Of what's become nondisclosure/taboo

In message , f/fgeorge
writes
On 30 Aug 2005 10:32:46 -0700, "Brad Guth"
wrote:

If you'd like to honestly focus upon something/anything, just specify
whatever and I'll follow suit.
Any suggestion the BIG BANG theory wasn't the one and only singular
event
I have some ideas on this: What if there was no "big bang" that
engulfed EVERYTHING. What if it was a "big bang" just in our section
of the sky? In order for there to be a "big bang" there HAD to be
something to go BANG! NO ONE has EVER been able to even SHOW how to
produce something from nothing. Since it is not concievable it
probably couldn't have happened! Since that is true then there HAD to
be something BEFORE the "big bang"!
Soooo on to the idea, suppose OUR section of the Universe went thru a
black hole type event and after the compression and "big bang" it
regrouped and made what we now recognize as our section of the whole.
Just because we can't see past the edge doesn't mean that waaaaay out
there there isn't anything. There is lots of "empty" space between our
known Galaxys and I can't see any reason to the idea that our little
section is all there is.

1) Responding to Brad Guth is probably a waste of time.
2) This is totally off topic for sci.astro.seti.
3) CAPITAL letters are the mark of a crank.
4) Your misconceptions about the "big bang" seem to be
all-comprehensive.
It _wasn't_ an explosion into something else. It was a creation of all
of space and time, possibly from nothing at all, possibly from something
pre-existing (such as is suggested by the "brane" theory).
"Our" section of the universe is limited by the speed of light
(according to current theory). The whole universe may well be infinite
in space, but (again, according to current theory) not in time.
The space between galaxies is irrelevant, because a creation event would
produce a new space and new time.
--
Remove spam and invalid from address to reply.

f/fgeorge;
I can't see any reason to the idea that our little
section is all there is.

Just because we can't see past the edge doesn't mean that waaaaay out
there there isn't anything.
Your ulterior motive as another or secondary ruse is working. It's
making you almost human.
I'd have to agree that perhaps a few little bangs transpired, or
perhaps like that black hole sort of passage that sucks in more ways
than we can understand. Also, from time to time the Oort to Oort zone
encounters with the likes of the Sirius star system should have been
interesting.

What if that once upon a time black hole encounter were merely an
amount or seed of antimatter as having been nicely surrounded by those
nearly resting photons?

Thereby not all that much normal gravity to deal with, just lots of
potential antimatter mass that need not be very large and, thereby a
great deal of empty space within a given black hole, plus horrific
energy differentials to boot that should make something happen to
whatever's capable of passing through.

I'm talking about that seed of antimatter accommodating a nifty cloak
of those photons from 1e-10 nm (roughly the size of an atom) to perhaps
at least 3e5 km if not 9.46e12 km, thus quite a wide spectrum worth of
perhaps as many as 1e100 photons/atom.

If the antimatter core represented 1e30 atoms, than the collective of
those nearly resting photons might become as great as 1e130. Of course
such nearly resting photons would remain somewhat energy dark to our
instruments, especially of that many as having been situated in one
tight little black hole of a spot.

BTW "f/fgeorge"; why are you bothering to having this perfectly honest
to God contribution of yours removed in 6 Days?
I have some ideas on this: What if there was no "big bang" that
engulfed EVERYTHING. What if it was a "big bang" just in our section
of the sky? In order for there to be a "big bang" there HAD to be
something to go BANG! NO ONE has EVER been able to even SHOW how to
produce something from nothing. Since it is not concievable it
probably couldn't have happened! Since that is true then there HAD to
be something BEFORE the "big bang"!
Soooo on to the idea, suppose OUR section of the Universe went thru a
black hole type event and after the compression and "big bang" it
regrouped and made what we now recognize as our section of the whole.
Just because we can't see past the edge doesn't mean that waaaaay out
there there isn't anything. There is lots of "empty" space between our
known Galaxys and I can't see any reason to the idea that our little
section is all there is.
~

Life on Venus, Township w/Bridge and ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
"In war there are no rules" - Brad Guth

Jonathan Silverlight;
2) This is totally off topic for sci.astro.seti.
I believe the truth and nothing but the truth is what's typically "off
topic" as far as yourself and SETI are concerned.

Although I do like the following notions that's totally beyond anything
Einstein.
"Our" section of the universe is limited by the speed of light
(according to current theory).
The space between galaxies is irrelevant, because a creation event would
produce a new space and new time.
Obviously creation is creation, thus "new space and new time" makes
perfect sense.

How about the same as applied for artificial creation via intelligent
design?
~

Life on Venus, Township w/Bridge and ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
"In war there are no rules" - Brad Guth

Good greaf f/fgeoge,
You really are pathetic, as in so dumb and dumber snookered that you're
continually dumbfounded beyond the point of no-return.

Since you're so all knowing, thus you already know that the IR albedo
of the moon offers a good 25%, and you must know that the original
target diameter of the IR laser beam had diverged out to roughly 20 km
(actually it was atmospherically and otherwise jidder influenced to
something far greater). This time you do all the math upon what even a
full m2 worth of whatever retroreflector/mirror had to offer in the way
of returning whatever photons, as directly compared to the total 20 km
diameter area worth of the 25% IR albedo of what the moon itself had to
offer.

Obviously you insist upon excluding whatever Kodak physics, dry
quick-sand physics, thus surface tension and gravity of lightly
compacted dust accumulations plus, having excluded that of whatever
impact related physics. You're also excluding just about every color
image as having been obtained from orbit (via Apollo as well as from
subsequent missions), especially of those containing something that's
artificial and/or that of mother Earth within frame so as to reasonably
insure proper illumination and spectrum/color as for being the truth.
You're also excluding whatever's associated with any such manned or
robotic/AI landers that still offer us nada damn thing as to their R&D
prototypes that you've obviously bought into, as in taking their hook,
line and sinker.

So, please inform us village idiots as to those reflected IR photons as
arriving back from our extremely dark and nasty moon, as supposedly
having those retroreflectors that were never of more than one as
situated within the same laser target zone.

BTW; the moon does offer an amount of exposed bedrock, or at least
impact displaced basalt, as per such having much less than meters thick
dust to contend with. At least I can see those rock like lunar surfaces
from my backyard.
~

Life on Venus, Township w/Bridge and ET/UFO Park-n-Ride Tarmac:
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-town.htm
The Russian/China LSE-CM/ISS (Lunar Space Elevator)
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/lunar-space-elevator.htm
Venus ETs, plus the updated sub-topics; Brad Guth / GASA-IEIS
http://guthvenus.tripod.com/gv-topics.htm
"In war there are no rules" - Brad Guth