Popping The Big Bang

Jim Greenfield wrote:

"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.



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!

if that is what you 'see', then you have misunderstood the bb theory.

How handy is it that 'space is expanding, taking matter with it'??

How handy is it that the speed of light is finite, so that as we look further
out in the universe we see it how it was longer back in the past.

what we see at 13B ly away is not the edge of the universe, what we see there is
how the universe was 13B years ago; relativly shortly after the BB.


--

And so it goes...
On The Brink...
Our lives like granuals of sand through the hourglass...
Do you know what time it is?
That's the question.

db wrote in message ...
Jim Greenfield wrote:

"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.



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!

if that is what you 'see', then you have misunderstood the bb theory.

How handy is it that 'space is expanding, taking matter with it'??

How handy is it that the speed of light is finite, so that as we look further
out in the universe we see it how it was longer back in the past.

what we see at 13B ly away is not the edge of the universe, what we see there is
how the universe was 13B years ago; relativly shortly after the BB.

Is that so? Pictures look mighty like the ones just around here- old
and wrinkled, not young at all. And people there see the same thing
looking here! Don't you think Al's bull****ometer could be suggesting
that we are both victims of the same illusion?

Jim G

From the shadows, the mysterious (Jim
Greenfield) (if that IS his real name) conspiratorially whispered:

db wrote in message ...
Jim Greenfield wrote:

"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.



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!

if that is what you 'see', then you have misunderstood the bb theory.

How handy is it that 'space is expanding, taking matter with it'??

How handy is it that the speed of light is finite, so that as we look further
out in the universe we see it how it was longer back in the past.

what we see at 13B ly away is not the edge of the universe, what we see there is
how the universe was 13B years ago; relativly shortly after the BB.

Is that so? Pictures look mighty like the ones just around here- old
and wrinkled, not young at all.

No they don't. You're either uninformed or deliberately lying. Which
is it?


--

Ben Sisson

1 flask of holy water: $11
1 modified crossbow: $50
1 pointy wooden stake: $1

7 seasons worth of memories of the best show on TV: priceless

"Jim Greenfield" wrote in message
om...

Any way- answer the post or shut up!

First things first:

What is it's age?

13.7 +/- 0.2 based on the WMAP probe measurements of the
CMBR:

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_mm/mr_age.html

See this site for info on WMAP:

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/

and the CMBR:

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest3.html

Lets assume 13.701 for the sake of this discussion.

Can a being at position 13.7 bly west of here, see one 13.7 east?

(I assume "west" means in some arbitrary direction and "east"
means in the opposite direction. A being 13.7 billion light
years away is unlikely to share our definitions of east and
west.)

If we look 13.7 bly west, we might see a clump of hydrogen
and helium gas as it was 1 million years after the 'bang'
that would later become a galaxy. A being living there then
could only see 100 million light years in any direction
where they would see the CMBR that we measure, and within
that region they would see little more than clumps of gas
that would later become galaxies.

A being (called Jim) living in that galaxy 13.7 billion
years later could look east and see a clump of hydrogen
and helium gas as it was 1 million years after the 'bang'
that would later become our galaxy.

What do they observe when they 'look beyond'?

Jim would see the same as us, galaxies distributed evenly
throughout the whole region he could observe. If he looked
west he could see a patch of hydrogen and helium gas 13.7
bly away, as it was 1 million years after the 'bang', that
would later become a galaxy. That galaxy's light has not
yet reached us. A being (called Sheila) living in that
galaxy 13.7 billion years later would see the same as Jim
and us, galaxies distributed evenly throughout the whole
region she could observe. If she looked east, she would
see the patch of gas destined to become Jim's galaxy as
it was 1 million years after the 'bang', and if she
looked west, ...

What are the dimensions of the universe?

Very much bigger than the patch we can see, possibly
infinite. Imagine repeating the above series of beings
seeing clumps of gas that would become galaxies containing
other beings at least billions of times.

Has light from one side of the universe reached the other?

The universe doesn't have sides.

(Some people are afraid of the dark, and BBs and DHRs of 1/0 )

Some people are afraid of what they cannot comprehend. Some
people are afraid of what we see. We still see it and it is
still there whether anyone comprehends it or not.

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_mm.html

George

"George Dishman" wrote in message ...
"Jim Greenfield" wrote in message
om...

First things first:

What is it's age?

13.7 +/- 0.2 based on the WMAP probe measurements of the
CMBR:
:

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest3.html

Lets assume 13.701 for the sake of this discussion.

Can a being at position 13.7 bly west of here, see one 13.7 east?

(I assume "west" means in some arbitrary direction and "east"
means in the opposite direction. A being 13.7 billion light
years away is unlikely to share our definitions of east and
west.)

If we look 13.7 bly west, we might see a clump of hydrogen
and helium gas as it was 1 million years after the 'bang'
that would later become a galaxy. A being living there then
could only see 100 million light years in any direction
where they would see the CMBR that we measure, and within
that region they would see little more than clumps of gas
that would later become galaxies.

Yes! That IS what we Should see, but photos of very distant galaxies
Don't show that. We Don't see 'clumps of gas', but galaxies which may
be similar to our own.
If they were 13 b years younger, one would expect them to look
different.

A being (called Jim) living in that galaxy 13.7 billion
years later could look east and see a clump of hydrogen
and helium gas as it was 1 million years after the 'bang'
that would later become our galaxy.

What do they observe when they 'look beyond'?

Jim would see the same as us, galaxies distributed evenly
throughout the whole region he could observe. If he looked
west he could see a patch of hydrogen and helium gas 13.7
bly away, as it was 1 million years after the 'bang', that
would later become a galaxy. That galaxy's light has not
yet reached us. A being (called Sheila) living in that
galaxy 13.7 billion years later would see the same as Jim
and us, galaxies distributed evenly throughout the whole
region she could observe. If she looked east, she would
see the patch of gas destined to become Jim's galaxy as
it was 1 million years after the 'bang', and if she
looked west, ...

STOP RIGHT HERE! Why didn't you elaborate?

What are the dimensions of the universe?

Very much bigger than the patch we can see, possibly
infinite. Imagine repeating the above series of beings
seeing clumps of gas that would become galaxies containing
other beings at least billions of times.

This is Exactly My Point! I to believe the universe to be infinite--
not constricted by the boundaries and limitations of some sudden past
singular event.

Has light from one side of the universe reached the other?

The universe doesn't have sides.

Sooner or later some Big Banger will go on about living on an
expanding 'membrane' similar to a balloon. That would represent the
sides I refer to here. I agree; there are no sides because the
dimensions are infinite.
George, the concepts of infinity and BB are oxymoronic and
incompatible.
Thanks for your reply
Jim G

(Some people are afraid of the dark, and BBs and DHRs of 1/0 )

Some people are afraid of what they cannot comprehend. Some
people are afraid of what we see. We still see it and it is
still there whether anyone comprehends it or not.

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_mm.html

George

Jim Greenfield wrote:

Sooner or later some Big Banger will go on about living on an
expanding 'membrane' similar to a balloon. That would represent the
sides I refer to here. I agree; there are no sides because the
dimensions are infinite.
George, the concepts of infinity and BB are oxymoronic and
incompatible.
Thanks for your reply
Jim G

There are many possible models to consider. Provide the
mathematical modeling for your preference, then we'll
talk.

"Jim Greenfield" wrote in message
om...
"George Dishman" wrote in message
...
"Jim Greenfield" wrote in message
om...

First things first:

What is it's age?

13.7 +/- 0.2 based on the WMAP probe measurements of the
CMBR:
:

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest3.html

Lets assume 13.701 for the sake of this discussion.

Can a being at position 13.7 bly west of here, see one 13.7 east?

(I assume "west" means in some arbitrary direction and "east"
means in the opposite direction. A being 13.7 billion light
years away is unlikely to share our definitions of east and
west.)

If we look 13.7 bly west, we might see a clump of hydrogen
and helium gas as it was 1 million years after the 'bang'
that would later become a galaxy. A being living there then
could only see 100 million light years in any direction
where they would see the CMBR that we measure, and within
that region they would see little more than clumps of gas
that would later become galaxies.

Yes! That IS what we Should see, but photos of very distant galaxies
Don't show that. We Don't see 'clumps of gas', but galaxies which may
be similar to our own.
If they were 13 b years younger, one would expect them to look
different.

They do. As several people have said, you should read
up on the subject or you will embarras yourself.

A being (called Jim) living in that galaxy 13.7 billion
years later could look east and see a clump of hydrogen
and helium gas as it was 1 million years after the 'bang'
that would later become our galaxy.

What do they observe when they 'look beyond'?

Jim would see the same as us, galaxies distributed evenly
throughout the whole region he could observe. If he looked
west he could see a patch of hydrogen and helium gas 13.7
bly away, as it was 1 million years after the 'bang', that
would later become a galaxy. That galaxy's light has not
yet reached us. A being (called Sheila) living in that
galaxy 13.7 billion years later would see the same as Jim
and us, galaxies distributed evenly throughout the whole
region she could observe. If she looked east, she would
see the patch of gas destined to become Jim's galaxy as
it was 1 million years after the 'bang', and if she
looked west, ...

STOP RIGHT HERE! Why didn't you elaborate?

The ellipsis indicates that you should continue the
sequence. I have written almost identical text three
times. You should be able to see the pattern and
repeat it as often as you like for yourself.

What are the dimensions of the universe?

Very much bigger than the patch we can see, possibly
infinite. Imagine repeating the above series of beings
seeing clumps of gas that would become galaxies containing
other beings at least billions of times.

This is Exactly My Point! I to believe the universe to be infinite--
not constricted by the boundaries and limitations of some sudden past
singular event.

Until a couple of years ago, "Big Bang" theory also said
the same. Space and time are related in GR and unless the
universe was going to collapse in a "Big Crunch", it had
to be infinite, and there wasn't enough matter to do that.

The acceleration of the expansion detected a few years ago
came as a bit of a surprise and a recent paper suggests that
it is possible for the universe to be finite without ending
in a crunch so infinite size is less certain but still quite
likely.

Has light from one side of the universe reached the other?

The universe doesn't have sides.

Sooner or later some Big Banger will go on about living on an
expanding 'membrane' similar to a balloon. That would represent the
sides I refer to here.
I agree; there are no sides because the
dimensions are infinite.
George, the concepts of infinity and BB are oxymoronic and
incompatible.

With just the observed density of matter, space in BB theory
could only be infinite in BB theory, and that has been known
since long before I joined this group many years ago. You
really should find out more about it before embarrassing
yourself with remarks like that.

George

George Dishman wrote in message
...

"Jim Greenfield" wrote in message
om...

Any way- answer the post or shut up!

First things first:

What is it's age?

13.7 +/- 0.2 based on the WMAP probe measurements of the
CMBR:

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_mm/mr_age.html

Gee, how does it get globular clusters of 15-18 billion years into it?

{snip}

(Some people are afraid of the dark, and BBs and DHRs of 1/0 )

Some people are afraid of what they cannot comprehend. Some
people are afraid of what we see. We still see it and it is
still there whether anyone comprehends it or not.

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_mm.html

But we don't 'see' the age of the universe. What we see is some random EM
radiation. It's only popular 'theory' that converts the observation into an
'age of the universe.' It's not 'revealed truth.'

greywolf42
ubi dubium ibi libertas

"greywolf42" wrote in message
...

George Dishman wrote in message
...

"Jim Greenfield" wrote in message
om...

Any way- answer the post or shut up!

First things first:

What is it's age?

13.7 +/- 0.2 based on the WMAP probe measurements of the
CMBR:

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_mm/mr_age.html

Gee, how does it get globular clusters of 15-18 billion years into it?

Easy, one goes out and buys some globular clusters of 15-18 billion
years and liberally sprinkles them about, there aren't any there at
the moment.

{snip}

(Some people are afraid of the dark, and BBs and DHRs of 1/0 )

Some people are afraid of what they cannot comprehend. Some
people are afraid of what we see. We still see it and it is
still there whether anyone comprehends it or not.

http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_mm.html

But we don't 'see' the age of the universe. What we see is some random EM
radiation.

What we 'see', or more accurately measure, is red-shifts
that vary with distance in a systematic manner.

It's only popular 'theory' that converts the observation into an
'age of the universe.' It's not 'revealed truth.'

That's science for you, the inescapable result of applying
simple maths to abservation. Sorry it doesn't suit your
preferences.

George

"Jim Greenfield" wrote in message
om...

Any way- answer the post or shut up!

**** you, you ignorant troll.
Your post has been answered.
Learn some physics before attempting
to beat off in public.