If the Big Bang was Reproduction - Would the Universe be "Alive"?

[The Anointed]

There is no evidence one way or the other about that, and it is a different question from the one posed in the OP, as to whether the universe can be said to be "alive" or not.

The age of our present physical universe gives too little time for these theories of biogenesis to get the job done. The philosophical question that has not been answered in origin-of-life studies is this: How can a universe of mindless matter produce beings with intrinsic ends, self- replication capabilities, and “coded chemistry”? Here we are not dealing with biology, but an entirely different category of problems.”

Our ancient ancestors expressed the belief that our scientists of today are just beginning to come to terms with, and that is, that following each “Big Bang” there comes the “Big Crunch,” when this universe is condensed once again, into the supposedly infinitely dense, infinitely hot, infinitesimally small singularity from which it originated.

There is no way whatsoever that the boundless cosmos as it has evolved to today, did so in the short 14 billion years since the last BIG BANG.

Only when we come to the realisation that this generation of the universe, has evolved from a series of parental universal bodies that have preceded this one, will science begin to realise the time scale involved in the evolution of man from mindless matter, which was created from the eternal energy.

Another universe may have preceded ours, study finds. May 14th, 2006. Courtesy Penn State University and World Science staff.

Three physicists say they have done calculations suggesting that before the birth of our universe, which is expanding, there was an earlier universe that was shrinking. To arrive at their pre-existing universe finding, Ashtekar’s group used loop quantum gravity, a theory that seeks to reconcile General relativity with quantum physics.

These two seemingly fundamental theories are otherwise contradictory in some ways. Loop quantum gravity, which was pioneered at Ashtekar’s institute, proposes that spacetime has a discrete “atomic” structure, as opposed to being a continuous sheet, as Einstein, along with most us, assumed. In loop quantum gravity, space is thought of as woven from one-dimensional “threads.” The continuum picture remains mostly valid as an approximation. But near the Big Bang, this fabric is violently torn so that it’s discrete, or quantum, nature becomes important. One outcome of this is that gravity becomes repulsive instead of attractive, Ashetkar argued; the result is the Big Bounce.

Paul Steinhardt of Princeton University, a cosmologist who has explored some related concepts, wrote in an email that the new research “Supports, in a general way, the idea that the Big Bang need not be the beginning of space and time.” The universe “may have undergone one or more bangs in its past history,” he added. Steinhardt and colleagues have also proposed a bounce of sorts, but it’s different. It could turn out that the two scenarios are equivalent at some deep level, but that’s not known, he added. Steinhardt‘s scenario makes use of string theory, another attempt to reconcile General Relativity with quantum physics. Some versions of string theory portray our visible universe as a three -dimensional space embedded in an invisible space having more dimensions.

Our zone, called a braneworld [the word comes from its similarity to a sort of membrane] could periodically bounce into another, parallel braneworld. Such an event might look to us, stuck in a few dimensions as we are, as a Big Bang. “I don’t know if Ashetkar’s case translates into a bounce between braneworlds like we are describing,” Steinhardt wrote.

Just as the Big Bang theory has been evolving over the years and is continuing to evolve as new data becomes available, these big Crunch theories that are just beginning to emerge are still in their infancy.

Because three-dimensional time as we know it, does not exist prior to the Big Bang: from the return of the universe to the supposedly infinitely hot, infinitely dense and infinitesimally small singularity of origin to the next Big Bang when three dimensional space and time would begin, it would appear that no time had elapsed, thus [As I believe] the erroneous Big Bounce theory.

I would rather a theory which states that there are many galactic clusters [universes] out there within the eternal and boundless cosmos, each cluster=universe in its own position in Space-time, consisting of billions of Galaxies falling inward toward a Great Abyss, Black Hole, or Bottomless Pit, (The Great Gatherer) where it is torn to pieces Molecule by molecule, atom by atom, sub-atomic particle by sub-atomic particle, and reconverted into the electromagnetic energy from which they were created and accelerated along the dark worm hole to speeds far, far in excess of the speed of light, where that liquid like Electromagnetic energy is spewed out in the trillions of degrees, somewhere far beyond the visible horizon of the eternal and boundless cosmos, where, from the cooling quantum of that electromagnetic energy a new universe is created, or rather, the old universe is resurrected, to continue on in its eternal process of evolution.

 

[exchemist]

The age of our present physical universe gives too little time for these theories of biogenesis to get the job done. The philosophical question that has not been answered in origin-of-life studies is this: How can a universe of mindless matter produce beings with intrinsic ends, self- replication capabilities, and “coded chemistry”? Here we are not dealing with biology, but an entirely different category of problems.”

Our ancient ancestors expressed the belief that our scientists of today are just beginning to come to terms with, and that is, that following each “Big Bang” there comes the “Big Crunch,” when this universe is condensed once again, into the supposedly infinitely dense, infinitely hot, infinitesimally small singularity from which it originated.

There is no way whatsoever that the boundless cosmos as it has evolved to today, did so in the short 14 billion years since the last BIG BANG.

Only when we come to the realisation that this generation of the universe, has evolved from a series of parental universal bodies that have preceded this one, will science begin to realise the time scale involved in the evolution of man from mindless matter, which was created from the eternal energy.

Another universe may have preceded ours, study finds. May 14th, 2006. Courtesy Penn State University and World Science staff.

Three physicists say they have done calculations suggesting that before the birth of our universe, which is expanding, there was an earlier universe that was shrinking. To arrive at their pre-existing universe finding, Ashtekar’s group used loop quantum gravity, a theory that seeks to reconcile General relativity with quantum physics.

These two seemingly fundamental theories are otherwise contradictory in some ways. Loop quantum gravity, which was pioneered at Ashtekar’s institute, proposes that spacetime has a discrete “atomic” structure, as opposed to being a continuous sheet, as Einstein, along with most us, assumed. In loop quantum gravity, space is thought of as woven from one-dimensional “threads.” The continuum picture remains mostly valid as an approximation. But near the Big Bang, this fabric is violently torn so that it’s discrete, or quantum, nature becomes important. One outcome of this is that gravity becomes repulsive instead of attractive, Ashetkar argued; the result is the Big Bounce.

Paul Steinhardt of Princeton University, a cosmologist who has explored some related concepts, wrote in an email that the new research “Supports, in a general way, the idea that the Big Bang need not be the beginning of space and time.” The universe “may have undergone one or more bangs in its past history,” he added. Steinhardt and colleagues have also proposed a bounce of sorts, but it’s different. It could turn out that the two scenarios are equivalent at some deep level, but that’s not known, he added. Steinhardt‘s scenario makes use of string theory, another attempt to reconcile General Relativity with quantum physics. Some versions of string theory portray our visible universe as a three -dimensional space embedded in an invisible space having more dimensions.

Our zone, called a braneworld [the word comes from its similarity to a sort of membrane] could periodically bounce into another, parallel braneworld. Such an event might look to us, stuck in a few dimensions as we are, as a Big Bang. “I don’t know if Ashetkar’s case translates into a bounce between braneworlds like we are describing,” Steinhardt wrote.

Just as the Big Bang theory has been evolving over the years and is continuing to evolve as new data becomes available, these big Crunch theories that are just beginning to emerge are still in their infancy.

Because three-dimensional time as we know it, does not exist prior to the Big Bang: from the return of the universe to the supposedly infinitely hot, infinitely dense and infinitesimally small singularity of origin to the next Big Bang when three dimensional space and time would begin, it would appear that no time had elapsed, thus [As I believe] the erroneous Big Bounce theory.

I would rather a theory which states that there are many galactic clusters [universes] out there within the eternal and boundless cosmos, each cluster=universe in its own position in Space-time, consisting of billions of Galaxies falling inward toward a Great Abyss, Black Hole, or Bottomless Pit, (The Great Gatherer) where it is torn to pieces Molecule by molecule, atom by atom, sub-atomic particle by sub-atomic particle, and reconverted into the electromagnetic energy from which they were created and accelerated along the dark worm hole to speeds far, far in excess of the speed of light, where that liquid like Electromagnetic energy is spewed out in the trillions of degrees, somewhere far beyond the visible horizon of the eternal and boundless cosmos, where, from the cooling quantum of that electromagnetic energy a new universe is created, or rather, the old universe is resurrected, to continue on in its eternal process of evolution.

I suggest you cease trying to hijack this thread onto your pet unevidenced notions.

 

[ecco]

The universe is only so big and then its surrounded by nothingness or it's totally infinite but it repeats its self endlessly.

No.

 

[King Phenomenon]

The universe is only so big and then its surrounded by nothingness or it's totally infinite but it repeats its self endlessly.

You just repeated what I said

 

[lostwanderingsoul]

In natural life, males in science talk about clear cold gases, then seeing coat of many colours, colder gases burning in space. Earth however in bio life owns blue light cold cooled gases/sky.

Science said I will discuss owning coat of many colours. Replication/reproduction he says......the coat of many colours he says belongs to the male human adult life sacrificed. Before Jesus, they said his male life sacrificed, as an adult.

So he is born a little baby, genetics healed. Males quote I will place time 0 relative only to the story/his story, relative to that quote only. For time is not a counting, only humans place time and age upon any condition in science. No reproduction there either.

Gases burning owning coat of many colours his theme for the machine atmosphere.

2 atmospheric conditions, cold clear black spatial night time sky to see everything, not relative to Earth. Blue light cold sky, light due to cooling of burning gases to own light.

Coat of many colours does not belong to natural life, it is a story/theme that said how to sacrifice life.

When a male proves he is lying as a human is by coercive reasoning. He places a subject to tell...without owning anything personally other than a bio life, as a sperm ovary baby inheritance. He can talk first 2 human parents, yet in relativity, his reproduction they are deceased....so all adult humans know by this reproduction ownership they will die. However they claim spatial relevance to always having existing owning no time reference, either for a beginning or an end....in relative thinking conditions.

Science proves that it is a coercive liar, by placing male life thinker human ownership to states that he is only thinking about....but said Joseph was the Father of Jesus, said coat of many colours and sacrificed life.....which is due to machine conditions that manipulated gases for being separated colours.

So if a male today wants to give natural light to his machine, we would no longer own blue light sky it would be machine inheritance only....clear cold gases, with burning lights of gases. No life, no natural atmosphere.

Ask how you would achieve that situation, would be to big bang blast our gases into burning out the cooling function. What bodies in space do not own, water ground mass and water ground evaporation to cool burning gases as compared to copying out of space gases.

Please give up the meaningless double talk.

 

[The Anointed]

I suggest you cease trying to hijack this thread onto your pet unevidenced notions.

Cosmological theories are formulated by scientists, and theories by definition, are the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and opinions of those scientists, who are prone to change their minds, leaving those who believed by faith alone, the original theory of those particular scientists, standing out on a shaky limb.

There are as many, if not more scientific theories as to the origin of our universe, as there are differing religious bodies, such as Christianity, Hindu, Abrahamic, Muslim, etc.

Here is but one of many theories as to the creation of our three-dimensional universe. This one is by Niayesh Afshordi, an astrophysicist with Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Canada, who proposes that our three-dimensional universe floats as a membrane in a “bulk universe” that has four dimensions and that the “Bulk Universe” has four dimensional stars, which go through the same life cycles as our three-dimensional stars.

The most massive ones explode as supernovae, and their central core collapses into a black hole, like in our universe---only in four-dimension. The four-dimensional black hole has its own four dimensional “Event Horizon,” the boundary between the inside and the outside of a black hole.

In a three-dimensional universe, the event horizon appears to be two dimensional. In a four-dimensional universe, it appears to be three dimensional. The four-dimensional black hole, then blows apart, with the leftover material forming a three-dimensional membrane surrounding a three dimensional event horizon, which expands---and is essentially our universe.

So, according to the theory proposed by Niayesh Afshordi, our universe is the vomited-up guts of a fourth dimensional black hole. The expansion of the event horizon explains our universe's expansion; the fact that its creation stems from another 4D universe explains the weird temperature uniformity.

The supposed Big Bang started the Universe as a hot murky soup of extremely energetic photons, which are the quantum of electromagnetic energy that was spewed out in the trillions upon trillions of degrees. Those photons are generally regarded as discrete elementary particles and are also called wave particles, but they are not particles at all, having zero mass and no electric charge, and yet carrying angular and linear momentum.

As this infinitely hot energy spread out, it cooled. One would expect, that those wave particles which are the quantum of the liquid like electromagnetic energy, would have continued to expand further and further away from each other in the expansion of the universal building material. But with the angular momentum of those waves, they collided with each other in nuclear fusion in the creation of the first basic sub-atomic particles. As the universal temperature dropped to some billions of degrees, the dark energy which was the expansion’s acceleration force, began to form into dark matter, hydrogen and helium, with trace quantities of lithium, beryllium, and boron.

The Universe stayed dark, without any luminous sources, until gravity, condensed the mainly hydrogen, with helium, and the trace quantities of lithium, beryllium, and boron, into the first stars. All stars, including these first- generation stars, act as chemical factories, synthesizing almost all of the elements that make up the world around us.

And God said, “Let there be light.” Which was not the light from the sun of this minor solar system within our Milky Way galaxy, which solar system would not be created for some nine billion years after the creation of those first massive stars that lit up the darkness of the bottomless pit, in which massive nuclear reactors the heavier elements were created.

When the original stars exploded as supernovae, and collapsed into a black hole, they spewed out much of the elements that those massive nuclear reactors had created, seeding the surrounding galactic gas cloud.

Subsequent generations of stars that formed in the surrounding Gas cloud, which were created from those elements, incorporated the elements that were created within them, and steadily increased the chemical abundances of their surroundings, which was the evolving Galaxy, that was anchored in space by the central Black Hole, around which, THE GALACTIC NEBULA had begun to revolve.

In 1935, Einstein and physicist Nathan Rosen used the theory of general relativity to elaborate on the idea of black holes and worm holes, proposing the existence of "bridges" through space-time. These bridges connect two different points in space-time, theoretically creating a shortcut that could reduce travel time and distance; Billions of light years to mere kilo-metres.

According to general relativity, the gravitational collapse of a sufficiently compact mass forms a singular Schwarzschild black hole. In the Einstein–Cartan–Sciama–Kibble theory of gravity, however, it forms a regular Einstein–Rosen bridge.

The gravitational collapse of a single star such as the minor star of our solar system, can only form a White Dwarf, Our sun will eventually burn up all its lighter elements and move on to the heavier material and blow out as a Red Giant, when this happens, it will expand outward and get so large that the orbit of the earth will actually be inside the sun, and the earth’s crust will be melted into an ocean of lava.

Eventually, there will be nothing there to burn and all that will be left of our sun will be a compact White dwarf of carbon and oxygen about the size of today’s earth, and a thimble full of material from the White Dwarf would weigh anything up to a ton.

A neutron star is what is left over when a very heavy star explodes. This explosion is called a Supernova, the gravitational collapse of those bigger stars, create a fast spinning body no bigger than the earth, which is so dense that even a thimble full of their material, would weigh anything up to about 100 million tons.

Atoms have a certain weight, but the weight is almost all in the nucleus. The nucleus inside an atom is so small that if you made a model of an atom that was the size of a large house, the nucleus would still only be the size of a grain of salt. An atom, apart from its nucleus, is almost all space.

In a neutron star, all of the atoms have been crushed together so tightly by the force of gravity that their nuclei are touching. If you can imagine the amount of space needed for a billion large houses to occupy, then reduce that to the space needed to house a billion grains of salt, which still weigh almost the same as the billion houses, then you have some idea as to what a neutron star is. But unlike a Black Hole neutron stars, which are also called Pulsars, do radiate beams of energy.

As previously stated, according to general relativity, the gravitational collapse of a sufficiently compact mass forms a regular Schwarzschild black hole, which is a non-rotating black hole as opposed to a rotating Kerr black hole. Nothing can escape from a black hole, not even light, the mass within a black hole warps the fabric of space, as the internal mass increases by the objects falling into and being devoured by that gravitational anomaly, it begins to form a funnel like tunnel in space.

Any object going into a black hole would be ripped apart by the intense gravitational force inside the black hole and reconverted to the photons from which it was originally created.

In 1963, New Zealand mathematician Roy Kerr, calculated an exact solution for Einstein’s field equations representing a Kerr black hole. The special feature of a Kerr black hole is that it rotates. So far as scientists know, all objects in the universe rotate, including stars, so when the star collapses into a black hole, it’s likely that it too will rotate.

In Kerr’s solution, it’s actually possible for the electromagnetic energy from which this universe and all herein was created, the quantum of that energy, being photons, to travel through the rotating black hole and could come out of the white hole at the other side.

A worm Hole could theoretically be used as a method of sending information or travelers through space, unfortunately, physical matter which includes humans journeying through the space tunnels would appear to be an impossibility as there are strong indications that material objects travelling through a worm hole is forbidden by the law of physics.

But now that it has been discovered that Physical matter is but an illusion, and all is, but the eternal energy, perhaps one day new technology may develop a way to teleport bodies of energy along light beams and reconstruct them to their original form, with no damage done: ‘Beam me up Scotty?’ (The great rapture.)

Wormholes may not only connect two separate regions within the universe, they could also connect two different universes.

 

[MonkeyFire]

No.

Do you think time, life, and space are all infinite? Accross the universe...

 

[Dan From Smithville]

Cosmological theories are formulated by scientists, and theories by definition, are the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and opinions of those scientists, who are prone to change their minds, leaving those who believed by faith alone, the original theory of those particular scientists, standing out on a shaky limb.

There are as many, if not more scientific theories as to the origin of our universe, as there are differing religious bodies, such as Christianity, Hindu, Abrahamic, Muslim, etc.

Here is but one of many theories as to the creation of our three-dimensional universe. This one is by Niayesh Afshordi, an astrophysicist with Perimeter Institute for Theoretical Physics in Canada, who proposes that our three-dimensional universe floats as a membrane in a “bulk universe” that has four dimensions and that the “Bulk Universe” has four dimensional stars, which go through the same life cycles as our three-dimensional stars.

The most massive ones explode as supernovae, and their central core collapses into a black hole, like in our universe---only in four-dimension. The four-dimensional black hole has its own four dimensional “Event Horizon,” the boundary between the inside and the outside of a black hole.

In a three-dimensional universe, the event horizon appears to be two dimensional. In a four-dimensional universe, it appears to be three dimensional. The four-dimensional black hole, then blows apart, with the leftover material forming a three-dimensional membrane surrounding a three dimensional event horizon, which expands---and is essentially our universe.

So, according to the theory proposed by Niayesh Afshordi, our universe is the vomited-up guts of a fourth dimensional black hole. The expansion of the event horizon explains our universe's expansion; the fact that its creation stems from another 4D universe explains the weird temperature uniformity.

The supposed Big Bang started the Universe as a hot murky soup of extremely energetic photons, which are the quantum of electromagnetic energy that was spewed out in the trillions upon trillions of degrees. Those photons are generally regarded as discrete elementary particles and are also called wave particles, but they are not particles at all, having zero mass and no electric charge, and yet carrying angular and linear momentum.

As this infinitely hot energy spread out, it cooled. One would expect, that those wave particles which are the quantum of the liquid like electromagnetic energy, would have continued to expand further and further away from each other in the expansion of the universal building material. But with the angular momentum of those waves, they collided with each other in nuclear fusion in the creation of the first basic sub-atomic particles. As the universal temperature dropped to some billions of degrees, the dark energy which was the expansion’s acceleration force, began to form into dark matter, hydrogen and helium, with trace quantities of lithium, beryllium, and boron.

The Universe stayed dark, without any luminous sources, until gravity, condensed the mainly hydrogen, with helium, and the trace quantities of lithium, beryllium, and boron, into the first stars. All stars, including these first- generation stars, act as chemical factories, synthesizing almost all of the elements that make up the world around us.

And God said, “Let there be light.” Which was not the light from the sun of this minor solar system within our Milky Way galaxy, which solar system would not be created for some nine billion years after the creation of those first massive stars that lit up the darkness of the bottomless pit, in which massive nuclear reactors the heavier elements were created.

When the original stars exploded as supernovae, and collapsed into a black hole, they spewed out much of the elements that those massive nuclear reactors had created, seeding the surrounding galactic gas cloud.

Subsequent generations of stars that formed in the surrounding Gas cloud, which were created from those elements, incorporated the elements that were created within them, and steadily increased the chemical abundances of their surroundings, which was the evolving Galaxy, that was anchored in space by the central Black Hole, around which, THE GALACTIC NEBULA had begun to revolve.

In 1935, Einstein and physicist Nathan Rosen used the theory of general relativity to elaborate on the idea of black holes and worm holes, proposing the existence of "bridges" through space-time. These bridges connect two different points in space-time, theoretically creating a shortcut that could reduce travel time and distance; Billions of light years to mere kilo-metres.

According to general relativity, the gravitational collapse of a sufficiently compact mass forms a singular Schwarzschild black hole. In the Einstein–Cartan–Sciama–Kibble theory of gravity, however, it forms a regular Einstein–Rosen bridge.

The gravitational collapse of a single star such as the minor star of our solar system, can only form a White Dwarf, Our sun will eventually burn up all its lighter elements and move on to the heavier material and blow out as a Red Giant, when this happens, it will expand outward and get so large that the orbit of the earth will actually be inside the sun, and the earth’s crust will be melted into an ocean of lava.

Eventually, there will be nothing there to burn and all that will be left of our sun will be a compact White dwarf of carbon and oxygen about the size of today’s earth, and a thimble full of material from the White Dwarf would weigh anything up to a ton.

A neutron star is what is left over when a very heavy star explodes. This explosion is called a Supernova, the gravitational collapse of those bigger stars, create a fast spinning body no bigger than the earth, which is so dense that even a thimble full of their material, would weigh anything up to about 100 million tons.

Atoms have a certain weight, but the weight is almost all in the nucleus. The nucleus inside an atom is so small that if you made a model of an atom that was the size of a large house, the nucleus would still only be the size of a grain of salt. An atom, apart from its nucleus, is almost all space.

In a neutron star, all of the atoms have been crushed together so tightly by the force of gravity that their nuclei are touching. If you can imagine the amount of space needed for a billion large houses to occupy, then reduce that to the space needed to house a billion grains of salt, which still weigh almost the same as the billion houses, then you have some idea as to what a neutron star is. But unlike a Black Hole neutron stars, which are also called Pulsars, do radiate beams of energy.

As previously stated, according to general relativity, the gravitational collapse of a sufficiently compact mass forms a regular Schwarzschild black hole, which is a non-rotating black hole as opposed to a rotating Kerr black hole. Nothing can escape from a black hole, not even light, the mass within a black hole warps the fabric of space, as the internal mass increases by the objects falling into and being devoured by that gravitational anomaly, it begins to form a funnel like tunnel in space.

Any object going into a black hole would be ripped apart by the intense gravitational force inside the black hole and reconverted to the photons from which it was originally created.

In 1963, New Zealand mathematician Roy Kerr, calculated an exact solution for Einstein’s field equations representing a Kerr black hole. The special feature of a Kerr black hole is that it rotates. So far as scientists know, all objects in the universe rotate, including stars, so when the star collapses into a black hole, it’s likely that it too will rotate.

In Kerr’s solution, it’s actually possible for the electromagnetic energy from which this universe and all herein was created, the quantum of that energy, being photons, to travel through the rotating black hole and could come out of the white hole at the other side.

A worm Hole could theoretically be used as a method of sending information or travelers through space, unfortunately, physical matter which includes humans journeying through the space tunnels would appear to be an impossibility as there are strong indications that material objects travelling through a worm hole is forbidden by the law of physics.

But now that it has been discovered that Physical matter is but an illusion, and all is, but the eternal energy, perhaps one day new technology may develop a way to teleport bodies of energy along light beams and reconstruct them to their original form, with no damage done: ‘Beam me up Scotty?’ (The great rapture.)

Wormholes may not only connect two separate regions within the universe, they could also connect two different universes.

Your first paragraph has previously been debunked. It is your opinion that is not based on any fact.

I didn't bother to read the rest.

 

[The Anointed]

Your first paragraph has previously been debunked. It is your opinion that is not based on any fact.

I didn't bother to read the rest.

So then, which of the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and scientific opinions, do you accept as being gospel truth?

 

[Dan From Smithville]

So then, which of the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and scientific opinions, do you accept as being gospel truth?

It is science. Not religion. But the point remains. Your claim regarding theories has been refuted. You just refuse to accept that and continue to spread your opinion as if it were fact.

 

[rational experiences]

Humans invented science for humans, living as a human, being a human, living on a stone planet first, the stone planet owning its released stone gases.

As the theme God/Bible. With a human as the story teller claiming I know it all, being the reason that life was attacked and sacrificed. A human experience.

Life today on Earth, groups trying to claim that the sacrificed life is the first life of all humans. Makes no common sense at all. To be rational.

So then you have scientists who are born from a very little cell an ovary that separates cells, grows cells and forms a human baby, that your conscious self human awareness explains how and why everything else exists. As big an egotist that you are, as a human. So other humans are notified of that incorrect human behaviour.

What religious purpose is, as a self aware teaching to self.

If you live on a stone planet, and its owned stone gases are atmospheric, what do you really know about out of space conditions, when science is only practiced by humans, living as humans on that stone planet, in a stone planet heavenly body?

In truthful human reality. As consciousness?

When science owns a theme and a formula to claim I know about space as compared to mass existing. Which factually only owns one researchable condition, to be a human, own a brain and a mind, and then see visions about conditions of research thinking conditions on Planet Earth.

The only space research that science as a human ever understood was how mountain mass ^ on a flooded Earth had been zero removed in a UFO o mass attack reaction, in relativity.

For you then realised a formula on how to pursue gaining a spatial hole yourself in Earth mass to move a conversion through, for the conversion to be stopped at a position for you to gain energy from. As a human living on Earth.

What your mind psyche is entrained to reason, which is only relative to stone and its mass and not anything else.

Why actually you are egotistical liars in human reality and always were, as we all know that human scientists in the past attacked and destroyed life on Earth, for archaeology owned that evidence. And yet still you all want to lie about it.

So when you preach that God changed and God a stone philosophy then attacked all life upon Earth, and humans are evil minded nasty individuals, who demonstrate that behaviour, then you would understand why religion was implemented....but you do not. Instead today you just preach how correct science is, for the sake of science and not for life continuance at all.

 

[The Anointed]

It is science. Not religion. But the point remains. Your claim regarding theories has been refuted. You just refuse to accept that and continue to spread your opinion as if it were fact.

When and only when, you can prove that your chosen scientific creation theory is 100% correct, and will never be disproven by new data that is to be, and will be discovered out there in the boundless cosmos, then you will have refuted the fact that Cosmological theories that are formulated by scientists, are the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and opinions of those scientists, who are prone to change their minds, as new data of the cosmos is revealed, leaving those who believed by faith alone, the original theory of those particular scientists, standing out on a shaky limb.

So, prove to us all, which of the many scientific theories, has ceased to be just a theory and can now be shown to be a 100% absolute fact.

 

[exchemist]

When and only when, you can prove that your chosen scientific creation theory is 100% correct, and will never be disproven by new data that is to be, and will be discovered out there in the boundless cosmos, then you will have refuted the fact that Cosmological theories that are formulated by scientists, are the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and opinions of those scientists, who are prone to change their minds, as new data of the cosmos is revealed, leaving those who believed by faith alone, the original theory of those particular scientists, standing out on a shaky limb.

So, prove to us all, which of the many scientific theories, has ceased to be just a theory and can now be shown to be a 100% absolute fact.

...thus demonstrating again that you have no understanding of what science is. But since you have not learnt by now, I don't think you ever will. Apparently it suits you to stay ignorant. My best guess is that it suits you, rhetorically, by leaving you free to make silly demands and crow about it when they are not met.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

When and only when, you can prove that your chosen scientific creation theory is 100% correct, and will never be disproven by new data that is to be, and will be discovered out there in the boundless cosmos, then you will have refuted the fact that Cosmological theories that are formulated by scientists, are the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and opinions of those scientists, who are prone to change their minds, as new data of the cosmos is revealed, leaving those who believed by faith alone, the original theory of those particular scientists, standing out on a shaky limb.

So, prove to us all, which of the many scientific theories, has ceased to be just a theory and can now be shown to be a 100% absolute fact.

When you can support your definition of a scientific theory, then come on back.

You haven't a clue what science is or what it says. When you think you have something to say about science, you should just let it go.

 

[ecco]

Do you think time, life, and space are all infinite? Accross the universe...

No.


Also...
I don't think the universe is "totally infinite".
I don't think the universe is "surrounded by nothingness"
I don't think the universe "repeats its self endlessly"


I do believe that our universe is not the only universe. As evidence, I would point to the fact that as far as we know there is not just one of anything.

 

[The Anointed]

When you can support your definition of a scientific theory, then come on back.

You haven't a clue what science is or what it says. When you think you have something to say about science, you should just let it go.

In your post #28, you said; "Your first paragraph has previously been debunked. It is your opinion that is not based on any fact.I didn't bother to read the rest.

My first paragraph read; "Cosmological theories are formulated by scientists, and theories by definition, are the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and opinions of those scientists, who are prone to change their minds, leaving those who believed by faith alone, the original theory of those particular scientists, standing out on a shaky limb.

By saying that my first paragraph has been debunked, you are in fact stating that all Cosmological theories, which are formulated by scientists, are not the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and opinions of those scientists, meaning that those 'THEORIES' must be factual.

You don't even have a clue as to what you have previously said, let alone anything else.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

In your post #28, you said; "Your first paragraph has previously been debunked. It is your opinion that is not based on any fact.I didn't bother to read the rest.

My first paragraph read; "Cosmological theories are formulated by scientists, and theories by definition, are the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and opinions of those scientists, who are prone to change their minds, leaving those who believed by faith alone, the original theory of those particular scientists, standing out on a shaky limb.

By saying that my first paragraph has been debunked, you are in fact stating that all Cosmological theories, which are formulated by scientists, are not the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and opinions of those scientists, meaning that those 'THEORIES' must be factual.

You don't even have a clue as to what you have previously said, let alone anything else.

Is there a point to this? I do not see any evidence that your definition of theory is anything more than just an opinion based on your ignorance of theories and science. This has been demonstrated about your claim previously. No attempt here to even try to justify your opinion. Just looks like you are going after me.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

In your post #28, you said; "Your first paragraph has previously been debunked. It is your opinion that is not based on any fact.I didn't bother to read the rest.

My first paragraph read; "Cosmological theories are formulated by scientists, and theories by definition, are the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and opinions of those scientists, who are prone to change their minds, leaving those who believed by faith alone, the original theory of those particular scientists, standing out on a shaky limb.

By saying that my first paragraph has been debunked, you are in fact stating that all Cosmological theories, which are formulated by scientists, are not the unproven hypothesis, suppositions, and opinions of those scientists, meaning that those 'THEORIES' must be factual.

You don't even have a clue as to what you have previously said, let alone anything else.

By debunking your claim, I am not saying what you claim. This underscores the fact of your own ignorance of science that I have already identified.

 

[Dan From Smithville]

I was just thinking about how the universe is "growing" and how, if I could go back to the moment of the big bang, and watch the entire universe animate itself in a time-lapsed fashion - I wonder if I could view the universe as "alive" and life being the universe itself.

Metaphorically, I think you could describe the universe as a living thing, but factually, it does not meet the criteria for life as we know it.

 

[MonkeyFire]

No.


Also...
I don't think the universe is "totally infinite".
I don't think the universe is "surrounded by nothingness"
I don't think the universe "repeats its self endlessly"


I do believe that our universe is not the only universe. As evidence, I would point to the fact that as far as we know there is not just one of anything.

Agree to dissagree.