Let's not talk about the Big Bang

[Ben Dhyan]

And that is simply not what actually happens through scattering. In scattering, the light takes on the spectral properties of the material that it scatters from. This is one thing TLT either ignores or doesn't realize. it doesn't thermalize to the point of giving a Planck distribution to 1 part in 100,000, which is what we actually observe in the CMBR. It also doens't produce variations from that distribution that match what we actually see (the BB model does).

I keep an open mind until the facts have spoken. And they have in this case.

Don't speak too soon, there time enough for further research into TLT, certainly the BB from nothing is dead on the water.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

On the contrary, it would be exciting to see it fail. That would lead to new physics and new insights.


Think of the south pole. No 'more south' from there.


Exactly. it isn't 'childish'. It is a real possibility. And if you understood that, you might be able to actually understand what the BB theory is saying.

Once again, you dismiss what you don't understand because of your biases.

Ok, so if the universe never began, what would have existed?

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Prove it.

The only real mystery is that something exists as opposed to pure non-existence.

No, the only real mystery is if this existence were to cease existing, what would exist?

 

[Polymath257]

Don't speak too soon, there time enough for further research into TLT, certainly the BB from nothing is dead on the water.

Neither statement is true. TLT is dead. BB is still active and important to our current understanding.

Ok, so if the universe never began, what would have existed?

If the universe exists and never began, the universe would have existed for an infinite amount of time (or, potentially, time would be circular). if the universe did not exist, then there would be no existence.

No, the only real mystery is if this existence were to cease existing, what would exist?

If existence ceased to exist, then there would be no 'exist'.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Neither statement is true. TLT is dead. BB is still active and important to our current understanding.



If the universe exists and never began, the universe would have existed for an infinite amount of time (or, potentially, time would be circular). if the universe did not exist, then there would be no existence.



If existence ceased to exist, then there would be no 'exist'.

TLT is still alive too, research continues.

So there we have it, no existence means that there was nothing at all existing. You acknowledge that there was an absolute nothing from which the BB began.

 

[gnostic]

Because a beginning implies something from nothing, and that is impossible.

You keep repeating the same errors.

The Big Bang theory never proposed “something from nothing”.

You are not even thinking logically.

What the BB does say, that the universe was infinitely hot and “dense”.

Nothingness wouldn’t have density. And if there are density, then there should also be mass and volume.

So clearly, there was “something” there at the very beginning, at the Planck Epoch.

The question should be, what is that “something”?

No one yet, except that it is extremely hot and dense, and most likely plasma.

What is this plasma made of? No ones know.

Perhaps it’s EVERYTHING - BIG & LITTLE - in the universe that’s here, today, ALL mashed up in dense and hot primordial soup? Again, no ones really know.

I am fine with not knowing what it is, at this stage.

Now while the Cyclical Universe model & Multiverse model may be theoretical possible, neither of them are probable at this present time, because no one have yet been to test either one of them.

And since they are currently untestable, both are not scientific theories, therefore both are not science.

You seemed to forget that no concept are true, until they have been rigorously tested (as required in Scientific Method), the evidence & data don’t match or support the predictions.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You are trying to change the subject, if I can help you to see that the algebraic sum of the +A and -A = 0, then I will feel I have done something worthy with my time today. Humor me, is my equation correct?

No, I am not changing the subject. And you are dealing with conditions where your 5th grade equation do not apply.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You keep repeating the same errors.

The Big Bang theory never proposed “something from nothing”.

You are not even thinking logically.

What the BB does say, that the universe was infinitely hot and “dense”.

Nothingness wouldn’t have density. And if there are density, then there should also be mass and volume.

So clearly, there was “something” there at the very beginning, at the Planck Epoch.

The question should be, what is that “something”?

No one yet, except that it is extremely hot and dense, and most likely plasma.

What is this plasma made of? No ones know.

Perhaps it’s EVERYTHING - BIG & LITTLE - in the universe that’s here, today, ALL mashed up in dense and hot primordial soup? Again, no ones really know.

I am fine with not knowing what it is, at this stage.

Now while the Cyclical Universe model & Multiverse model may be theoretical possible, neither of them are probable at this present time, because no one have yet been to test either one of them.

And since they are currently untestable, both are not scientific theories, therefore both are not science.

You seemed to forget that no concept are true, until they have been rigorously tested (as required in Scientific Method), the evidence & data don’t match or support the predictions.

No fair! It is much easier to refute a strawman version of a concept rather than the actual concept. When one has no proper math or evidence one has to rely on strawman arguments.

 

[Subduction Zone]

You keep repeating the same errors.

The Big Bang theory never proposed “something from nothing”.

You are not even thinking logically.

What the BB does say, that the universe was infinitely hot and “dense”.

Nothingness wouldn’t have density. And if there are density, then there should also be mass and volume.

So clearly, there was “something” there at the very beginning, at the Planck Epoch.

The question should be, what is that “something”?

No one yet, except that it is extremely hot and dense, and most likely plasma.

What is this plasma made of? No ones know.

Perhaps it’s EVERYTHING - BIG & LITTLE - in the universe that’s here, today, ALL mashed up in dense and hot primordial soup? Again, no ones really know.

I am fine with not knowing what it is, at this stage.

Now while the Cyclical Universe model & Multiverse model may be theoretical possible, neither of them are probable at this present time, because no one have yet been to test either one of them.

And since they are currently untestable, both are not scientific theories, therefore both are not science.

You seemed to forget that no concept are true, until they have been rigorously tested (as required in Scientific Method), the evidence & data don’t match or support the predictions.

No fair! It is much easier to refute a strawman version of a concept rather than the actual concept. When one has no proper math or evidence one has to rely on strawman arguments.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

You keep repeating the same errors.

The Big Bang theory never proposed “something from nothing”.

You are not even thinking logically.

What the BB does say, that the universe was infinitely hot and “dense”.

Nothingness wouldn’t have density. And if there are density, then there should also be mass and volume.

So clearly, there was “something” there at the very beginning, at the Planck Epoch.

The question should be, what is that “something”?

No one yet, except that it is extremely hot and dense, and most likely plasma.

What is this plasma made of? No ones know.

Perhaps it’s EVERYTHING - BIG & LITTLE - in the universe that’s here, today, ALL mashed up in dense and hot primordial soup? Again, no ones really know.

I am fine with not knowing what it is, at this stage.

Now while the Cyclical Universe model & Multiverse model may be theoretical possible, neither of them are probable at this present time, because no one have yet been to test either one of them.

And since they are currently untestable, both are not scientific theories, therefore both are not science.

You seemed to forget that no concept are true, until they have been rigorously tested (as required in Scientific Method), the evidence & data don’t match or support the predictions.

Polymath does not agree, he states that if the universe did not exist, there would be no existence. So BBT means the universe came from nothing. My God, you have your own mind, please use it and not just follow trolls.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

No, I am not changing the subject. And you are dealing with conditions where your 5th grade equation do not apply.

It does not matter, Polymath has already answered the question, he says there would be no existence if the universe did not exist, therefore BBT has the universe coming into existence from nothing. Now is your mind able to accept the update to the erroneous belief you had.

 

[Subduction Zone]

It does not matter, Polymath has already answered the question, he says there would be no existence if the universe did not exist, therefore BBT has the universe coming into existence from nothing. Now is your mind able to accept the update to the erroneous belief you had.

He dd not say that the universe came into existence from nothing. You might want to reread what he wrote.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

He dd not say that the universe came into existence from nothing. You might want to reread what he wrote.

Logical deduction my good friend, let A = Universe. +A -A= 0. Polymath agrees that if the universe A, did not exist -A, then 0 nothing would exist. So now we have this algebraic expression 0 +A = A. Nothing (0) means no time, time only comes into existence with the BB universe +A.

 

[Subduction Zone]

Logical deduction my good friend, let A = Universe. +A -A= 0. Polymath agrees that if the universe A, did not exist -A, then 0 nothing would exist. So now we have this algebraic expression 0 +A = A. Nothing (0) means no time, time only comes into existence with the BB universe +A.

Logic is missing from your toolbox. When you claim that @Polymath257 agrees to something you need to quote and link. The odds are that you misunderstood what he said. I doubt he said that. We know the universe exists because we exist. But if the universe did not exist we would not exist That is not the same as saying that nothing would exist. Something else could still exist, but since we would not be there we would not know. That is all.

Your "logic" fails again.

 

[Jimmy]

I believe existence began around 1980. I believe it arose out of a certain boy's birth. Well he wasn't traditionally born. He appeared when he was around 5 years old. I believe when he dies some time probably before 2080 is when existence will end and go back to 1980ish repeating this infinite cycle. God needed an anchor, a mirror if you will and a way to end himself. Well you said you didn't want to talk about the BBT. How about the Big Boy Theory? Haha.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Logic is missing from your toolbox. When you claim that @Polymath257 agrees to something you need to quote and link. The odds are that you misunderstood what he said. I doubt he said that. We know the universe exists because we exist. But if the universe did not exist we would not exist That is not the same as saying that nothing would exist. Something else could still exist, but since we would not be there we would not know. That is all.

Your "logic" fails again.

Reference Polymath Post #1, 580
To my question, "if the universe did not exist, what would exist? ",
Polymath replies, "If existence ceased to exist, then there would be no 'exist".

So do you agree with Polymath that there was no existence before the BB, no time, no space, no anything.

Btw, isn't it about time you began to learn for yourself instead of relying on what others' believe for your belief.
.
So here is my next question, how does something come from nothing, time from no time, space from no space?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Reference Polymath Post #1, 580
To my question, "if the universe did not exist, what would exist? ",
Polymath replies, "If existence ceased to exist, then there would be no 'exist".

So do you agree with Polymath that there was no existence before the BB, no time, no space, no anything.

Btw, isn't it about time you began to learn for yourself instead of relying on what others' believe for your belief.
.
So here is my next question, how does something come from nothing, time from no time, space from no space?

Why didn't you quote it at the very least? Oh, I see, because it does not support your claim.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I believe existence began around 1980. I believe it arose out of a certain boy's birth. Well he wasn't traditionally born. He appeared when he was around 5 years old. I believe when he dies some time probably before 2080 is when existence will end and go back to 1980ish repeating this infinite cycle. God needed an anchor, a mirror if you will and a way to end himself. Well you sa id you didn't want to talk about the BBT. How about the Big Boy Theory? Haha.

BBT Big Boy Theory...

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Why didn't you quote it at the very least? Oh, I see, because it does not support your claim.

Ok, that should have been #1,584.

Ben Dhyan said:
No, the only real mystery is if this existence were to cease existing, what would exist?
Polymath replies, "If existence ceased to exist, then there would be no 'exist'"

And this is his post #1,580

Question, if the universe did not exist, what would exist?
Polymath replies, "The only real mystery is that something exists as opposed to pure non-existence.

So do you agree with Polymath that there was no existence before the BB, no time, no space, no anything.

Btw, isn't it about time you began to learn for yourself instead of relying on what others' believe for your belief.
.
So here is my next question, how does something come from nothing, time from no time, space from no space?

 

[Subduction Zone]

Ok, that should have been #1,584.

And this is his post #1,580

So do you agree with Polymath that there was no existence before the BB, no time, no space, no anything.

Btw, isn't it about time you began to learn for yourself instead of relying on what others' believe for your belief.
.
So here is my next question, how does something come from nothing, time from no time, space from no space?

So he did not say that you said that he did. He did not even imply it.

He did not say or imply anything about there even being a "before the Big Bang". And please, don't accuse others of not thinking for themselves when you cannot even begin to. You need some serious education in physics and you do not even understand the basics of science.