I Feel Like Ranting !

Painius wrote,

How can you be so certain that the Big
Bang occurred? It's the "working
backwards it **must** come to a point"
that sticks in my craw. .... How can such
an assumption be "good science".

Paine, a web search under 'Big Bang Nucleosynthesis' will turn up some
great info. The synthesis of the first elements, and particularly the
existance of deuterium which cannot be produced by stellar processes, is
consistent with a superhot BB event. This is one cornerstone of the BB
model.

Nature loves OSCILLATION, vibration,
back n forth, up n down, in n out,
frequency, wavelength, lambda...
but all of a sudden the natural Universe
just goes one way?

Once we can get past the void-space/ universal c-invariance idea, *our
visible cosmos* is seen as having a finite beginning-point and end
point, in the Big Bang-Big Crunch. "Ever-accelerating expansion" is seen
as a grand illusion when spatial density and c are allowed to rise at
cosmological distances... and *our visible cosmos* is allowed to come
into its Contraction phase, eventually leading to the Big Crunch. And is
_is_ oscillatory and reciprochal. That's ONE frame of referance, the
'inside' frame, bounded by our sphere of visibility.
Then there's the imaginal 'outside' frame, from which
we see an overarching, continuoulsy-running Process at work, analogous
to the freon cycle in refrigeration. The sphere of *our visible cosmos*
becomes like a cluster of freon molecules embedded in the flowing
Process. The cluster experienced the 'bang' of its emergence and will
experience the 'crunch' of its re-ingestion back into the compressor.
Yet the greater Process remains perpetual and unchanging, fulfilling the
original lambda idea of a Steady-State universe. All its sub-phases-
Accelerating expansion, decelerating expansion, Contraction, and
Implosion are all running simultaneously, each at its respective station
on the cycle.
But as long as we cling to the void-space/ universal c-invariance
regime, we'll hafta settle for a 'one-shot' BB, ever-accelerating
expansion of the "void" and an ignominious entropic heat death in the
far future. A very dissatisfying and counter-intuitive prospect, to say
the least.
oc

To reply by e-mail please use anti-spam address: oldcoot88atwebtv.net
Change 'at' to@

G=EMC^2 Glazier wrote:

Fred You are right to talk about what we can find in latest books
is good but it is as not very interesting. We could tell each other
to go to GOOGLE,and that is not going to be that interesting. Like
Einstien told a friend "now that they know my theories I'm just an
old man that
does not wear socks. If we can discuss stuff where great minds have
left off(add to their books) that makes science interesting. We
have to
express some of our own thinking. We can't be parrots.
Even thinking can be boring unless we can think of new stuff. There
is plenty
of our own thoughts without using thoughts of others I think so
Thinking about and discussing the unknown is the most fun.
The
past century "fusion" was interesting,and new. Today its not all
that interesting anymore. Unknowns like dark matter. gamma
explosions
blackholes and space are more to my liking. Gravity will always be
number 1 Bert

Heavy! (;-))

--
Regards
Fred

Remove FFFf to reply, please

Painius wrote:

"Fred Williams" wrote...
in message ...

. . .
The journals are full of attempts to explain why the BB
occurred
because it's one of the next big questions. It's not much fun
talking about the stuff we already know. is it?! . . .

Good stuff, Fred! Let's see if we can make talking about the
"stuff we already know" more fun!

For nearly two thousand years following Ptolemy, people
"already knew" that Earth was the center of the Universe. The
only ones who thought it might be fun talking about it were
people like Copernicus, Galileo, Shapley, Hubble.

Can we think of more examples where talking about the stuff
we already know can be an exceeding pleasure?

Yeah, the category of "What we think we know." is sometimes even more
fun: Good point.
Change subject:
Imagine Galileo with his telescope first turned to the heavens and
seeing things no one else could see. The sky became a different
place. That was a unique moment in astronomy; a unique experience.


--
Regards
Fred

Remove FFFf to reply, please

Just to expand a bit more on the refrigeration cycle as an analogy of
the CBB (Continuous BB) Process-- The compressor/ condenser represent
the pre-BB state; the compressor pressurizes the condenser (the 'hot'
coil on the back of the fridge). The hot, pressurized liquid freon
erupts thru a restrictor valve (a tiny pin hole), flashing into a gas in
the evaporator, the 'freezing unit' inside the fridge. That point of
eruption represents the 'Big Bang' point, the phase-change from the
pre-BB state into the externalized universe. The gaseous freon is
finally re-ingested back into the continuously-running compressor
powering the cycle.
An individual cluster of freon molecules indeed
experiences a 'bang-squeeze, bang-squeeze' oscillation as it goes thru
the cycle- like the reciprocation of a piston engine. But the larger
Process is continuously running, like a gas turbine.
As illustrated in the freon cycle analogy, the entire
externalized universe is coldest part of the cycle, while the pre-BB
state is the hottest. A hypermassive BH 'Engine' at the core of the
universe, the Primal particle, is the 'compressor-condenser' powering
and sustaining the Process, intaking the old, spent creation thru its
poles while erupting brand-new spacetime out its spinning equator. The
externalized Process, the macro-universe itself, assumes the form of the
dual-hemisphered toroid with a common equator, rotating on a polar axis.
The CBB model is not (yet) subject to empirical proof,
and definitely falls under the realm of philosophy. Yet it offers a
rational, intellectually pleasing alternative to the stunted and
truncated current model.
But then, maybe everybody's happy with a 'one shot'
BB with *everything* suddenly coming from 'nothing', void space,
universal c-invariance, and an open-ended entropic run down back to
'nothing'. oc

To reply by e-mail please use anti-spam address: oldcoot88atwebtv.net
Change 'at' to@

Dave George Gamow before the BB was greatly excepted figured out the
back ground temperature of space has cooled down to 3K since the
explosion. We know it today to be 2.7K That has to tell us something.
My own thoughts are the big bang took place 22 billion LY ago. That in
the last 11 billion LY ago there has been mini-bangs created by
collisions between two black holes,and this happens on average one in a
24 hour period. The biggest mini-bang happened in 1999,and for a second
was equal to all the energy of the universe. This is based on good
science,and not science fiction. I just add my own thoughts,and hope
that will add to the interest. The universe belongs to all of us.This is
our spacetime. Let use it wisely,and don't let are ego spoil are good
times together. No one here is getting a Nobel this year. Not even me.(I
deserve one) Bert

"Bill Sheppard" wrote in message...
...

Just to expand a bit more on the refrigeration cycle as an analogy of
the CBB (Continuous BB) Process-- The compressor/ condenser represent
the pre-BB state; the compressor pressurizes the condenser (the 'hot'
coil on the back of the fridge). The hot, pressurized liquid freon
erupts thru a restrictor valve (a tiny pin hole), flashing into a gas in
the evaporator, the 'freezing unit' inside the fridge. That point of
eruption represents the 'Big Bang' point, the phase-change from the
pre-BB state into the externalized universe. The gaseous freon is
finally re-ingested back into the continuously-running compressor
powering the cycle.
An individual cluster of freon molecules indeed
experiences a 'bang-squeeze, bang-squeeze' oscillation as it goes thru
the cycle- like the reciprocation of a piston engine. But the larger
Process is continuously running, like a gas turbine.
As illustrated in the freon cycle analogy, the entire
externalized universe is coldest part of the cycle, while the pre-BB
state is the hottest. A hypermassive BH 'Engine' at the core of the
universe, the Primal particle, is the 'compressor-condenser' powering
and sustaining the Process, intaking the old, spent creation thru its
poles while erupting brand-new spacetime out its spinning equator. The
externalized Process, the macro-universe itself, assumes the form of the
dual-hemisphered toroid with a common equator, rotating on a polar axis.
The CBB model is not (yet) subject to empirical proof,
and definitely falls under the realm of philosophy. Yet it offers a
rational, intellectually pleasing alternative to the stunted and
truncated current model.
But then, maybe everybody's happy with a 'one shot'
BB with *everything* suddenly coming from 'nothing', void space,
universal c-invariance, and an open-ended entropic run down back to
'nothing'. oc

To reply by e-mail please use anti-spam address: oldcoot88atwebtv.net
Change 'at' to@

I think it's *high* time for Science to conquer death...

All the OTHER religions have!

happy days and...
starry starry nights!

--
Tender is my love for thee
Oh star so close at hand,
Warming those so dear to me
As we lay on the sand...

It's so easy to believe
In all this beachin' fun,
That some day you and i will be--
Altogether one.

Paine Ellsworth

In message
, Painius
writes

I think it's *high* time for Science to conquer death...

All the OTHER religions have!

"Gilgamesh, whither rovest thou?
The life thou pursuest thou shalt not find.
When the gods created mankind,
Death for mankind they set aside,
Life in their own hands retaining...
Do we build a house for ever?"

(3rd millennium BC, translation in "Intelligent Life in the Universe".
They don't quote the source for this version)
The Greeks had some myths about the undesirability of living forever,
too.
--
"Forty millions of miles it was from us, more than forty millions of miles of
void"

"Jonathan Silverlight" wrote...
in message ...

Painius writes in message...
,

I think it's *high* time for Science to conquer death...

All the OTHER religions have!

"Gilgamesh, whither rovest thou?
The life thou pursuest thou shalt not find.
When the gods created mankind,
Death for mankind they set aside,
Life in their own hands retaining...
Do we build a house for ever?"

(3rd millennium BC, translation in "Intelligent Life in the Universe".
They don't quote the source for this version)
The Greeks had some myths about the undesirability of living forever,
too.
--
"Forty millions of miles it was from us, more than forty millions of miles of
void"

Ah yes, Jonathan... GILGAMESH!

He who is awesome to perfection!

"It was he who opened the mountain passes,
who dug wells on the flank of the mountain.
It was he who crossed the ocean, the vast seas, to the rising sun,
who explored the world regions, seeking life."

I guess the inability to conquer death *does* set science
apart from the religions, doesn't it...

--
happy days and...
starry starry nights!

Painius

Hi Sally By the time science cures dying I will be dead. Being dead is
the same as not being alive. That means we were all dead. I think we all
won natures big lottery by being alive. The chance of male sperm getting
to the egg is many millions to one. Man wastes a lot of its sperm(one
way or another) Woman"s eggs don't always get fertilized(sad but true)
Best to do things natures way. The old must die. Rich people live longer
than poor(This comes in with the survival of the fittest) I think if
I had the money of Gates I might live a few years longer. Right now
my American Express card is keeping me alive. Bert I think they will
cry when I go

"G=EMC^2 Glazier" wrote in message
...
my American Express card is keeping me alive. Bert I think they will
cry when I go
I would...honestly. However, I reckon you have a good many years in you :-)
Sally