0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Well, how do you suppose science moves forward? Does it move forward by everyone accepting everything that has been written by someone else? Or does it take someone moving in the opposite direction to discover something unexpected and novel?
As for setting up a mathematical equation on the whole Universe to show it has already been there and never originated and will never end
today’s facts frequently become yesterdays errors!
No! You make sure someone else has thought of it first and published it before you digest and regurgitate it without thinking for yourself.
Quotetoday’s facts frequently become yesterdays errors!Well there's your problem, Andrew. You clearly believe that but it is seldom true.Today's Science has not 'proved the old stuff to be wrong'. It has extended it and modified it because it has been based on it. Hence, tomorrows Science can be expected to do the same.I am, of course, only referring to developments since the Enlightenment.Today's daft ideas won't prove anything to have been wrong because they have no foundation. Do you not realise that an idea that is based on someone's fancy is about as likely to be proved right as I am to float up to the ceiling.Yes, there are many ways of looking at things but, I'm afraid that most of them are just not valid - particularly the ones which are not based on evidence.Do you really think you are in any position to challenge the competence of an eminent Cosmologist to propose Black Holes? That's a pretty arrogant statement from someone who is reluctant ever to get into any substantial theory. Do you actually understand the basis of the black hole concept? Do you think it is just based on fancy?What is the basis for all this waffle about your alternative Cosmology? Did it come to you in a dream? Did you do any measurements or have you used existing data to come to this conclusion? Put it another way; what is your authority or basis for rejecting the accepted model?If you refuse to engage in proper Science, how can you take exception to the 'Troll' epithet?
vehemently defended subjects
Great Beyond - New Planet DiscoveredJupiterGeoffrey Marcy and Paul Butler, a pair of astronomers from the United States, have discovered a planet that closely resembles Jupiter. Though astronomers have found other planets out there, none so far have so closely resembled the planets of our own solar system. This new planet, which is being called Jupiter's cousin, orbits the star 55 Cancri and takes 13 years to go around the star once. It takes Jupiter just over 11 years to circle our sun.
Not familiar with static universe. The Universe is anything but static, it is in a constant evolutionary state and that everything in the Universe is constantly changing except for the Universe meaning the canvas on which all the planets stars, meteors, comets, atoms and sub atomic particles are being recycled over eternity is Static But not the components that are in it. And we have privilege to gaze upon it in nothing more than an equivalent nanosecond that encompasses the evolution of our own planet.
We are trying to observe the hypothesised events before and during the hypothesised Big Bang event.
Black holes hold together an astronomical geometric network. This network includes the means capable for the transfer,or recycle, of energy. The mass of energies collected by black holes is then pulled through a space time vaccum. These wormholes release the collection of mass energy into the adjoining dimension, thus sustaining an even flow of mass and energy throughout the universe. These dimensional vortexes are the gateway to infinite proportions, in fathomable by humans. This vast geometric network holds together every variation of questionable reality. Black holes continue to collect and distribute energies as they grow. This growth rate continues until there are only two supermasses remaining. These masses eventually collide becoming one.
Black holes hold together an astronomical geometric network. This network includes the means capable for the transfer,or recycle, of energy. The mass of energies collected by black holes is then pulled through a space time vaccum. These wormholes release the collection of mass energy into the adjoining dimension, thus sustaining an even flow of mass and energy throughout the universe. These dimensional vortexes are the gateway to infinite proportions, in fathomable by humans. This vast geometric network holds together every variation of questionable reality. Black holes continue to collect and distribute energies as they grow. This growth rate continues until there are only two supermasses remaining. These masses eventually collide becoming one. With nothing to feed on,the event horizon can no longer sustain itself. The mass collapses under the great pressure of its own gravitational force. The neutrons then pull into and collect at a specific point. At that moment the gravity,force,and pressure needed to sustain this process can no longer be achieved,resulting in a collapse into the vortex. This,in turn, results in a cataclysmic explosion on the other side of the vortex itself. Concluding in the unimaginable thrust beginning the cycle again. This process repeats itself infinitely. Enter the being and absorb the universe. Beyond lies the beginning.
The big bang is correct and well modelled as far as the observational record extends but that is clearly not the end of it. I strongly suspect we are observing one universe within a vast multiverse of indefinite size containing many similar universes to our own. That is essentially constant. See my evolutionary cosmology topic in the new theories section for a bit more explanation. I do not believe there is any significant prospect of ever communicating with or observing one of these other universes so we will have to do without confirmation of their existence.I also consider it very likely that our universe itself creates new universes as part of its normal existence. These new universes are probably what we call black holes.To my answer would be a tick in three of your boxes big bang yes, constant universe(multiverse) yes. other yes. The concept of"scientific" creationism is a load of total rubbish. The creation myths in ancient writings contain a great deal of wisdom about life and human nature and are valuable for that reason only. To regard them as a basis for scientific actuality is totally batty.It saddens me greatly when people insist on regarding the myths in the worlds heritage as factual writings. This reduces their value and causes many modern people to ignore them and the true wisdom that they contain. Please note I include the myth of Jesus Christ in that category and am a practicing Christian myself.