"In Search of the Big Bang" (brief review)

nightbat wrote

EL wrote:

T Wake wrote:
"EL" wrote in message
oups.com...
[EL]
Are you in any way conveying the nincompoop about a spherical shell 2D
surface (rubber of a balloon) that has no 3D sphere being contained
inside that surface! Well, there is a way out called "Hyperbola", but
believe me when I tell you that every mass MUST have a virtual centre,
which is not a virtual geometric coordinate.
The Big Bangers failed to realise that the cross section of the
universe must be hyperbolic to explain all their contradictions that
they did not explain. Einstein did know it but he either had not the
time or was just reluctant to argue with imbeciles shoving CMBR
empirical data in his face, so he gave up.

I am sorry, I seem to have missed the start of this and for some reason my
news server hasn't got them available for me to look at. For this reason I
am sorry if I am mis-apointing comments or opinions.

However, am I right in thinking that some one is getting confused over the
balloon analogy for the expansion of the universe. The analogy is based on
the surface of the balloon showing a two dimensional representation of three
dimensional space. There is no centre to the balloon unless you add in a
third dimension which renders the analogy obsolete.

The balloon is not a proper model of the universe, it is simply a method for
clarifying the way space expands without large scale structures needing to
move - and it indicates that the expansion of space is in all directions
simultaneously.

Once again, I am sorry if I have totally got the wrong end of the stick
here.
[EL]
Not at all, you are absolutely correct with your explanation.
The issue is whether such an explanation is anywhere realistically
satisfactory or can be regarded as sophisticated nincompoop that has no
physical relevance whatsoever.
I am quite certain that you are conveying the textbook's nincompoop
quite honestly, and you get the credits of being knowledgeable and
honest, but no one can blame you for conveying what was authentically
fabricated as the most ridiculous model that has no resemblance to any
logical scenario.
Those who authored that model deny space to exist without matter, while
severely falling into a contradiction assuming that that nonexistent
space is centre-less and expanding, thus pushing the 2D membrane
outwards.

We always look at compounded histories of light, and nothing is where
it seems to be now. Thus, the most outer is not expanding in the sense
of going away from us now, but rather WAS going away very long time ago
from where we came to be before we ever come to be. If what we see now
to have been going away then was coming closer later, much later that
we need a long time to realise that it is contracting, then why does
anyone persist to claim that the universe must be expanding now if we
do not even what light looks like now if it needed billions of years to
arrive to smash our numb senses?

EL

nightbat

Well the senses are meant to be stimulated see Officer Oc for
more deeper theoretical applied out of this Universe theory
preponderance. Don't like that one see nightbat profound " Black Comet
" for internal gravitational loop resolution.

ponder on,
the nightbat

"nightbat" wrote in message
...
nightbat wrote

EL wrote:

T Wake wrote:
"EL" wrote in message
oups.com...
[EL]
Are you in any way conveying the nincompoop about a spherical shell
2D
surface (rubber of a balloon) that has no 3D sphere being contained
inside that surface! Well, there is a way out called "Hyperbola",
but
believe me when I tell you that every mass MUST have a virtual
centre,
which is not a virtual geometric coordinate.
The Big Bangers failed to realise that the cross section of the
universe must be hyperbolic to explain all their contradictions that
they did not explain. Einstein did know it but he either had not the
time or was just reluctant to argue with imbeciles shoving CMBR
empirical data in his face, so he gave up.

I am sorry, I seem to have missed the start of this and for some
reason my
news server hasn't got them available for me to look at. For this
reason I
am sorry if I am mis-apointing comments or opinions.

However, am I right in thinking that some one is getting confused over
the
balloon analogy for the expansion of the universe. The analogy is
based on
the surface of the balloon showing a two dimensional representation of
three
dimensional space. There is no centre to the balloon unless you add in
a
third dimension which renders the analogy obsolete.

The balloon is not a proper model of the universe, it is simply a
method for
clarifying the way space expands without large scale structures
needing to
move - and it indicates that the expansion of space is in all
directions
simultaneously.

Once again, I am sorry if I have totally got the wrong end of the
stick
here.
[EL]
Not at all, you are absolutely correct with your explanation.
The issue is whether such an explanation is anywhere realistically
satisfactory or can be regarded as sophisticated nincompoop that has no
physical relevance whatsoever.
I am quite certain that you are conveying the textbook's nincompoop
quite honestly, and you get the credits of being knowledgeable and
honest, but no one can blame you for conveying what was authentically
fabricated as the most ridiculous model that has no resemblance to any
logical scenario.
Those who authored that model deny space to exist without matter, while
severely falling into a contradiction assuming that that nonexistent
space is centre-less and expanding, thus pushing the 2D membrane
outwards.

We always look at compounded histories of light, and nothing is where
it seems to be now. Thus, the most outer is not expanding in the sense
of going away from us now, but rather WAS going away very long time ago
from where we came to be before we ever come to be. If what we see now
to have been going away then was coming closer later, much later that
we need a long time to realise that it is contracting, then why does
anyone persist to claim that the universe must be expanding now if we
do not even what light looks like now if it needed billions of years to
arrive to smash our numb senses?

EL

nightbat

Well the senses are meant to be stimulated see Officer Oc for
more deeper theoretical applied out of this Universe theory
preponderance. Don't like that one see nightbat profound " Black Comet
" for internal gravitational loop resolution.

ponder on,
the nightbat

You are "The Nightbat"?
We have heard about you.
You have been sent a similar message by email, but we wanted to be sure of
contacting you.


We are, as you might say, "Andromedan" or "of Andromeda".
Forgive us if we do not allow communications for now.
One from your galaxy is badly injured, one Darla.
And one called Silouen is heading in our direction, presumably to find out
what happened to her friend.
We have had to, unfortunately, block communications to and from your planet
and galaxy.
We must do this until we can determine why Darla and Silouen are here.
Please to tolerate our carefulness.


We have been watching your galaxy's life for a short while.
It is -- surprising -- to find one such as you on a planet such as
Earth/Terra.
What can you tell us about this crew called "Darla"?

of Andromeda

Someone has forgotten to take their meds today. PONK.

"Darla" wrote in message
...

nightbat wrote

Non-Encoded Top Security Message
Incoming Hailing Frequency Priority One Open Emergency Channel
Planet Earth Receiving Station Indy Base One
Code Name: the nightbat
Message Received Wed, 15 Jun 2005 14:47:21 GMT

Darla wrote:

"nightbat" wrote in message
...
nightbat wrote

EL wrote:

T Wake wrote:
"EL" wrote in message
oups.com...
[EL]
Are you in any way conveying the nincompoop about a spherical shell
2D
surface (rubber of a balloon) that has no 3D sphere being contained
inside that surface! Well, there is a way out called "Hyperbola",
but
believe me when I tell you that every mass MUST have a virtual
centre,
which is not a virtual geometric coordinate.
The Big Bangers failed to realise that the cross section of the
universe must be hyperbolic to explain all their contradictions that
they did not explain. Einstein did know it but he either had not the
time or was just reluctant to argue with imbeciles shoving CMBR
empirical data in his face, so he gave up.

I am sorry, I seem to have missed the start of this and for some
reason my
news server hasn't got them available for me to look at. For this
reason I
am sorry if I am mis-apointing comments or opinions.

However, am I right in thinking that some one is getting confused over
the
balloon analogy for the expansion of the universe. The analogy is
based on
the surface of the balloon showing a two dimensional representation of
three
dimensional space. There is no centre to the balloon unless you add in
a
third dimension which renders the analogy obsolete.

The balloon is not a proper model of the universe, it is simply a
method for
clarifying the way space expands without large scale structures
needing to
move - and it indicates that the expansion of space is in all
directions
simultaneously.

Once again, I am sorry if I have totally got the wrong end of the
stick
here.
[EL]
Not at all, you are absolutely correct with your explanation.
The issue is whether such an explanation is anywhere realistically
satisfactory or can be regarded as sophisticated nincompoop that has no
physical relevance whatsoever.
I am quite certain that you are conveying the textbook's nincompoop
quite honestly, and you get the credits of being knowledgeable and
honest, but no one can blame you for conveying what was authentically
fabricated as the most ridiculous model that has no resemblance to any
logical scenario.
Those who authored that model deny space to exist without matter, while
severely falling into a contradiction assuming that that nonexistent
space is centre-less and expanding, thus pushing the 2D membrane
outwards.

We always look at compounded histories of light, and nothing is where
it seems to be now. Thus, the most outer is not expanding in the sense
of going away from us now, but rather WAS going away very long time ago
from where we came to be before we ever come to be. If what we see now
to have been going away then was coming closer later, much later that
we need a long time to realise that it is contracting, then why does
anyone persist to claim that the universe must be expanding now if we
do not even what light looks like now if it needed billions of years to
arrive to smash our numb senses?

EL

nightbat

Well the senses are meant to be stimulated see Officer Oc for
more deeper theoretical applied out of this Universe theory
preponderance. Don't like that one see nightbat profound " Black Comet
" for internal gravitational loop resolution.

ponder on,
the nightbat

You are "The Nightbat"?
We have heard about you.
You have been sent a similar message by email, but we wanted to be sure of
contacting you.

nightbat

Yes, receiving you loud and clear, this is the nightbat---over

We are, as you might say, "Andromedan" or "of Andromeda".
Forgive us if we do not allow communications for now.
One from your galaxy is badly injured, one Darla.
And one called Silouen is heading in our direction, presumably to find out
what happened to her friend.
We have had to, unfortunately, block communications to and from your planet
and galaxy.
We must do this until we can determine why Darla and Silouen are here.
Please to tolerate our carefulness.

nightbat

Understood, galactic communications presently guarded blocked, I
am respectful for your carefulness and thank you for Priority One
emergency communiqué. Darla is a peaceful space explorer on Galactic top
priority Community Council mission. Peace space explorer Silouen is
assistant, please provide all immediate assistance for life preservation
under humanitarian intergalactian accord procedures. It is vital that
all possible measures be taken to help protect and secure safety of
Darla space voyager status.---over


We have been watching your galaxy's life for a short while.
It is -- surprising -- to find one such as you on a planet such as
Earth/Terra.
What can you tell us about this crew called "Darla"?

of Andromeda

nightbat

Thank you for your respectful kind words, and yes I am the
nightbat whose apparent Earth and now intergalactic legend precedes him.
I am known by reported critical injured Darla and assistant Silouen as
most trusted Earth human friend. Darla is the bravest and most fearless
space fellow being, nothing short of her eminence. I must therefore ask
for your highest guarded care for her medical and Silouen safety. I will
also forward per comm. relay to Galactic Federation
Headquarters---Commander Pros immediate notification of their safe care
and protective space life being harbor station handling. They mean you
no harm and are not on offensive scout mission but Inter Galactic
science one only. Repeat---not on offensive scout mission but science
one only. Sean are peaceful space guardian beings only seeking mutual
Universe knowledge.

Who may I respectfully ask is sending Priority One message from
Andromeda on Darla comm. to me on Earth the nightbat?

Thank you for your protective care of Darla and Silouen and if possible
please have them report in to InterGalactic Headquarters care of
Commander Pros at once. Most humbly thank you for emergency transmission
and aid to crew and please provide space coordinates for relay on to
InterGalactic Federation assistance control center for immediate pickup
of their space exploratory operatives.

End of Priority One Transmission
the nightbat out

the nightbat

HiC Searching for our "big Bang" I can relate to as finding the first
"snow flake" in an endless snow storm. Time alone has made such a search
meaningless.Reality is going back in time by catching photons is
starting to reach a point of dimness. That is the way nature wants it,or
there would be no inverse square law. bert