 |
|  |
 |
|
Rogan Josh
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Big Crunch
I don't know about the questioning the Big Bang I think there is more than enough 'hard' evidence that it is the source of all observable effects in existance. i.e Whether the universe is oscillating or not is irrelevent as the two scenarios are indistinguishable as all information is lost from one cycle to the next.
|
That would depend on the size at the smallest point of the oscillation - as long as it is slightly below the Planck scale, it would leave remnants. The Big Bang itself is not the progenator of all these effects - the expansion of the universe is. That is quite different!
quote:
I'd rather question specifics about the Big Bang, I don't like the bit about rampant inflation explaining isotropy for example. It just doesn't feel right to me.
|
I agree - I dislike inflation too.
quote:
And I want a better excuse for Omega equalling exactly 1, we don't know that it does but I think it will turn out to be so - to be flat is aesthetic in my mind, but I want an equally aesthetic pre-cursor to explain it. |
This is a good example of 'fiath' in science. There is really no evidence or reason for having Omega=1, it is just 'nice'. (In fact there is evidence for it not being 1.) But most cosmologists believe it to be so., and then speculate at length about what the 'dark matter' may be. (I do too.)
|
|
|  |
 |
|
debeest
|
|
I see no evidence whatsoever for the general notion that the universe was created or is directed by some sort of conscious entity. Semi-comprehensible tracts handed down to us from people who were hopelessly ignorant (through no fault of their own) don't count as evidence to me. Religions that posit a godding force are a complete mystery to me because they consist of belief without any evidence.
Scientific evidence generally has the virtue of being observable, measurable, and consistently repeatable. It exists in the physical world outside of people's minds, so that even those who expect not to see it must acknowledge it. People may differ in interpreting it, but a scientific viewpoint allows the evidence itself to be accepted even by those who differ as to interpretation.
I feel certain that you will want to argue that my description of scientific evidence applies fairly well to theological "evidence" as well. I may as well state my disagreement now.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Rogan Josh
|
|
quote: Originally posted by debeest
I feel certain that you will want to argue that my description of scientific evidence applies fairly well to theological "evidence" as well. I may as well state my disagreement now. |
Not at all. Indeed, since you are so happy with your 'scientific understanding' of the Big Bang, perhaps you would like to explain it to me. I would be very interested.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Rogan Josh
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Big Crunch
RJ, you in Edinburgh for the foreseeable future or just temporarily? |
That depends. I only have a 'temporary' 6-year contract here, but it is special funding from the government (basically so I don't have to teach, and can just focus on research) so I am allowed to take it wherever I like (in the UK). If a good university offers me a good deal (like a permanent contract to start when my gov funding stops, with reduced teaching duties) I would go. I had wondered about moving back to Oxford....
|
|
|  |
 |
|
niDe
|
|
yes. it sounds better than other terms.
like god.
and "what happens when like HEAPS of dust spins REALLY REALLY fast like and gets all hot (so take off all your clothes) and then like explodes into planets and all that other space stuff"
ah huh says the man with the green hat.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
quote: Originally posted by debeest
I don't think that most physicists would agree on that last point, though I'm sure many would. But I think most physicists would agree that Steven Hawking is among the few most important modern physicists, and not because the media focus on him more than they should. He may not be a supergenius, but he's added more to modern physical thinking than most. |
well, I have not ran into one of his theories in my classes
I have, however, ran into theories developed\partially developed by people who are here in Maryland
like Greenberg down the hall
JM
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Jon Miller
|
|
that is the theory they are looking for
a few of dudes down the hall are doing research right now trying to come up with a working theory
JM
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:33. Apolyton Time is 00:33. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|