What was the Big Bang

[ThePainefulTruth]

And again you refuse to provide evidence of god.

If I may...no, there is no evidence of God per se, but there is evidence that implies the possibility of God, i.e. the universe. Put another way, as have several atheist-skeptics of late, the possibility of a laissez-faire deist God cannot be ruled out. Appending a hyphenated agnostic- to your belief system, is the only way to keep the road to the Truth clear and unimpeded.

 

[james blunt]

As i said, you didn't read the paper. Vacuum bubbles naturally form all the time in the quantum realm. Your understanding of QM is not required and you are free to laugh at vacuum bubbles just as i am free to laugh at your unexplained god magic.

Space is not a vacuum, I suppose this theory of vacuum bubbles is to cover the NASA underwater fake stuff?

 

[ChristineM]

If I may...no, there is no evidence of God per se, but there is evidence that implies the possibility of God, i.e. the universe. Put another way, as have several atheist-skeptics of late, the possibility of a laissez-faire deist God cannot be ruled out. Appending a hyphenated agnostic- to your belief system, is the only way to keep the road to the Truth clear and unimpeded.

When proof by exhaustion fails, i.e. billions of failures over thousands of years to prove a god or gods exist then i will review that proof to see if it is valid. Until then ill go with the no god required theories anf hypothesis.

Of course that means if you can provide a valid theory that your god dun it with god magic, I'll take a look.

 

[ChristineM]

Space is not a vacuum, I suppose this theory of vacuum bubbles is to cover the NASA underwater fake stuff?

I have never said space is vacuum and don't talk rubbish, you are not dealing with with an idiot here. I knew you did not understand QM and still you waffle in a self deluding pretense

 

[james blunt]

I have never said space is vacuum and don't talk rubbish, you are not dealing with with an idiot here. I knew you did not understand QM and still you waffle in a self deluding pretense

You think I don't understand QM ? QM is easy , the whole universe is easy .

Your mistaking lethargic for a lack of knowing.

 

[ChristineM]

You think I don't understand QM ? QM is easy , the whole universe is easy .

Your mistaking lethargic for a lack of knowing.

You posts indicate otherwise.

Oh, and QM is far from easy

 

[james blunt]

You posts indicate otherwise.

Oh, and QM is far from easy

Madam, I could go up several ''gears'' anytime I feel like doing so. Judging a book by it's cover is rather naive would you not agree?

Perhaps you would like to up a gear and discuss Q.F.T which contains Q.F.D, Q.F.F., Q,F,P , additionally a N-field and a n-field.

However, this is a big bang thread so it is rather rude of us to take the thread off topic.

Do you like the big bang ?

 

[ChristineM]

Madam, I could go up several ''gears'' anytime I feel like doing so. Judging a book by it's cover is rather naive would you not agree?

Perhaps you would like to up a gear and discuss Q.F.T which contains Q.F.D, Q.F.F., Q,F,P , additionally a N-field and a n-field.

However, this is a big bang thread so it is rather rude of us to take the thread off topic.

Do you like the big bang ?

Chuckle, you really have no idea have you, the universe, the big bang are in all probability products of QM, vacuum bubbles are just one possibility,

 

[james blunt]

Chuckle, you really have no idea have you, the universe, the big bang are in all probability products of QM, vacuum bubbles are just one possibility,

I like absolutes, what is the point in possibilities?

Do you agree in the expansion before the big bang?

 

[Thief]

Gravity is a concept, but is also a force.

you can't use both colors at once
you will spoil the painting

gravity is there
whether you measure it ....or not

 

[Thief]

You might as well say that all of reality is an illusion.

there is a trick question used by philosophy teachers
it's been around like....forever

if a tree falls in the woods....does it make a sound?

if you say yes....you are sane

if you say no....then this reality depends on you
(at least that portion you think about)

 

[Thief]

I like absolutes, what is the point in possibilities?

Do you agree in the expansion before the big bang?

i do not

even with a singularity
there is no place to come from
and no place to go to

the secondary point is the beginning of expansion
(as in ....let there be light)

 

[Thief]

1) The dimensions of an object (reality)

2) Relative space time (a coordinate system of imaginary lines, arbitrary)

xyz is real enough.....it can be measured
the effect of motion upon a substance that is moving can be calculated

we use a factor we call.....time...as a means of comprehending

time is not real
it is only a quotient
a value on the chalkboard
it does not exist anywhere else

 

[ThePainefulTruth]

When proof by exhaustion fails, i.e. billions of failures over thousands of years to prove a god or gods exist then i will review that proof to see if it is valid. Until then ill go with the no god required theories anf hypothesis.

Of course that means if you can provide a valid theory that your god dun it with god magic, I'll take a look.

I'm agreeing with you that there is no evidence, which necessarily means there is no proof. But the existence of the universe is evidence that resulted from a completely unknown cause or force behind the Big Bang. If we can't rule out God, God is a possibility--which equates it, in this case, with a spontaneous Big Bang, which is equally unjustified by evidence. Zero evidence for both, gotta be 50/50--unless you can think of another scenario which isn't just a rejiggering of one of these two.

 

[exchemist]

When proof by exhaustion fails, i.e. billions of failures over thousands of years to prove a god or gods exist then i will review that proof to see if it is valid. Until then ill go with the no god required theories anf hypothesis.

Of course that means if you can provide a valid theory that your god dun it with god magic, I'll take a look.

This all makes perfect sense if one has a physicalist or philosophical materialist worldview, as many people do. But that is not the only worldview it is possible to hold.

 

[ChristineM]

I like absolutes, what is the point in possibilities?

Do you agree in the expansion before the big bang?

It is said there are no absolutes but possibilities are boundless.

Before the bb is unknown, you can of course fill the gap with god but you would need evidence... Ah right.

 

[ChristineM]

I'm agreeing with you that there is no evidence, which necessarily means there is no proof. But the existence of the universe is evidence that resulted from a completely unknown cause or force behind the Big Bang. If we can't rule out God, God is a possibility--which equates it, in this case, with a spontaneous Big Bang, which is equally unjustified by evidence. Zero evidence for both, gotta be 50/50--unless you can think of another scenario which isn't just a rejiggering of one of these two.

So you are a follower of god of the gaps?

I know of 28 hypothesis which are mathematically sound, some actually have physical evidence to back them up, not one requires a god. In fact any claim of god magic is just that, a claim.

 

[james blunt]

So you are a follower of god of the gaps?

I know of 28 hypothesis which are mathematically sound, some actually have physical evidence to back them up, not one requires a god. In fact any claim of god magic is just that, a claim.

Not quite , zero point pressure is a miracle of mechanics to create something.

Δk0 = t where k0 is any given point of space and t is time.

i.e Gods miracle

P.s Hello again Christine, somebody important.

 

[`mud]

I have to guess that there's a `now` somewhere ?
But we are `moving`, aren't we ?

 

[ChristineM]

This all makes perfect sense if one has a physicalist or philosophical materialist worldview, as many people do. But that is not the only worldview it is possible to hold.

It is not the only worldview but it is a mathematical proof