Let's not talk about the Big Bang

[Polymath257]

No before means there is no time and space, yes?

It means there is no before. The phrase 'before the BB' is literally meaningless in BB cosmology.

 

[Polymath257]

I agree with the concept of time and space being part of the geometry of the universe, so therefore if there is no time, there is no space. Agreed?

I would turn it around and say that if there is space, then there is also time. I try to use positive formulations to avoid giving the idea that there exists 'nothing'.

 

[Polymath257]

No, we agree that there is no before. No before means no time, no space, no existence, no nothing, zilth, zero, nada.

The difficulty is that you seem to think that the notion of 'before' is meaningful in this context. and that is the point: in BB cosmology, it is simply not meaningful.

 

[Polymath257]

No, we agree that there is no before. No before means no time, no space, no existence, no nothing, zilth, zero, nada.

Does time exist south of the south pole? Or is there no time south of the south pole?

 

[Polymath257]

Certainly you are correct in your discernment that if time does not exist, there is no time. So if there is no time, there is no existence.

Does time exist south of the south pole?

 

[Polymath257]

Halfway between the moon and earth, for example... Which way is South? North? East? West?

They are meaningless in that context.

 

[Polymath257]

Earth doesn't represent space or the universe.

There is space South of the South pole and space North of the North pole.

No, there simply is no north of the north pole. There is 'up', but not 'north'.

 

[Polymath257]

So what precisely is the meaning of the concept "before" in the context of 'there was no "before" the BB'?

It means 'an earlier time'. And, in that context, that concept is meaningless because there is no earlier time.

 

[Polymath257]

My reply would be the same no matter who said it.

"One would think so but all that is presented is...

Earth is a sphere, there is no South of the South pole. Therefore the BB just happened and there was no before. Case closed lol"

The geometry of spacetime at the BB singularity is similar in many ways to the geometry of the Earth at the south pole singularity.

 

[Polymath257]

No its a nice way if telling you direction doesn't exist in space. If you can only use earth, your are trapped in a box, you are lost on space.

There is no south of the moon. No south of Venus. No south of the BB.

Well, technically, on a planet, south is defined by the sense of rotation. There is even a south pole for the sun.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

"Tired light" has failed as a scientific hypothesis since it disagrees with some of the evidence. And using clickbait titles as "evidence" does not help you.

The results coming from the JWST are showing BBT is not correct and more consistent with TLT, as I explained. If you disagree with them, point out the what aspect you disagree with and the technical reason. The 2018 TLT paper has not been refuted afaik.

 

[Polymath257]

So where do you think existence came from?

I don't think that is a meaningful question.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

No as described at least several time the 'nothing' described by Hawking is NOT no existence, no nothing, zilth, zero, nada.

The Quantum 'nothing' described by Hawking has no 'continuous time and space. It is a Quantum existence at the zero energy level.

You are not Subduction Zone, your comment is out of context. Having said that, there was never a BB anyway, the universe is eternal without a beginning, the SSM, the universe is not expanding the redshift is distance.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

I don't think that is a meaningful question.

For those who believe in BBT it is.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Again the nothing of Hawking's theorum is not 'no-existence.'

There was no BB.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It means there is no before. The phrase 'before the BB' is literally meaningless in BB cosmology.

There was no BB, I'm moving on.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

The difficulty is that you seem to think that the notion of 'before' is meaningful in this context. and that is the point: in BB cosmology, it is simply not meaningful.

I'm moving on. there was no BB, the SSM is the correct model, and TLT is the correct explanation of redshift.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

Does time exist south of the south pole? Or is there no time south of the south pole?

The BBT is a failure, SSM is the go.

 

[Ben Dhyan]

It means 'an earlier time'. And, in that context, that concept is meaningless because there is no earlier time.

There was no before because the universe had no beginning.

 

[blü 2]

Again -- it's a waste of brainpower to spend good IQ's to figure if there's life out there.

So you have no curiosity about the cosmos? What it is? How it got that way? How it relates to us and how we got this way?

That's sad.

I speak as one who finds those questions immensely stimulating.