Big Bang Theory

braincell · Post by **braincell** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 11:38 am

Fascinating documentary about the origin of the universe:

http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid ... &plindex=2

BingoTheClowno · Post by **BingoTheClowno** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 5:38 pm

That's very cool!

Speaking about atoms, neutrons and quarks, did you know that the atoms that make you and me and everybody are maybe as old as the age of the Earth (4-5 billion years)? The atoms are not destroyed unless they undergo fission or fusion which doesn't happen naturaly on Earth (I think). So when we are born, the atoms in the new cells generated by cell division are not new, but old atoms processed from the ingested food.

Another interesting perspective, have you noticed that everything in this Universe, from the smallest atomic structure to planetary systems to galaxies, spins?

It seems also that the prefered shape in the Universe is the sphere.

Neutron · Post by **Neutron** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 6:18 pm

what if the universe isnt expanding at all, and light just slows down over great distance, causing the red shift on which the entire theory is based.

Post by **garyb** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 6:22 pm

BingoTheClowno · Post by **BingoTheClowno** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:04 pm

Neutron wrote:what if the universe isnt expanding at all, and light just slows down over great distance, causing the red shift on which the entire theory is based.

Then the wave-nature of light would not be true.

Light, or visible light, is electromagnetic radiation of a wavelength that is visible to the human eye (about 400–700 nm). In a scientific context, the word light is sometimes used to refer to the entire electromagnetic spectrum.[1] Light is composed of an elementary particle called a photon.

braincell · Post by **braincell** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:15 pm

The fact that the solar system is rotating in the galaxy means that the stars are not in the same place as the previous year which throws a wrench in the whole theory of astrology.

It's hilarious to me that we celebrate birthdays every year. There was only one day you were born on and that day will never come again. To be more accurate it could be called the anniversary or your birth day.

BingoTheClowno · Post by **BingoTheClowno** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 7:24 pm

Me$$iah · Post by **Me$$iah** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:04 pm

Im not sure if our whole picture of the universe is wrong.

Ive been looking into the theories of Velikovsky lately, and it makes for some interesting reading.
Maybe its the effects of EM that makes things in the universe spin.

Also it seems as tho Jimmy's favorite holiday spot, Lake Tahoe, has produced a genius surfer.
This dude has 'stunned the scientific community' with the long sought after theory of everything

I love sciencey stuff me

Neutron · Post by **Neutron** » Fri Jan 25, 2008 8:43 pm

BingoTheClowno wrote:

Ill have some clouds and icicles for the enemy villags plz
oh you have tornadoes on special? ill have 4

Post by **garyb** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:36 am

hermaphroditic illustrations....

Zer · Post by **Zer** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 4:03 am

BingoTheClowno · Post by **BingoTheClowno** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 6:54 am

stardust wrote:try this and get beyond these nice pictures od big bang whic was none.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Loop_quantum_gravity

I understand that the Big Bang theory contradicts your own core beliefs, however you cannot deny the fact that this theory is widely accepted. As reconciliation, I must say that it is very mysterious why the primordial ball of elementary particles existed after all..

BingoTheClowno · Post by **BingoTheClowno** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 7:03 am

Me$$iah wrote:Maybe its the effects of EM that makes things in the universe spin.

Why objects spin at large scales is very simple: because of the curvature of space-time.

BingoTheClowno · Post by **BingoTheClowno** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 7:29 am

braincell wrote:The fact that the solar system is rotating in the galaxy means that the stars are not in the same place as the previous year which throws a wrench in the whole theory of astrology.

Does anyone you know believe in astrology?

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:02 am

well, 'believe' is the wrong description, but I consider astrology as serious as (say) quantum physics

cheers, Tom
(really, not kidding...)

Neutron · Post by **Neutron** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 9:09 am

they have actually made stuff work with quantum physics, astrology, not so much

Post by **garyb** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 1:15 pm

such knowing!

astroman · Post by **astroman** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 5:35 pm

Neutron wrote:they have actually made stuff work with quantum physics, ...

of course they did - that's why I called it 'serious'

...astrology, not so much

yes, but then how could you ? for what purpose anyway ?
we're in the middle between the two
quantum physics is on a level smaller than our own 'dimension' and deals with matter accordingly
astrology is on a scale pointing outward from us and describes a general context that has an influence on us - in cyclic periods.

scientists are often restricted to a simple direct-dependency based thinking
so their (usual) arguing against the astrological symbol of (say) Mars as defining 'war' is that the gravity from this planet is so small and undefined on earth that it can never have any influence on political decisions...
and they are correct - there's not even the slightest bit of it

what they overlook is that these things circling around us represent a kind of complex cosmic clock describing conditions and events beyond our direct influence.
There is stuff beyond physics I have experienced myself - and I swear I have not been on drugs when those events happened

I have enjoyed a few 10k pages of strictly scientific literature in my life, starting at age 12 - so I guess I know pretty well what I'm writing about...

I don't call science a nonsense, it's good for many things and much of it is really fascinating - but it's only a part of the whole picture.
Dunno how big (or important) this part is, but any scientist who does not consider his or her incomplete view, is not only a failure on the job, but also a boring moroon imho

cheers, Tom

braincell · Post by **braincell** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 6:37 pm

I think most would say it is incomplete but that doesn't mean that mythology is the answer.

Post by **garyb** » Sat Jan 26, 2008 6:51 pm

what do you call "the big bang"?

even though some event seems to have taken place, it's not directly observable or knowable, and "big bang" is a simplified description, not the actual reality of the event. "big bang" is a metaphor, which is what a myth is....