Can religion reject this science ?

[james blunt]

Again, showing you don't know what the actual theory says. But how can you if you don't know the math?

The big bang states the Universe started from a hot dense state !

The hot dense state obviously occupied space .

I have my own math for creation and it involves micro bangs , here is a sneaky preview at part of my model , it looks much better in 3d but the free program won't let me do it in 3d .

micro bangs A / k and B / k

the creation of mass and the universe (A+B)/t * A/k + *B/k = 4/3 πr³ / t

I'm the real deal and I know what I'm talking about !

 

[shmogie]

Started? How can you start if there was not time before? Well, there was not even before before. Not to talk of previous. begin, was, instant
So your post contains at least 5 terms that make no sense in this context.

Ciao

- viole

I think you are being purposely obtuse. No matter.

Time is, in this context, just another thing that did not exist, then did.

The space time continuum did not exist, then did.

Nothing, then something.

 

[shmogie]

The big bang states the Universe started from a hot dense state !

The hot dense state obviously occupied space .

I have my own math for creation and it involves micro bangs , here is a sneaky preview at part of my model , it looks much better in 3d but the free program won't let me do it in 3d .

micro bangs A / k and B / k

the creation of mass and the universe (A+B)/t * A/k + *B/k = 4/3 πr³ / t

I'm the real deal and I know what I'm talking about !

As stated, you don't understand the theory.

You are in the universe, everything you refer to is or was in the universe.

The alleged singularity from which the big bang came was outside the universe, because the universe did not exist.

In retrograde, the math that clearly supports the BB breaks down about one Planck time from the bang., so the singularity is supposition.

Nevertheless, the universe and everything in it, everything, wasn't, then was

 

[Thief]

It's not only between everything , it is within everything and has no physicality . An object occupies a space but the space is still there and unaltered .

try telling that to the person that think matter 'flexes' the fabric of space

I kinda wish that analogy had never been spoken
it got started decades ago
by people who seem to be in the know

not realizing the @averageJOE might take the comparison literally

I might agree that space is empty
but to say material substance can exist without it?

now.....don't knee jerk

consider.....space that is NOT empty
completely full
completely uniform
perfect is every manner
altogether the same .....no matter how you describe it

BANG!

 

[viole]

I think you are being purposely obtuse. No matter.

Time is, in this context, just another thing that did not exist, then did.

The space time continuum did not exist, then did.

Nothing, then something.

Sorry, but you seem purposely obtuse, not me. But that is probably because you realized the absurdity of your position, but you do not want let it go. At least, i hope you realized that.

What sense does it make to say “time did not exist and then it did” ? “Did not when”? Just think about it for a moment.

Let me help you: there was no time during which time did not exist. You don’t need physics, simple logic suffices.

Consider the negation: there was a time in which time did not exist, and tell me if you can spot the absurdity.

So, since the negation is obviously self defeating, then there was indeed no time in which time did not exist. Ergo, time existed forever.

Next lesson: the block universe and eternalism, lol.

Ciao

- viole

 

[james blunt]

consider.....space that is NOT empty

Consider space is not empty now ! It was empty before the manifestation of matter .

However , there may still be empty space beyond our visual universe and our visual universes energy field may be expanding into this empty space as the field density increases .

 

[james blunt]

Space is immovable

Is there anyone left who doesn't understand the correct semantics still ?


A + B/ t creates a binary field and the very first field mass . This binary field mass then inverts all the space-time energy that pre-existed by the micro bangs . All this energy comes rushing in and the binary field expands isotropic in an instant . Mass particles then form within the interior of the field space .

Isn't it beautiful ?

Believe !

The interior field space field , I call the N-field, Higgs called it a Higgs field, Einstein called it space time, Dirac thought it like a sea, Newton an ether , Tesla an electrical Universe .

They were all thinking about the same thing, I ''see'' all their thoughts !

 

[Hotcakes78]

The Universe Inside and Out !


Introduction.

The Universe inside and out is a journey of discovery that considers past science and present science . A journey of discover that will advance present science thoughts and theory , opening up a whole new era of science in regards to physics and physical process .
The Universe inside and out makes reference to Dirac , Newton , Higg's , Tesla and Einstein , concluding an united field theory namely the N-field theory , an united field theory that explains the beginning of the visual universe , unites field matter ( spatial quantum fields ) and atomic matter ( Visible objects ) into an united manifold that is independent of space.
Additionally the Universe inside and out explains the gravity mechanism , the nature of light and the nature of time .


Chapter One - Absolute Newtonian Space .

For purposeful and meaningful discussion I feel it is of utmost importance that we all agree upon definition and semantics . Firstly I would like to draw our attention to the definition of space

1. A continuous area or expanse which is free, available, or unoccupied.

It is important we do not change the context of our definitions where semantics are important . People often generalise space as being contents included which is contradictory to our definition of space and not of fact .

In consideration of what is space ?

I propose that space is the single property of an infinite void , agreeing with Newton that space is absolute and immovable . In regards to space there is no evidence that suggests anything other than these provided seven postulates :

1) Space cannot be created or destroyed

2) Space is immovable

3) Space is timeless and has no mechanism to age or decay

4) Space is the unique property of a void

5) Space has no mechanism to be visibly light or visibly dark

6) Space is transparent

7) Space has no physicality

There's no reason or reasons why these postulates are not of axiom value and true to observation , it would be quite absurd and subjective to disagree with the postulates without providing proof of evidence to demonstrate falsity of the postulates . Objectively , the seven postulates hold true and are unarguable without evidence to the contrary !



(To be continued , comments thus far ? )

Last edited: 3 minutes ago

Guess the Irony of you using science to disprove science is lost on you

 

[shmogie]

Sorry, but you seem purposely obtuse, not me. But that is probably because you realized the absurdity of your position, but you do not want let it go. At least, i hope you realized that.

What sense does it make to say “time did not exist and then it did” ? “Did not when”? Just think about it for a moment.

Let me help you: there was no time during which time did not exist. You don’t need physics, simple logic suffices.

Consider the negation: there was a time in which time did not exist, and tell me if you can spot the absurdity.

So, since the negation is obviously self defeating, then there was indeed no time in which time did not exist. Ergo, time existed forever.

Next lesson: the block universe and eternalism, lol.

Ciao

- viole

Well, you apparently haven read any cosmologists or physicists on the issue. Do you have any idea what the space time continuum is ?

Time is the space between events, or as one cosmologists put it, time exists so everything doesn´t happen at once.

There was no universe, no events in the universe, no time.

Here two logic syllogisms you might understand, since you invoked logic

Nothing existed before the universe, time exists in the universe, therefore, time did not exist before the universe

Time exists between events, before the creation of the universe there were no events, therefore, time did not exist before the creation of the universe

 

[Polymath257]

Space is immovable

Wow, that was even more underwhelming than I expected. And that is saying something.

 

[poorAtlas]

The Universe Inside and Out !


Introduction.

The Universe inside and out is a journey of discovery that considers past science and present science . A journey of discover that will advance present science thoughts and theory , opening up a whole new era of science in regards to physics and physical process .
The Universe inside and out makes reference to Dirac , Newton , Higg's , Tesla and Einstein , concluding an united field theory namely the N-field theory , an united field theory that explains the beginning of the visual universe , unites field matter ( spatial quantum fields ) and atomic matter ( Visible objects ) into an united manifold that is independent of space.
Additionally the Universe inside and out explains the gravity mechanism , the nature of light and the nature of time .


Chapter One - Absolute Newtonian Space .

For purposeful and meaningful discussion I feel it is of utmost importance that we all agree upon definition and semantics . Firstly I would like to draw our attention to the definition of space

1. A continuous area or expanse which is free, available, or unoccupied.

It is important we do not change the context of our definitions where semantics are important . People often generalise space as being contents included which is contradictory to our definition of space and not of fact .

In consideration of what is space ?

I propose that space is the single property of an infinite void , agreeing with Newton that space is absolute and immovable . In regards to space there is no evidence that suggests anything other than these provided seven postulates :

1) Space cannot be created or destroyed

2) Space is immovable

3) Space is timeless and has no mechanism to age or decay

4) Space is the unique property of a void

5) Space has no mechanism to be visibly light or visibly dark

6) Space is transparent

7) Space has no physicality

There's no reason or reasons why these postulates are not of axiom value and true to observation , it would be quite absurd and subjective to disagree with the postulates without providing proof of evidence to demonstrate falsity of the postulates . Objectively , the seven postulates hold true and are unarguable without evidence to the contrary !



(To be continued , comments thus far ? )

Last edited: 3 minutes ago

Concluding that Reality and Divinity must therefore be one in the same.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

No , you see the space , if you didn't see space all things you see that illuminated by light would have no perceived distance between you and the object .

You see the space between objects like you see the space between the distant stars.

Seeing the object allows you to see the space .

Nope. You can be aware of the space as a matter of perspective, but you aren't "seeing" space. Just as you can't "hear" silence.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

The spiritual part about Gods Buddhas, Dao and the different teachings we today call religions

I'm unaware of science saying anything about them. Got a link to the relevant article?

 

[exchemist]

Nope. You can be aware of the space as a matter of perspective, but you aren't "seeing" space. Just as you can't "hear" silence.

Theorist can keep a dialogue like this going for weeks . You will get nowhere.

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

Theorist can keep a dialogue like this going for weeks . You will get nowhere.

Ah, but it's not dialogue, it's me simply explaining why he's wrong.

 

[FearGod]

Space is God in my objective opinion , that's why I am asking religion on science opinion .

Do you see any falsity in my post ?

How the void space created matter and how it's conscious?

 

[james blunt]

Nope. You can be aware of the space as a matter of perspective, but you aren't "seeing" space. Just as you can't "hear" silence.

How absurd , I see space , if you can't see space I suggest you open your eyes !

 

[james blunt]

How the void space created matter and how it's conscious?

The void space didn't create matter , matter manifested by a miracle of the void space . There is no other answer but that , it is a factual miracle . That is why the void space must be God because the void space is so special , it's magical , you can't destroy it , it doesn't age , it is everywhere , it is eternal .
As an amateur scientist , I respect the void space , it is brilliant , it is pure , it is everything that anything exists in . You couldn't design it ..

 

[exchemist]

Ah, but it's not dialogue, it's me simply explaining why he's wrong.

OK fair enough, posted for benefit of other readers only.

Just don't start correcting his algebra. Here's an example of what that can get one into: Algebra help . | Sciforums

 

[Kangaroo Feathers]

How absurd , I see space , if you can't see space I suggest you open your eyes !

You do not "see" space, as there is nothing to see. You can be aware of the absence, and the estimated void is present in your mental model, but you don't "see" the space. You see what's on the other side of the space. If you could see space, you wouldn't be able to see what was on the other side. Space is implicitly an absence, like a vacuum.