In the beginning there was no beginning !

[TheBrokenSoul]

star date 23/11/2021 update

The Milkyway may have been pushed to the center of observation rather than being a starting point of observation .

The Hubble Reshift may be a cosmology mistake , light is naturally redshifted d/t . Unless surface scattering can be observed direct , Doppler Effect , the evidence is weak .

If x=y all queries satisfied . Neurological reference use ''Heat causes the molecules to move faster, (heat energy is converted to kinetic energy ) which means that the volume of a gas increases more than the volume of a solid or liquid. However, gases that are contained in a fixed volume cannot expand - and so increases in temperature result in increases in pressure.''

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

Star date 23/11/2021 Relativity and Neurological Reference Frame Update

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

Star date update : 23/11/2021

Let two observers stand side by side at the opening to a very long tunnel , both observers observe the tunnel has an absence of light and appears in darkness . Neither observer can determine the length of the tunnel and label the length x^n . Now let one observer start to walk down the tunnel path whilst the second observer remains stationary . Let the observer who walks the path have a lantern held in his hand to light the way .
As the observer starts to recede into the tunnel away from the stationary observer , the stationary observer can now observe the length of the tunnel as the distance between observers expands . The stationary observer can now define the length x .

Let two observers stand side by side at the opening to a very long tunnel , both observers observe the tunnel has an absence of light and appears in darkness . Neither observer can determine the length of the tunnel and label the length x^n . Now let one observer start to walk down the tunnel path whilst the second observer remains stationary . Let the observer who walks the path have one end of a long length tape measure held in his hand to measure the length whilst in the darkness . While the tape measure expands , let the stationary observer notice the tunnel or length of space has not expanded .


Added : Oh know , don't look up because you might observe the inner wall .

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

Star date update : 24/11/2021

It seems the hecklers have stopped allowing me the freedom to think and reply in accordance with the truths .

 

[ratiocinator]

It seems the hecklers have stopped allowing me the freedom to think and reply in accordance with the truths .

Brandolini's law.

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

Brandolini's law.

I have already proved sciences errors in this thread and also added advancement .

If you want me to clarify anything for you , please feel free to ask .

 

[ratiocinator]

I have already proved...

The only thing you have proved here is that you haven't got the first inkling of a clue what you're talking about. Sorry, but I'm bored with it.

 

[ecco]

While the tape measure expands...

An expanding tape measure is not very good for measuring anything.
Example:
You have a tape measure that is three feet.
You measure two feet on a piece of wood and cut it.
You expand the tape measure so that is 1.5 times its original length.
You measure two feet on a piece of wood and cut it.
Your two pieces of wood are not the same length.

Perhaps you meant something other than expanding.

As the observer starts to recede into the tunnel away from the stationary observer , the stationary observer can now observe the length of the tunnel as the distance between observers expands . The stationary observer can now define the length x .

That is illogical.

If the receding observer has not reached the end of the tunnel, the stationary observer cannot determine the length of the tunnel.

Put another way...
If the receding observer has walked for one hour, there is no way to know how much longer and farther he must walk to reach the end.

It seems the hecklers have stopped allowing me the freedom to think and reply in accordance with the truths .

I don't know if you consider me a heckler. I certainly don't have the level of knowledge that @Polymath257 or @ratiocinator have. However, I can spot BS. I can also comment on the BS I see.

Nevertheless, I don't see where anything I did or do should impact your "freedom to think and reply in accordance with the truth".

Perhaps trying to wriggle out of the box you have been put in by people who really understand the science is affecting your ability to think.

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

The only thing you have proved here is that you haven't got the first inkling of a clue what you're talking about. Sorry, but I'm bored with it.

You are sadly mistaken and nobody has yet put in a genuine challenge . Posting links to the science I am challenging isn't a challenge and I await a genuine challenge on the physics I have provided .

Please provide evidence space itself is expanding ?

Please provide evidence there was no space before the big bang ?

Please provide evidence a point of space (x0,y0,z0) can expand or be displaced ?



Both issues not resolved in query or presented with evidence to back counter claims.

You are not even presenting any logical argument .

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

An expanding tape measure is not very good for measuring anything.
Example:
You have a tape measure that is three feet.
You measure two feet on a piece of wood and cut it.
You expand the tape measure so that is 1.5 times its original length.
You measure two feet on a piece of wood and cut it.
Your two pieces of wood are not the same length.

Perhaps you meant something other than expanding.




That is illogical.

If the receding observer has not reached the end of the tunnel, the stationary observer cannot determine the length of the tunnel.

Put another way...
If the receding observer has walked for one hour, there is no way to know how much longer and farther he must walk to reach the end.




I don't know if you consider me a heckler. I certainly don't have the level of knowledge that @Polymath257 or @ratiocinator have. However, I can spot BS. I can also comment on the BS I see.

Nevertheless, I don't see where anything I did or do should impact your "freedom to think and reply in accordance with the truth".

Perhaps trying to wriggle out of the box you have been put in by people who really understand the science is affecting your ability to think.

You can assume the observer in motion has reached the end of the tunnel before the stationary observer can declare a measure of x . x is a constant so obviously the measure was finished .

Knowledge is memory of education or a google search ,not all knowledge is correct .

 

[Polymath257]

You are sadly mistaken and nobody has yet put in a genuine challenge . Posting links to the science I am challenging isn't a challenge and I await a genuine challenge on the physics I have provided .

Why should they give a challenge based on the 'physis you have provided', which is mostly wrong or too vague to even be meaningful?

Please provide evidence space itself is expanding ?

This is provided by the specific nature of the red shift that distinguishes it from a Doppler shift. The effect is consistent with general relativity, which describes space as expanding. We can also measure effects of curvature of space due to gravity.

Please provide evidence there was no space before the big bang ?

Please provide evidence that was *anything* before the big bang.

Please provide evidence a point of space (x0,y0,z0) can expand or be displaced ?

Irrelevant to whether space can expand. Single points are not expanding; the space between them is.

Both issues not resolved in query or presented with evidence to back counter claims.

You are not even presenting any logical argument .

And yet you provide no evidence that any of your ideas are correct. You draw a few pictures and write a few nonsense formulas, but fail to give evidence that they actually correspond to reality.

Furthermore, many of your claims are shown wrong by direct observation (for example, the existence of neutrons and their difference with protons and electrons together).

 

[Spirit of Light]

You can assume the observer in motion has reached the end of the tunnel before the stationary observer can declare a measure of x . x is a constant so obviously the measure was finished .

Knowledge is memory of education or a google search ,not all knowledge is correct .

Can you be sure your own knowledge is correct as you know I can not verify what you write about because I don't understand it, but how can you be so sure your answers are the correct ones

 

[Mock Turtle]

Can you be sure your own knowledge is correct as you know I can not verify what you write about because I don't understand it, but how can you be so sure your answers are the correct ones

Does it look like a duck, sound like a duck, and fly like a duck? Then it is probably quackery.

 

[Spirit of Light]

Does it look like a duck, sound like a duck, and fly like a duck? Then it is probably quackery.

When did science start to quack

 

[Mock Turtle]

When did science start to quack

Long before it was ever called science?

 

[Polymath257]

I have already proved sciences errors in this thread and also added advancement .

If you want me to clarify anything for you , please feel free to ask .

You have made a few vague claims and drawn a few poor pictures, but have not given any details.

For example, from your views, how much should light that passes by the sun during an eclipse be shifted? What is the precise relation of redshift of distant galaxies to distance? How would you determine whether a specific nucleus is stable or not?

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

You have made a few vague claims and drawn a few poor pictures, but have not given any details.

For example, from your views, how much should light that passes by the sun during an eclipse be shifted?

PASS , no idea , I have not studied that or query that .

What is the precise relation of redshift of distant galaxies to distance?

Pass , no idea , I have not studied that or query that

How would you determine whether a specific nucleus is stable or not?

Particle physics , ok , by a constant vibration and/or frequency . The same as you would I assume .


Which of my claims and diagrams would you like to discuss further ?

You say they are vague but with the pictures they should be easy to undertsand .

Recap : We don't see the Sun approx 8 minutes in the past , this relativity diagram demonstrates why .

Would you like to start with this ?

 

[Polymath257]

PASS , no idea , I have not studied that or query that .

OK, so your 'theory' cannot do what general relativity does.

Pass , no idea , I have not studied that or query that

OK, so your 'theory' cannot do what standard cosmology does.

Particle physics , ok , by a constant vibration and/or frequency . The same as you would I assume .

No, I want *details*. Would, for example, the Poassium 40 nucleus be stable or not? if not, what would its half-life be?

If you cannot do this, then your 'theory' cannot do what standard nuclear physics can.

Which of my claims and diagrams would you like to discuss further ?

Suppose that a muon is moving at 99% of the speed of light in a laboratory. Given that the half-life of a muon at rest is 2.2 microseconds, what distance would you predict that the muon will travel before decaying?

You say they are vague but with the pictures they should be easy to undertsand .

You show a few arrows and throw a few .5q around, but that does not make a theory.

Recap : We don't see the Sun approx 8 minutes in the past , this relativity diagram demonstrates why .

Would you like to start with this ? View attachment 57815

Sure, what does that diagram mean in context? it shows two arrows pointed in opposite directions, one blue and one yellow. Between them is a caption 'approx 8 minutes'. There is a blue observer and a yellow observer with t=00:08 given for each of them. There is a caption that says 'both observers see each other at the same time'. The yellow circle observer is slightly larger than the blue circle observer.

I interpret that as saying that light from the Earth reaches the sun at the same time as light from the sun reaches the Earth.

My response: so what? That means that both see the other as they were 8 minutes in the past. Why you seem to think that has anything to do with relativity is unclear.

Sort of like how you *hear* thunder well after you see lightning. it takes time for the sound to reach your ears. For the sun, it takes time for the light to reach the Earth.

 

[TheBrokenSoul]

Irrelevant to whether space can expand. Single points are not expanding; the space between them is.



).

There is no space between points to expand .

So you are going to ignore visual evidence I have provided , basic physics I have provided ?

You again asked me to prove space existed before big bang which I have done several times .

You keep ignoring the explanation and proof , reverting back to becuase this says .

A gas cannot expand if it is contained , true or false ?

A deflated balloon sealed in a match box cannot inflate , true or false ?

The extension of a measuring tape requires adjacent space ? , true of false

This is basic physics in the real world that contradicts the big bang theory , for any matter to expand it needs adjacent space to expand into .

If you can't see the simple truth and physics requirements for expansion , I really am at a loss for words because knocking when there is nobody in is futile .

added : even if space was expanding , the space would physically require adjacent space to expand into .
That is how ludicrous the claim is that space is expanding and didn't exist before any event .

 

[Polymath257]

There is no space between points to expand .

So you are going to ignore visual evidence I have provided , basic physics I have provided ?

You again asked me to prove space existed before big bang which I have done several times .

No, you have not. You made some unsubstantiated claims, but have given no evidence or proof.

You keep ignoring the explanation and proof , reverting back to becuase this says .

A gas cannot expand if it is contained , true or false ?

What do you mean by 'contained'? if the 'container supplies less force than the pressure of the gas, then the container will break and the gas will expand.

But so what? Why do you think that is relevant?

A deflated balloon sealed in a match box cannot inflate , true or false ?

False. it will just break the matchbox.

The extension of a measuring tape requires adjacent space ? , true of false

Matter moving through space requires space, yes.

This is basic physics in the real world that contradicts the big bang theory , for any matter to expand it needs adjacent space to expand into .

Irrelevant. The matter in the big bang expansion is NOT moving through space. The space is expanding.

If you can't see the simple truth and physics requirements for expansion , I really am at a loss for words because knocking when there is nobody in is futile .

No, I don't see these as 'simple truths'. At best, they are irrelevant. At worst they are simply wrong.

added : even if space was expanding , the space would physically require adjacent space to expand into .

Wrong once again. All this shows that you don't understand the basics.

That is how ludicrous the claim is that space is expanding and didn't exist before any event .

You showed nothing except that you don't understand what you are talking about.