Popping The Big Bang

With mounting conjecture that we 'are not alone' in the universe, it
might be timely to appreciate how truly fortunate WE are in viewing
the heavens.
Apparently we are close to the position of the 'singularity' from
which the universe sprung into being some 13.7 billion years ago, and
can see its glory in all directions. Not so those poor souls at the
extremities! If as claimed, the edge of the universe is 13.7 bly away,
the total width becomes 27.4 bly, and so they are only able to 'see'
as far as us (half of it).
AND this doesn't take into account the fact that the material of
their home has travelled out from "The Big Bang" for 13.7 billion
years (and that's allowing light speed for matter), and then emmitted
light back to us that is claimed to have also taken 13.7 billion years
for the trip = light and mass travelling about the universe for 27.4
by then, when it is only 13.7 to begin with!!
So what do those beings see? Not us, as they are more light years
away than the earth's age, and certainly not behind us (in their
view), as we are at the 13.7 limit of their view. And what if they
look outward? Are they gazing into an inky abyss?
Now aren't we just so privileged to live at the center of it all?
(And isn't 'The Big Bang' such an imaginitive load of rubbish??)

Jim Greenfield

Jim Greenfield wrote:

Apparently we are close to the position of the 'singularity' from
which the universe sprung into being some 13.7 billion years ago, and
can see its glory in all directions. Not so those poor souls at the
extremities! If as claimed, the edge of the universe is 13.7 bly away,
the total width becomes 27.4 bly, and so they are only able to 'see'
as far as us (half of it).

It is your own ignorant misunderstanding of cosmology you are criticizing,
not the actual model used by cosmologists. Please try to relief your
ignorance to the point that you can hold a worthwhile opinion on the
subject. Hint: the big bang was not an explosion of matter from a point
into preexisting space, and we are not at the 'center' of it any more than
any other point in space is at its center.

Paul

Thanks again for once again demonstrating how a lack of understanding of a
scientific theory allows one to make foolish statements in public. My
suggestion - get some knowledge and stop making stupid statements.

Jim Greenfield wrote:
With mounting conjecture that we 'are not alone' in the universe, it
might be timely to appreciate how truly fortunate WE are in viewing
the heavens.
Apparently we are close to the position of the 'singularity' from
which the universe sprung into being some 13.7 billion years ago, and
can see its glory in all directions. Not so those poor souls at the
extremities! If as claimed, the edge of the universe is 13.7 bly away,
the total width becomes 27.4 bly, and so they are only able to 'see'
as far as us (half of it).
AND this doesn't take into account the fact that the material of
their home has travelled out from "The Big Bang" for 13.7 billion
years (and that's allowing light speed for matter), and then emmitted
light back to us that is claimed to have also taken 13.7 billion years
for the trip = light and mass travelling about the universe for 27.4
by then, when it is only 13.7 to begin with!!
So what do those beings see? Not us, as they are more light years
away than the earth's age, and certainly not behind us (in their
view), as we are at the 13.7 limit of their view. And what if they
look outward? Are they gazing into an inky abyss?
Now aren't we just so privileged to live at the center of it all?
(And isn't 'The Big Bang' such an imaginitive load of rubbish??)

Jim Greenfield

Dear Jim Greenfield:

"Jim Greenfield" wrote in message
om...
....
Apparently we are close to the position of the 'singularity' from

http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmo_01.htm

A good a place as any as to "what we see" means. Especially part 2.

David A. Smith

Jim Greenfield wrote:

With mounting conjecture that we 'are not alone' in the universe, it
might be timely to appreciate how truly fortunate WE are in viewing
the heavens.
Apparently we are close to the position of the 'singularity' from
which the universe sprung into being some 13.7 billion years ago, and
can see its glory in all directions. Not so those poor souls at the
extremities! If as claimed, the edge of the universe is 13.7 bly away,
the total width becomes 27.4 bly, and so they are only able to 'see'
as far as us (half of it).

Are you trolling Greenfield? There is no edge--everywhere is the center.
All observers in the universe see similar.
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html
http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm

On Mon, 15 Sep 2003 03:46:33 GMT, Sam Wormley wrote:

Are you trolling Greenfield? There is no edge--everywhere is the center.

I doubt he's trolling. This is a misunderstanding I've bumped into among
non-science people time and again when they're trying to understand
space-time.

My experience is that the "mental map" most people have of space-time isn't
too different from what Newton held, although (of course) nowhere near as
sophisticated. Most people are slaves to their mental images of reality; they
might know, but don't really accept, that space-time as a whole can't be
painted and doesn't "look" like any picture their minds can build. It takes a
non-trivial grasp of mathematics (well past the standard high school two years
of Algebra, one year of Geometry, and perhaps one of Trigonometry) before a
person has the mental tools to begin to understand just how strange the
universe is.

Isn't it wonderful? Not that so few people have those tools, but that at least
some do?



--
Catherine Hampton
Home Page * http://www.devsite.org/
The SpamBouncer * http://www.spambouncer.org/

(Please use this address for replies -- the address in my header is a
spam trap.)

"J. Scott Miller" wrote in message ...
Thanks again for once again demonstrating how a lack of understanding of a
scientific theory allows one to make foolish statements in public. My
suggestion - get some knowledge and stop making stupid statements.


So will a few mouthfulls of your 'raisin bread' help my ignorance? If
you can't 'see' that the whole BBB's was proposed because the earth
'seemed' to be near the center of the universe, as every way we look
the red shift appears to show galaxies moving away, then YOU fit the
description!
How handy is it that 'space is expanding, taking matter with it'?? Yet
I've yet to observe anything expand without energy change, or been
advised of atoms getting larger-- and they surely contain space! So
just which 'space' will you nominate to expand? Is it that within
atoms, between molecules, between stars, or galaxies? Is it all
expanding, or just what suits the BB Theory? Last crap I saw posted in
BB support had it confined to 'groups of galxies'.

Any way- answer the post or shut up!
Can a being at position 13.7 bly west of here, see one 13.7 east?
What do they observe when they 'look beyond'?
What are the dimensions of the universe?
What is it's age?
Has light from one side of the universe reached the other?
(Some people are afraid of the dark, and BBs and DHRs of 1/0 )

Jim Greenfield wrote:

snip

Any way- answer the post or shut up!
Can a being at position 13.7 bly west of here, see one 13.7 east?

snip

Jim,

You are not seeing the universe as it is, but rather as it was,
with distance concurrently representing time slices. Each
successively more distant sphere you look at represents how
the universe looked in successively more distant pasts.

Consider that when that when some of the most distant light
was made this earth didn't yet exist. We are seeing snapshots
of many different pasts, none of which exists any longer.
And in fact, when light left the most distant, and many
even closer places, this earth didn't even exist yet, but
we have come along to intercept some of that light.

Considering a universe which folds over on itself, 13.7 bly
east and 13.7 bly west of here might be closer neighbors
than you realize.

The universe doesn't have to make sense to you. It is up to
you to make sense of the universe that is, and it is a
universe which is proving to be difficult to understand.

Jim Greenfield wrote:
With mounting conjecture that we 'are not alone' in the universe, it
might be timely to appreciate how truly fortunate WE are in viewing
the heavens.
Dale Trynor wrote:
It gets more interesting if one can predict other universes as well.
Apparently we are close to the position of the 'singularity' from
which the universe sprung into being some 13.7 billion years ago, and
can see its glory in all directions. Not so those poor souls at the
extremities! If as claimed, the edge of the universe is 13.7 bly away,
the total width becomes 27.4 bly, and so they are only able to 'see'
as far as us (half of it).
AND this doesn't take into account the fact that the material of
their home has travelled out from "The Big Bang" for 13.7 billion
years (and that's allowing light speed for matter), and then emmitted
light back to us that is claimed to have also taken 13.7 billion years
for the trip = light and mass travelling about the universe for 27.4
by then, when it is only 13.7 to begin with!!

You might want to review how a theory I have been promoting that gives
some interesting predictions that are related to this, providing you
haven't already done so. After the parts that look at how time
gravitational dilation can be shown to expand space you can then look at
how it examines how a coaleasing neutron star gives an inflation like
appearance for any inside observers. You will note how it predicts that
while the original diameters have gone from a few km diameter to light
years across instantly from the prospective of each individual neutron
they will still only be able to gage the size of their universe
depending on how long light has had to travel.
In one light second they will only observe whatever parts of their
universe that light can travel in that one second and this would not
change the fact that there really is light years of distance still hidden.
This gives the prospective of having started from that single point even
while in some ways this is only an illusion equally shared by every
other point particle.
So what do those beings see? Not us, as they are more light years
away than the earth's age, and certainly not behind us (in their
view), as we are at the 13.7 limit of their view. And what if they
look outward? Are they gazing into an inky abyss?
Now aren't we just so privileged to live at the center of it all?
This idea of a center is very peculiar in this special theory because of
how it also postulates the existence of white holes. After you review
the site and have time to think about it you will have seen how and why
it predicts that our universe is a black hole within another universe.
The thing about black holes is they draw matter etc into them and if you
were inside of a larger space within one you would see what looks like
white holes pulling in matter from the older outer universe into ours.

Attempts to model these white holes as they would first appear based on
how a traveler would observe one while entering our universe from the
outside, tends to suggest the possibility that they might appear to
curve into our universe and may even appear in different locations while
in actuality being the one surface. They might in some reverse sort of
way be considered as the center of our universes as easily as its
outside. More studies needed.
Sorry about the site neglect this hobby dose not pay.
http://dalet.9cy.com/

(And isn't 'The Big Bang' such an imaginitive load of rubbish??)
I would like to hear what your opinions might be on this theory after
you give it some thought.

Jim Greenfield wrote:

So will a few mouthfulls of your 'raisin bread' help my ignorance?

One attribute of idiots like yourself is a grossly overinflated
sense of their own mental abilities. The painful truth is that you
have made a laughable newbie error, and are persisting in holding
onto this misconception in the face of correction.

You now have two choices. You can admit you ****ed up and go learn
what the BB theory actually says. Or, you could subordinate intellect
(whatever you have in that department) to ego and stroll down the
road to crankhood.

Which will it be?

Paul