritual foundation of life and that unfolding reflects how the material world also became a reality.

It contains a vast amount of information, telling us creation is very ancient and that there are more creations other than we can know. What we know about the extent of our reality is but one on many many more.

I see it will be a source of great wonder for science in the future.

The translation is only provisional and some aspects of it may change when our mind catches up to what it offers.

Regards Tony

dad · May 25, 2020

IndigoChild5559 said:
The Big Bang is NOT in trouble. Are there unanswered questions? Always. But that doesn't spell trouble. All the facts that we know of support the Big Bang.

So the article is wrong?

dad · May 25, 2020

viole said:
True. Yet, they still outperform creationists

Ciao

- viole

Once you admit knowing almost nothing, it really doesn't matter who you think you 'outperform'!

blü 2 · May 25, 2020

dad said:
Creation is a better explanation.

Thanks.

So tell me, how did creation work? What were the particular processes involved? What did each do, and how? How was it paid for? Were there cost overruns?

Was any planning procedure used or was it just an accident that maybe 20 septillions of stars formed and 10 bn years or more went by before life formed on a planet around one of them and well over 3 bn further years went by before H sap sap appeared?

That seems grotesquely inefficient. Was there an enquiry into the matter? If so, who was held responsible?

I'm genuinely interested in your explanations.

dad · May 25, 2020

blü 2 said:
Thanks.

So tell me, how did creation work? What were the particular processes involved? What did each do, and how? How was it paid for? Were there cost overruns?

God spoke, and all forces and laws and everything that exists fell into line and arranged itself accordingly.

Was any planning procedure used or was it just an accident

Planning. Like someone with a blueprint.

that maybe 20 septillions of stars formed and 10 bn years or more went by before life formed on a planet around one of them and well over 3 bn further years went by before H sap sap appeared?

No. Stars do not form as you claim and are nothing like you think.

I'm genuinely interested in your explanations.

As we are all genuinely interested in your spam.

Altfish · May 25, 2020

dad said:
Whether God created or not you are still left with your little 'I don't know'!

But "I don't know" is far bigger than "God did it" or other made up nonsense. I like things I don't know about, it makes me read up, explore, investigate - it is exciting.
Anyway, why is "I don't know" 'Little'? I don't know keeps scientists busy; We don't know if we can find a cure/vaccine for COVID19 - is that LITTLE?

dad said:
It is. That doesn't mean we know how God does it. Just that He did.

There you go again, making assertions without a shred of evidence.

dad said:
No matter how much they and you beg, it won't change anything about the ignorance they admit, and you try to ignore.

Pot calling the kettle black - me thinks

dad · May 25, 2020

Altfish said:
But "I don't know" is far bigger than "God did it" or other made up nonsense.

No offence, but I am not interested in how wonderful or important or 'big' you think not knowing is!

I like things I don't know about, it makes me read up, explore, investigate - it is exciting.

Guess you are real excited about science then.

Anyway, why is "I don't know" 'Little'? I don't know keeps scientists busy; We don't know if we can find a cure/vaccine for COVID19 - is that LITTLE?

I don't know who unleashed the virus on mankind, and if they had the vaccine before doing so. But I do think it is great that science strives to find cures for whatever is out there. NOTHING to do with what they admit not knowing about the BB though. Focus.

There you go again, making assertions without a shred of evidence.

Pot calling the kettle black - me thinks

It is not me that begs or mentioned begging. Focus.

viole · May 25, 2020

dad said:
Once you admit knowing almost nothing, it really doesn't matter who you think you 'outperform'!

well, I would still outperform the ones who know absolutely nothing. "Almost nothing" is vastly preferable to "absolutely nothing". Don't you think so?

Ciao

- viole

exchemist · May 25, 2020

dad said:
No one in your cult, maybe. I am not concerned with what they suggest, or believe. I already know.

In other words they have no clue, we got that. Of course, they feel one day they might. That and a few dollars may get you a doughnut.

I did not post the article for insight, only for the admission that they are ignorant!
Thanks for the prophesy.

I realise insight is not your strong suit.

But perhaps other readers may find my summary saves them the trouble of wading through the article for themselves.

ChristineM · May 25, 2020

dad said:
Try not to misrepresent the article in the OP. It does point out how little they know about the key tenet of the BB.
If you claim they are wrong and you know a whole bunch about the imaginary fraction of a second inflation, then post it. I think we all know you have nothing.

You made a statement of time elapsed, it was wrong, i pointed out the actual time which you mocked.

You made the statement, you misrepresented the article, dont push the responsibility for your gross errors onto others

blü 2 · May 25, 2020

dad said:
God spoke, and all forces and laws and everything that exists fell into line and arranged itself accordingly.

That's terrific!

How does it work, exactly? What are the processes involved?

dad said:
No. Stars do not form as you claim and are nothing like you think.

I assure you my views are mainstream orthodox. On the basis of what evidence do you disagree?

dad said:
As we are all genuinely interested in your spam.

It's your chosen conclusion to the OP, where you said it was a better 'explanation'. So I'm simply seeking your clarification as to what, exactly, it explains.

Big Bang in Trouble

Undefeated

Pragmatic Libertarian

Veteran Member

Twilight, not bright nor dark, good nor bad.

Undefeated

Undefeated

Undefeated

Loving God and my neighbor as myself.

Ontological Naturalist

Veteran Member

Undefeated

Undefeated

Veteran Member

Undefeated

Veteran Member

Undefeated

Ontological Naturalist

Veteran Member

"Be strong", I whispered to my coffee.

Veteran Member