and who was here at the time of the Big Bang to see it? (apart From God )spontaneous creation can be seen
Peter
and who was here at the time of the Big Bang to see it? (apart From God )spontaneous creation can be seen
We don't need to see the event to be able to prove it happened, who here saw the Pyramids being built?Bat17 said:and who was here at the time of the Big Bang to see it? (apart From God )
Peter
Bat17 said:Surley this had to be a finite amount of matter or the would have been no space? and it still begs the question of where the initial matter comes from? spontaneous creation from nothing?
Peter
seth_belgium said:Well, then change infinite to "an extremely large amount of".
Where did the initial matter come from : Big Crunch. The expantion of the universe might come to an end one day. When it does, matter will start moving back towards the absolute center of it all, thus creating a new super-singularity. Followed by another Big Bang, and so on...
I believe this continuous movement between big bang and big crunch exists to prevent the universe from dying out. This last thing will happen when the expantion does not stop.
Seth
I believe this continuous movement between big bang and big crunch exists to prevent the universe from dying out.
No one which is why they are still arguing about how they were created http://www.geopolymer.org/science_archaeology/pyramids_egypt/who here saw the Pyramids being built?
How maybe, but not when and whyBat17 said:No one which is why they are still arguing about how they were created http://www.geopolymer.org/science_archaeology/pyramids_egypt/
Peter
Why, the fact that it didn't behave in the same way this time doesn't mean that it always had to surely. Maybe the crunch just gathered momentum over timeThe Stoat said:This idea suggests you believe that there is a controlling force that designed this mechanism. TS
Cheers to that, Col! I applaud you for elegantly reinserting some sanity back into this thread.ColinEssex said:What does it matter / who cares how the universe was created? no-ones going to know for sure so its an unanswerable question.
Surely, it would be better to focus on the problems currently besetting mankind.
Col
Rich said:Why, the fact that it didn't behave in the same way this time doesn't mean that it always had to surely. Maybe the crunch just gathered momentum over time
I thought it would have to reduce at each crunch as it would lose energy each time?Why, the fact that it didn't behave in the same way this time doesn't mean that it always had to surely. Maybe the crunch just gathered momentum over time
ColinEssex said:What does it matter / who cares how the universe was created? no-ones going to know for sure so its an unanswerable question.
Surely, it would be better to focus on the problems currently besetting mankind.
Col
Kraj said:Cheers to that, Col! I applaud you for elegantly reinserting some sanity back into this thread.
seth_belgium said:@Stoat:
-> I thought I read somewhere that it was decellerating... Misinformation on my behalf then. Damned!
-> I would find it logical that the universe would do that continuing movement because in nature, nothing exists without a reason. I'm not saying that it's sentient or alive... Anyway, my theory seems flawed when it's actually increasing in speed of expansion.
I agree completely. But I also think there is something comical about zealously arguing an unprovable hypothesis (ie., whether God exists; whether the universe has a purpose; where the universe came from; etc.) as if it were fact, which is what the thread had generally become. Col's comment, in my mind, was a way of saying "chill out".The Stoat said:Not really. [...]
Thanks Kraj, or maybe a "get real" comment - lets sort out this planet before we blow it to piecesKraj said:Col's comment, in my mind, was a way of saying "chill out".
ColinEssex said:Thanks Kraj, or maybe a "get real" comment - lets sort out this planet before we blow it to pieces
As I said ages ago, mankind will destroy mankind - not some big rock from space
Col
Lucky that I am in a minority thenWe will most likely not destroy the whole of man kind, just the majority.
Hehe... me too! (unless the republicans get their way )Bat17 said:Lucky that I am in a minority then
Peter
I think yall' give man way to much credit. As soon as man steps over the line, Mother Nature will put him in his place. About the only thing man can do to really screw things up is a global, massive nuclear war. Short of that Mother Nature wins. And even given that, Mother Nature will win. What maybe thousands of human years to get back, is just a blink in the eye of Mother nature.jsanders said:It could go either way. We will most likely not destroy the whole of man kind, just the majority.