Science a GoGo's Home Page Forums General Discussion Not-Quite-Science Forum Philosophy of Religions--all religions, including,

I have Rev but unfortunately there is no one version of BB and I have apprehensions about most of them.



I am even more cynical about things before the big bang and the article goes against me on several fronts.

I would call myself a pragmatist who is also a scientist and given the best available evidence links time strictly with space the idea of talking before time existed I find unscientific.

Trying to put it in your Religious terms I suspect you believe in GOD but is GOD one thing? I have seen you write things that sort of shows this problem and even the blessing Father, Son and Holy Spirit are these three different things or the same thing.


I had to search for this but I found the references

The Father is God. (Matthew 6:8, 7:21, Galatians 1:1)
Jesus is God from the beginning (John 1: 1-18)
The Holy Spirit is God (John 15:26, Mark 3:29, 1 Corinthians 6:19).


This is the same problem as the science question of exists before the Big Bang you have to make assumptions and as a scientist I hate assuming anything. So as a scientist I am very skeptical that we can say anything meaningful about anything prior to the BB, I would at least want some data and evidence.

Direct issues I have with the article on BB is it states the BB starts as a singularity. That is a very General Relativity version of BB and a lot of QM scientists simply do not accept that and I list myself as one. The subject has its own reference and they list several alternatives to the singularity

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Initial_singularity



A singularity is such a tricky thing to approach with data and having never seen an infinity or a singularity then I am firmly in the no singularity camp as I doubt they can exist.

So to me the article fails on at least two key points.



That one is easier for me to accept because I am not a "solid worlder". I have never viewed the universe or anything in it as solid for many years because it is so easy to show it can't be so with science.

"Solid worlders" struggle with how things can pass thru matter like neutrons and x-rays and the like because they want the world to be solid and particles to be like solid little balls because for some reason they find that image easier to cope with. The reality is the opposite is the case the most normal thing is for particles to do is pass directly thru matter without interaction the rarity is to interact with matter.

Electromagnetic waves including light would pass directly thru matter if it was not for the electron clouds around the atom. Realistically when light sees matter all it sees is a curtain of charge and as it is an electromagnetic wave it interacts with that charge. Certain materials have atomic charge in a certain way that light will still pass thru them like glass and plastic other materials the charge wall will reflect the wave. So even from a basic understanding of light the world isn't solid and light isn't and never has been a solid particle it simply can appear to be a solid ball because of interactions with media.

To make the point absolute and prove the above point you can do some Quantum trickery and make materials transparent to light

Technical:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Electromagnetically_induced_transparency

EIT => Basically it "is a quantum interference effect that permits the propagation of light through an otherwise opaque atomic medium"

Layman versions:
http://arstechnica.com/science/2012/03/f...tack-using-eit/
http://www.wired.com/wiredscience/2011/09/electromagnetic-induced-transparency/


What happens next is some people can't accept that answer because of the human mind games ... no amount of proof can make the world not solid to them.


The whole thing reminds me of Plato's story of the man in the cave I am sure you are familiar with it

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Allegory_of_the_Cave


The answer to into what the universe is expanding is nothing as the universe creates space, space does not create the universe. The problem that statement has with people is as humans we still crave to view space as solid and real.