The Big Bang
- Thread starter skunkushybrid
- Start date
Trolling
New Member
Yeah I heard about that, they like smashed a bunch of particles together to get that one single partical and I guess that's what separated from it, really hard to grasp that Big Bang part still lol. I mean now we have to figure out why was that little spot there in the first place, is there something that occurred before the Big Bang???
Shannon Alexander
Well-Known Member
No harm done Trolling...
Give it an other couple of decades and scientists could have proof again that the universe is slowing down...
Give it an other couple of decades and scientists could have proof again that the universe is slowing down...
Doer
Well-Known Member
This is sickenly un-factual. Caltech? Try Cern. Proof? No proof. Higgs? No Higgs. A new boson? Maybe. God particle....NOT>.
Doer
Well-Known Member
I'd say, don't confuse the lies. Religions are not talking about multiple gods. All cultures have demi-gods and those are worshiped. But, all relgions, I'm familar with (all majors) speak of only one God. They don't claim they have the best God. They claim they have the only difinition.
Then the confusion and fibbing begins.
Dislexicmidget2021
Well-Known Member
A thought on dark energy expansion that excellerates expanding the universe continualy,the big bang was the greatest explosion of all time,the grandfather of them all ok,
so as this supreme explosion,it generated an innitial shockwave so great that a secondary wave occured from it then and expanded
continuously and continues onward while gaining speed as research has been pointing towards this for
some time now,so the question persists why is that wave still gaining speed?Thinking about it having come from
the densest molecule and having exploded to become the big bang,the secondary shockwave dosent seem to be
hindered or going through a sort of temporal resistance of time/space as it i think it could be outside of space or on the outward
cusp of the continual expansion so perhaps rather than resistance, there is something opposite of it oustide
of the universe,sort of like a gaining of traction effect or static pulling outside that could be working together with dark energy that is already inside the circumfrence of the universe's expansion,
it could be that there is a force outside of the universe
that only the potential of movement is increased as opposed to an eventual slowing down from inside of the universe's curvature of space or so I theorize<--this could be my hingepoint to incorrect thinking here as i am not a hundred percent sure if this is the case,any input about the idea of time curvature resistancewould be cool.
so essentially all im proposing,Is that i think dark energy alone isnt enough to keep this accelerating rate of expansion constant and that there may very well be a perpetual gain effect because there is literaly nothing to slow any momentum outside of the universe
Mind you this is only a thought not a posit.Any opinions?
so as this supreme explosion,it generated an innitial shockwave so great that a secondary wave occured from it then and expanded
continuously and continues onward while gaining speed as research has been pointing towards this for
some time now,so the question persists why is that wave still gaining speed?Thinking about it having come from
the densest molecule and having exploded to become the big bang,the secondary shockwave dosent seem to be
hindered or going through a sort of temporal resistance of time/space as it i think it could be outside of space or on the outward
cusp of the continual expansion so perhaps rather than resistance, there is something opposite of it oustide
of the universe,sort of like a gaining of traction effect or static pulling outside that could be working together with dark energy that is already inside the circumfrence of the universe's expansion,
it could be that there is a force outside of the universe
that only the potential of movement is increased as opposed to an eventual slowing down from inside of the universe's curvature of space or so I theorize<--this could be my hingepoint to incorrect thinking here as i am not a hundred percent sure if this is the case,any input about the idea of time curvature resistancewould be cool.
so essentially all im proposing,Is that i think dark energy alone isnt enough to keep this accelerating rate of expansion constant and that there may very well be a perpetual gain effect because there is literaly nothing to slow any momentum outside of the universe
Mind you this is only a thought not a posit.Any opinions?
Zaehet Strife
Well-Known Member
It makes me wonder...double oh' six, just how long the human race will be able to survive. Will we figure out how to achieve speeds close to the speed of light in order to accomplish intergalactic space travel. Will we be able to survive by harvesting the energy from the dieing suns of our ever increasing/cooling universe? Is everything worthless, because it will just start over again with different variables through the supposed "big crunch" or will it just continue to expand forever, leaving the universe a desolate, and extremely cold and empty space...?
I am impressed by your reply, very good stuff bro, keep it coming.
Zaehet Strife
Well-Known Member
This would then not be categorized as truth... merely something you want to be true.
Zaehet Strife
Well-Known Member
mindphuk
Well-Known Member
Don't mean to quibble too much but theories do not change into anything else when more evidence supports it. A theory is a model, evidence that a model is very close to reality does not make it not-a-model. Also, the boson in question was found at CERN, not Caltech although many on the team were from there.
Finche
Member
Islam is younger, only in relation to the prophet Muhammad who showed up about 600 years after Christ, but Islam itself has been around a lot longer than that.
The origin’s for Judaism, Islam, and Christianity are all from the same source. Muhammad a descendent from the eldest son Ishmael. Isaac, descended the tribes of Israel, and through them, Moses and Jesus.
I waiting for the Vatican to say the Higgs Boson is the spark from God’s finger LMFAO.
cannabineer
Ursus marijanus
I thought Mohammed defined Islam. I'd appreciate sound links to pre-Mohammedan Islam that is recognizably distinct. To claim Judeo-Christianity as pre-Islamic is facile imo, and from an Islamocentric viewpoint ... cn
Doer
Well-Known Member
The unifying characteristic of Judaism, Christianity and Islam is that all accept the tradition that God revealed himself to the patriarch Abraham.[SUP][15][/SUP]
And even before that, but not by much, all around 2500 BCE, the group around the North Black Sea, began to roam. Two thrusts, East as the Aryans and South they became known the Iraians, later Persians.
The Darhmic views are Aryan and to this day, we don't know if the language of Sanscrit is from India or brought in with the One God idea. That is certainly attributed to Aryan not Indus. The stage upon stage of Hindu gods and godesses is the Indus, perhaps. Buddha and Krishna as religions have no certain origins, either. Many believe they were real people.
2000 BCE is the beginning of the One God, kingdom of Judea and around 700 years later is Abraham. 1300 more is Jesus. 600 more is Mohammed.
All the same set of stories, told in different tribes. They became mandatory reading for childern at differnent times but for the same reason, power. All have a root fantasic story of revelation but all are Abrahamic religions.
A similar situation existed for the East. Lao Tsu. When? Around 2500 BCE. God is the Tao, the Way of Everything.
We are just trying to figure things out. But, nothing at all has every proved this idea of Diety watching and controlling events.
The Greeks on the other hand had this idea of Diamand. Un-corruptible Self. Vast power of self actualization. Christos is that ideal humble but powerful Self.
And even before that, but not by much, all around 2500 BCE, the group around the North Black Sea, began to roam. Two thrusts, East as the Aryans and South they became known the Iraians, later Persians.
The Darhmic views are Aryan and to this day, we don't know if the language of Sanscrit is from India or brought in with the One God idea. That is certainly attributed to Aryan not Indus. The stage upon stage of Hindu gods and godesses is the Indus, perhaps. Buddha and Krishna as religions have no certain origins, either. Many believe they were real people.
2000 BCE is the beginning of the One God, kingdom of Judea and around 700 years later is Abraham. 1300 more is Jesus. 600 more is Mohammed.
All the same set of stories, told in different tribes. They became mandatory reading for childern at differnent times but for the same reason, power. All have a root fantasic story of revelation but all are Abrahamic religions.
A similar situation existed for the East. Lao Tsu. When? Around 2500 BCE. God is the Tao, the Way of Everything.
We are just trying to figure things out. But, nothing at all has every proved this idea of Diety watching and controlling events.
The Greeks on the other hand had this idea of Diamand. Un-corruptible Self. Vast power of self actualization. Christos is that ideal humble but powerful Self.
BongTokinAlcoholic420
Well-Known Member
I believe "God" sparked the so called "Big Bang" and has been making it "run" ever since. Until one day .... a billion trillion years from now ... it will "implode" ... as you say. IMHO
high|hgih
Well-Known Member
Theres a lot of things I think about this. The big bang of course is the default, basic rule to how this universe came to be. There was singularity and then it exploded into a crazy-scape of space and time.
One way to think about it is there is another theory called the bounce theory, where the big bang happened. But yet our universe is slowly collapsing back. If you read up on it time itself is actually slowing down on a cosmological scale. Someday, all the stars will go out. what the big bounce theory suggests is that the uiniverse will go back to the form of singularity and explode yet again, constantly bouncing zipping around imploding and exploding for eternity. Physics shows things cannot be created or destroyed right? Well even if ever single star were to burn out their matter would still be present, floating through space doing whatever it does.. The only thing missing if this whole universe were to collapse is light. If all the stars were gone, how would this next universe have light? Well light gets sucked into black holes doesn't it?
Another way to think about it is that our universe is not the only one. Its one of infinite more than likely. In the middle of every galaxy is a supermassive black hole, now maybe after all the materials in the galaxy get sucked into this black hole it, like a cloud, can't hold them anymore and at the bottom of the hole(singularity) bursts a new universe. All the materials in the galaxy are enough to make a new one with different outcomes right? Then what I was thinking is there are other black holes, ones from stars.. If these were to birth a new universe it would be far less complex only holding the components of the star and whatever else it managed to suck up.
There is too much learning that has to do with the universe.. There is still quantom mechanics which prove that there is something controlling all of this, some force. String theory which shows the basic particles of everything.. Neutrinos..
One way to think about it is there is another theory called the bounce theory, where the big bang happened. But yet our universe is slowly collapsing back. If you read up on it time itself is actually slowing down on a cosmological scale. Someday, all the stars will go out. what the big bounce theory suggests is that the uiniverse will go back to the form of singularity and explode yet again, constantly bouncing zipping around imploding and exploding for eternity. Physics shows things cannot be created or destroyed right? Well even if ever single star were to burn out their matter would still be present, floating through space doing whatever it does.. The only thing missing if this whole universe were to collapse is light. If all the stars were gone, how would this next universe have light? Well light gets sucked into black holes doesn't it?
Another way to think about it is that our universe is not the only one. Its one of infinite more than likely. In the middle of every galaxy is a supermassive black hole, now maybe after all the materials in the galaxy get sucked into this black hole it, like a cloud, can't hold them anymore and at the bottom of the hole(singularity) bursts a new universe. All the materials in the galaxy are enough to make a new one with different outcomes right? Then what I was thinking is there are other black holes, ones from stars.. If these were to birth a new universe it would be far less complex only holding the components of the star and whatever else it managed to suck up.
There is too much learning that has to do with the universe.. There is still quantom mechanics which prove that there is something controlling all of this, some force. String theory which shows the basic particles of everything.. Neutrinos..
Similar threads
