Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online Now
0 members (), 118 guests, and 2 robots.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
Top Posters(30 Days)
Previous Thread
Next Thread
Print Thread
Page 9 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
P
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
P
Joined: Mar 2006
Posts: 4,136
Quote:
... laws of physics might be different


physics laws require something physical.

Quote:
we can go back to 10^-35s after the Big Bang, but can go no further,


there may not be any physics laws that would apply past
the point of 10^-35s !

"Let There Be Light"

maybe thats how long it took God to say it.

perhaps up to that point ( 10^-35s ) there was the Word of God being spoken by God.

and then once there was Light , Physics laws would apply.



3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.
.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Orac Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Strangely Paul I completely agree with that, at least there is a justification for violating all the physics laws that where in existence something many many cosmologist fail at smile

However what I was also highlighting was the level of science one needs to be called a cosmologist because in most countries there is no legal protection over the term and very few if any countries have a formal association. It is almost identical to ‘Nutritionist’ and ‘Dietitian’ situation in most countries anyone who has done anything with food is probably able to call themselves a ‘Nutritionist’.

Last edited by Orac; 02/12/14 02:06 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Orac, you were the one who said: “"If there was nothing at the big bang, there would be nothing now.”
You also said: “It says what it says there there was something at the big bang”

When I pointed out that the first of these statements was tautologous, and asked you to be specific about what you were saying; your response was: “Sorry I don't have to specify anything science doesn't work like that”

You said of the Big Bang: “…that theory starts with something at the big bang. If you want to argue there is something or nothing that predates our universe then it is cosmogony as we have no data”.

Now you say: “Big Bang is hardly an exact definition”

What are you saying; that Big Bang is fine when you use it, but inexact when I use it? Are you “being anal” when you use it, or is that just a insult you reserve for people who are not fobbed off by indeterminate circumlocution.


There never was nothing.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Orac Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
The point is Bill S when I use Big Bang IT IS NEVER EXACT .. HOW CAN IT BE THERE IS NO DATA. Look at my statements and tell me where you think there is any exactness in any of those statements ... BIG BANG is a garbage loose term and generally horribly abused. I gave you my complete logic and you even worked out I imposed a boundary and would not speculate beyond that point because my logic works on justification and I have none for going any further, now you want to play word games by pulling quotes without context .. really?

Sorry I don't do word games ..... you win by default frown

You may use big bang however and whatever you like to be honest Bill S I really wouldn't care it's a pile of cosmology garbage do with it as you please smile

From my janitor perspective there are hundreds of different version of what people call "big bang" and all are about as valid as each other and may their big bangs rock their world laugh

Anyhow I think this thread has reached it's inevitable end don't you lets all have a group hug and find something else to argue about.

Last edited by Orac; 02/12/14 03:08 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
T
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
T
Joined: Jun 2008
Posts: 1,249
Originally Posted By: Orac
..lets all have a group hug and find something else to argue about.
The possibilities are infinite wink


I was addicted to the Hokey Pokey, but then I turned myself around!!




Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Orac Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
In what has to be one of the funniest blogs of watching someone solve a problem with infinity this is classic by Buzz Skyline

It's the good old 1+2+3+4+5... = -1/12

He starts arguing it is wrong but the maths peeps quickly show him his argument fails

http://physicsbuzz.physicscentral.com/2014/01/redux-does-1234-112-absolutely-not.html

So then he actually does a very smart thing and graphs it and can suddenly see the problem and what the maths is showing and the penny drops.

http://physicsbuzz.physicscentral.com/2014/02/so-what-does-1234-equal-we-give-you_11.html

And he worked it out by graphing it smile





Suddenly he sees it a large postive infinity, a large negative infinity and the bit in the middle of the curve.

Then a broken and dejected infinitarian he heads off

Originally Posted By: buzz

1+2+3+4+ . . . = -1/12 + infinity

and other similar things, but I've had enough of this stuff for now.


Perfectly clear now isn't it you just subtract away from infinity smile

Hint: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Absolutely_convergent#Rearrangements_and_unconditional_convergence

Last edited by Orac; 02/13/14 04:15 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Interesting links, that’s a painful quantity of maths just to establish something that is patently obvious to a non mathematician. Having said that, I do appreciate the necessity to prove things that might otherwise be wrongly accepted because they seem so obvious.

You seem to have a very poor opinion of cosmology/cosmologists. Many of them have their PhD, but then one can get a PhD in philosophy or theology/divinity, so I suppose there is plenty of scope for “class distinction” among the elite. Could it be that cosmologists are scientists with imagination?

Quote:
Anyhow I think this thread has reached it's inevitable end


I agree. If we have discussed this for so long, and you still think I believe there was nothing before the BB, then the chances of any real progress are “infinitely” small. smile

I’m a little reticent about the group hug – there are some funny people on SAGG. laugh


There never was nothing.
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
Joined: Jan 2007
Posts: 2,311
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
Interesting links ...Having said that, I do appreciate the necessity to prove things that might otherwise be wrongly accepted because they seem so obvious.

You seem to have a very poor opinion of cosmology/cosmologists.

Many of them have their PhD, but then one can get a PhD in philosophy or theology/divinity ...
Hold it, Bill S, have you not noticed that dull preachers with doctors of theology/divinity are the ones who are turning so many churches into vacuums?


G~O~D--Now & ForeverIS:Nature, Nurture & PNEUMA-ture, Thanks to Warren Farr&ME AT www.unitheist.org
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Quote:
have you not noticed that dull preachers with doctors of theology/divinity are the ones who are turning so many churches into vacuums?


Hold that thought, Rev. If they are creating vacuums, perhaps they could settle all the wrangling about the nature of nothing.


There never was nothing.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Orac Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
Interesting links, that’s a painful quantity of maths just to establish something that is patently obvious to a non mathematician. Having said that, I do appreciate the necessity to prove things that might otherwise be wrongly accepted because they seem so obvious.


Interesting that you think it is an obvious answer. Perhaps research what it means to add or subtract a number from infinity. smile


I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
Quote:
Interesting that you think it is an obvious answer.


Can I suggest that while I research what it means to add or subtract a number from infinity you might research the difference between saying something "is obvious" as opposed to "seems obvious". smile


There never was nothing.
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
O
Orac Offline OP
Megastar
OP Offline
Megastar
O
Joined: May 2011
Posts: 2,819
Originally Posted By: Bill S.
research the difference between saying something "is obvious" as opposed to "seems obvious". smile


That doesn't translate different to me am I missing something in the English?

In translation I get

Something that is obvious seems obvious to me
Something that seems obvious is obvious to me

What am I missing?

Last edited by Orac; 02/17/14 01:16 AM.

I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
B
Megastar
Offline
Megastar
B
Joined: Aug 2010
Posts: 3,570
The sun is the source of our daylight; that’s obvious.

The sun moves across the sky; that seems obvious, but is not.


There never was nothing.
Page 9 of 9 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9

Link Copied to Clipboard
Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact UsokĀž»­¾W
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.

Powered by UBB.threads™ PHP Forum Software 7.7.5