DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
Okay, I'm out, you've lost me. Your secular assumptions have blinded you beyond repair, I fear. Hopefully the day will come when you see the truth. I shall pray for that day for you.
-
Welcome to Religious Forums, a friendly forum to discuss all religions in a friendly surrounding.
Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to the following site features:- Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
- Our modern chat room. No add-ons or extensions required, just login and start chatting!
- Access to private conversations with other members.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!
Big Bang Theory Primer
- Thread starter sayak83
- Start date
Okay, I'm out, you've lost me. Your secular assumptions have blinded you beyond repair, I fear. Hopefully the day will come when you see the truth. I shall pray for that day for you.
The exact reason the church gave in condemning Galileo. Instead of looking to an ancient book, written by men, that may or may not contain the 'word of God', how about looking at the real word, which is supposedly His creation? For me, the second takes precedence any day.
You mean, my directly realized truths based on scientific evidence and Hindu meditative gnosis ?
I too will pray that you eventually come out of the grave error of blindly following an untrue religion based on claims of spiritually unenlightened men. It will assuredly happen to you, in this life or in one of the lives that follow. For you will surely wander from birth to death countless times till you rid yourself of your illusions.
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
The book never says anything about the sun orbiting the Earth, for your information. The Church was just wrong in thinking the Bible implied that.
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
And here I had thought that you had had an open mind after admitting that God could exist and that He could have created 10,000 years ago or even yesterday. Oh well, I guess I was just wrong to have thought that.
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
Enjoy your thread.
No, I don't have an open mind about that at all. Where did I say I did? That whom you think you worship does not exist, this I know as surely as I know how to breathe. I merely pointed out that idea to show how logically absurd it is. It's more absurd than claiming that a square circle can exist. That you don't see it merely shows to me how blinded you have become by the tangled weaves of false beliefs of your faith. You have my love and prayer.
I will enjoy the thread thank you. Hope to converse with you again.
DavidFirth
Well-Known Member
Then you're just like all secular scientists. Closed mind, not open to the possibility of deity. Considering that you can in no wise prove no deity exists with your mathematics, that is quite a stubborn position to take. Indeed, I am happy to make my exit from such bias.
But it does talk about the sun being fixed in the sky, being at rest, etc.
You are interpreting your ancient book just as the church was. Both are wrong because they ignore the *real* evidence from the universe around.
'And yet it moves'.
You are mistaken. I believe in Brahman, who appears to many as a deity and to others in a more impersonal form. It's the essential substratum of all existence and truth maker of all truths, transcending both matter and consciousness, but providing a basis for both, just as water form both the oceans and the ice that floats in it. What you have is a very imperfect and deeply broken conception of deity, based on belief from a flawed book where authentic experiences of Brahman have been deeply distorted by ignorance, egoism and delusions of men. That, to a lesser or greater extent is a problem with all human attempts at truth, whether in religion or philosophy or ethics or science. However, your blind idolization of this one imperfect book and what it says about Deity has led you to error, both in conceiving the nature of Deity and the nature of reality that is an expression of the same. Deity has one and only one Son, not Jesus whom you falsely idolize along with the book, but rather this immense Reality of innumerable worlds and universes and beings which is eternally co-existent and yet depended on the Deity and is non-different in essence with Brahman though not identical in forms and properties with Him(ice in the ocean again). Thus, careful analysis into the essence of Nature also provides a complementary but authentic image of Brahman, just like knowing the Son provides knowledge of the Father. Thus for me science is as sacred an enterprise as meditation or worship (both of which I do) and the truths of science (and math) provides me with authentic insights and meaningful relationships with Deity just like worship and meditation does. And I am not an exceptional Hindu in this either. The laboratory, the meditation seat and the temple are all equally sacred places for me. In fact this conflict between science and fundamentalist Abrahamic faith merely confirms the deeply flawed nature of these flavors of belief.
So, both science and religious praxis provides me with authentic knowledge of the true Deity. So, what do I lack? You will need to spend some effort in convincing me that I lack anything. On the other hand your lack is clearly evident isn't it? Swimming desperately against the tide of overwhelming evidence from nature that the book you believe is from God is completely wrong about the nature of the universe?
Brahman or the passage into Brahman vastness of the state of completeness,
the point of looking ahead to future existance,
or looking back to lost chances of future expectances.
Where is this Nirvana, in the land of confusing non-cognizant existance ?
~
Boy....it's nice to be this confused.
~
And the Sun does indeed move, inside the Cosmos,
but....does the Cosmos move ??
the point of looking ahead to future existance,
or looking back to lost chances of future expectances.
Where is this Nirvana, in the land of confusing non-cognizant existance ?
~
Boy....it's nice to be this confused.
~
And the Sun does indeed move, inside the Cosmos,
but....does the Cosmos move ??
Last edited by a moderator:
WalterTrull
Godfella
Ok. That's it! I'm out. No really, I'm out. Really, really, really. (Can't trust old people)
Jose Fly
Fisker of men
It's fascinating to see how Christian creationists have so easily slid into solipsism....
....while at the same time insisting that they are certain of their religious beliefs. Further, the reason they embrace solipsism is because of their belief that their God just might have magically altered reality in a way that's beyond our ability to detect, yet they simultaneously state....
Fascinating.
....while at the same time insisting that they are certain of their religious beliefs. Further, the reason they embrace solipsism is because of their belief that their God just might have magically altered reality in a way that's beyond our ability to detect, yet they simultaneously state....
Fascinating.
Summing things up
The last few posts had a lot of Mathematics in them. But, what is the bottom line?
1) The expansion of the universe is the expansion space itself and not the motion of matter away from each other through space. It's a bit like the pictures getting magnified below,
2) Because everything is getting zoomed together, it's very convenient to express cosmology in terms of the comoving coordinate that zooms out along with space. Thus while actual physical distance between galaxies increase with the zooming of space, in comoving coordinates, they are still in same coordinate location as shown below,
3) At the large scales involving thousands of galaxies, observation shows that the distribution of galaxies are approximately uniform. This makes it easier to calculate a first-pass analytical physical theory of the universe. The final expressions are:-
(Square of the Hubble Parameter giving the Rate of expansion at a given time)
= (Density of Matter and Radiation in the Universe at that time) - (Curvature of Space Divided by the Square of Length Scale of the Universe at that time) + Cosmological Constant of Einstein
4)Also using energy balance we get:-
(Rate of Change of Density of Matter and Radiation with time) /( Hubble Parameter) + (Pressure exerted by Matter and Radiation) + (Density of Matter and Radiation at that given time in the Universe ) = 0
5) We also saw that while matter and Radiation slows down the rate of expansion, the cosmological constant tends to speed it up. This explains the current acceleration of expansion rate that cosmologists have observed.
Next we shall look at how matter, radiation and cosmological constant individually affect the physics of the universe. For this we shall look at the energy balance equation for expansion given by point (4) above. In mathematical terminology we write this as (see Post)
Fluid equation
ρ' + 3*(a'/a)*(ρ + p) = 0
First we look at the solution of fluid equation for matter.
For matter the pressure is given by
p= ρ*u^2 where u is the characteristic thermal vibration velocity of the matter particle relative to the speed of light.
Now most matter particles have considerable mass and have relatively low energy such that their thermal vibrational speed is much much less than the speed of light. Hence u«1. Hence for matter p~0. This makes the fluid equation very easy to solve for matter.
If ρ° is the current matter density of the universe, the solution of the fluid equation for matter for a flat expanding universe with near zero curvature gives
ρ°/ρ = a^3
where a is the scale factor or zoom factor for the universe.
Then solving the Friedmann equation provides the change in the scale of the universe with time as,
a = (t/t°) ^(2/3)
where t° is the current time of the universe where the present length scale (or size scale) of the universe is taken to be a° = 1.
Thus for example at half the age of today, the size of the universe was
a = (0.5)^2/3 = 0.63 times the current size of the universe.
And the Hubble parameter is given by
H= a'/a = 2/(3t)
Thus the Hubble parameter continues to stay positive but decreases towards zero as age of the universe increases towards infinity.
However the above results are only for matter alone. We have to add the results from radiation as well as cosmological dark energy to get the complete picture of the behavior of the universe.
More of that in the next post.
The last few posts had a lot of Mathematics in them. But, what is the bottom line?
1) The expansion of the universe is the expansion space itself and not the motion of matter away from each other through space. It's a bit like the pictures getting magnified below,
2) Because everything is getting zoomed together, it's very convenient to express cosmology in terms of the comoving coordinate that zooms out along with space. Thus while actual physical distance between galaxies increase with the zooming of space, in comoving coordinates, they are still in same coordinate location as shown below,
3) At the large scales involving thousands of galaxies, observation shows that the distribution of galaxies are approximately uniform. This makes it easier to calculate a first-pass analytical physical theory of the universe. The final expressions are:-
(Square of the Hubble Parameter giving the Rate of expansion at a given time)
= (Density of Matter and Radiation in the Universe at that time) - (Curvature of Space Divided by the Square of Length Scale of the Universe at that time) + Cosmological Constant of Einstein
4)Also using energy balance we get:-
(Rate of Change of Density of Matter and Radiation with time) /( Hubble Parameter) + (Pressure exerted by Matter and Radiation) + (Density of Matter and Radiation at that given time in the Universe ) = 0
5) We also saw that while matter and Radiation slows down the rate of expansion, the cosmological constant tends to speed it up. This explains the current acceleration of expansion rate that cosmologists have observed.
Next we shall look at how matter, radiation and cosmological constant individually affect the physics of the universe. For this we shall look at the energy balance equation for expansion given by point (4) above. In mathematical terminology we write this as (see Post)
Fluid equation
ρ' + 3*(a'/a)*(ρ + p) = 0
First we look at the solution of fluid equation for matter.
For matter the pressure is given by
p= ρ*u^2 where u is the characteristic thermal vibration velocity of the matter particle relative to the speed of light.
Now most matter particles have considerable mass and have relatively low energy such that their thermal vibrational speed is much much less than the speed of light. Hence u«1. Hence for matter p~0. This makes the fluid equation very easy to solve for matter.
If ρ° is the current matter density of the universe, the solution of the fluid equation for matter for a flat expanding universe with near zero curvature gives
ρ°/ρ = a^3
where a is the scale factor or zoom factor for the universe.
Then solving the Friedmann equation provides the change in the scale of the universe with time as,
a = (t/t°) ^(2/3)
where t° is the current time of the universe where the present length scale (or size scale) of the universe is taken to be a° = 1.
Thus for example at half the age of today, the size of the universe was
a = (0.5)^2/3 = 0.63 times the current size of the universe.
And the Hubble parameter is given by
H= a'/a = 2/(3t)
Thus the Hubble parameter continues to stay positive but decreases towards zero as age of the universe increases towards infinity.
However the above results are only for matter alone. We have to add the results from radiation as well as cosmological dark energy to get the complete picture of the behavior of the universe.
More of that in the next post.
Continuing this thread after a long time.Summing things up
The last few posts had a lot of Mathematics in them. But, what is the bottom line?
1) The expansion of the universe is the expansion space itself and not the motion of matter away from each other through space. It's a bit like the pictures getting magnified below,
2) Because everything is getting zoomed together, it's very convenient to express cosmology in terms of the comoving coordinate that zooms out along with space. Thus while actual physical distance between galaxies increase with the zooming of space, in comoving coordinates, they are still in same coordinate location as shown below,
3) At the large scales involving thousands of galaxies, observation shows that the distribution of galaxies are approximately uniform. This makes it easier to calculate a first-pass analytical physical theory of the universe. The final expressions are:-
(Square of the Hubble Parameter giving the Rate of expansion at a given time)
= (Density of Matter and Radiation in the Universe at that time) - (Curvature of Space Divided by the Square of Length Scale of the Universe at that time) + Cosmological Constant of Einstein
4)Also using energy balance we get:-
(Rate of Change of Density of Matter and Radiation with time) /( Hubble Parameter) + (Pressure exerted by Matter and Radiation) + (Density of Matter and Radiation at that given time in the Universe ) = 0
5) We also saw that while matter and Radiation slows down the rate of expansion, the cosmological constant tends to speed it up. This explains the current acceleration of expansion rate that cosmologists have observed.
Next we shall look at how matter, radiation and cosmological constant individually affect the physics of the universe. For this we shall look at the energy balance equation for expansion given by point (4) above. In mathematical terminology we write this as (see Post)
Fluid equation
ρ' + 3*(a'/a)*(ρ + p) = 0
First we look at the solution of fluid equation for matter.
For matter the pressure is given by
p= ρ*u^2 where u is the characteristic thermal vibration velocity of the matter particle relative to the speed of light.
Now most matter particles have considerable mass and have relatively low energy such that their thermal vibrational speed is much much less than the speed of light. Hence u«1. Hence for matter p~0. This makes the fluid equation very easy to solve for matter.
If ρ° is the current matter density of the universe, the solution of the fluid equation for matter for a flat expanding universe with near zero curvature gives
ρ°/ρ = a^3
where a is the scale factor or zoom factor for the universe.
Then solving the Friedmann equation provides the change in the scale of the universe with time as,
a = (t/t°) ^(2/3)
where t° is the current time of the universe where the present length scale (or size scale) of the universe is taken to be a° = 1.
Thus for example at half the age of today, the size of the universe was
a = (0.5)^2/3 = 0.63 times the current size of the universe.
And the Hubble parameter is given by
H= a'/a = 2/(3t)
Thus the Hubble parameter continues to stay positive but decreases towards zero as age of the universe increases towards infinity.
However the above results are only for matter alone. We have to add the results from radiation as well as cosmological dark energy to get the complete picture of the behavior of the universe.
More of that in the next post.
Last time I looked at how matter density in the universe affects the fractional rate of stretching of space in the universe. This value is given by the Hubble parameter, H, and we got,
H= a'/a = 2/(3t)
Remember that a(t) is the magnification factor of space compared to today's value (which is taken as unity, see quoted post) and a' = d(a) /dt . Thus we see that matter slows down the rate of expansion of space with time.
Now I shall look at the effect of radiation density on the expansion of space. Unlike matter, radiation does exert pressure, and this is given by,
p = (ρ*c^2)/3 where ρ is the radiation density. In our new normalized units where speed of light c=1 we get p = ρ/3.
The fluid equation was derived earlier as,
ρ' + 3*(a'/a)*(ρ + p) = 0
Putting the value of pressure and solving we get the zoom factor as
a(t) = (t/t°) ^0.5
Hence for radiation the Hubble parameter is
H = a'/a = 1/(2t)
And the radiation density is related to the expansion factor as,
ρ = ρ°/a^4
Once again the rate of expansion is seen to decrease with time due to radiation energy density.
In an actual universe, both matter and Radiation will contribute. In such a case we can separate the universe into
a) Early hot period dominated by radiation energy.
So energy density is mostly radiation density in this hot universe. In this case, expansion factor and the radiation, matter densities change with time as below:-
a(t) ∝ t^0.5 and ρ_rad ∝ 1/t^2 , ρ_matter ∝ 1/t^1.5
b) Later colder universe where most of the energy density is in matter.
In this case,
a(t) ∝ t^(2/3) and ρ_rad ∝ 1/t^(8/3) , ρ_matter ∝ 1/t^2
Thus we see that the Friedmann equation and Fluid equation together enable us to calculate how the rate of expansion of the universe changes with time and how matter and Radiation density decreases with it.
In the next post, we shall look at the dark energy and its effect on the evolution of the universe.
Native
Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
The entire Big Bang idea is flawed and based on a huge amount of cosmological assumptions which again have caused strange ideas of "dark this and that". The modern cosmology should be reset back to a time where the calculations fits the motions in the Universe and not reverse where the Universe is skewed to fit rigorous calculations.
Actually the calculations do fit the motions of the universe.
Native
Free Natural Philosopher & Comparative Mythologist
For a start you can try to calculate why the stars in galaxies all have the same orbital velocity around the galactic center, known as "the anomalous galactic rotation curve".