Jump to content




Welcome to Unexplained Mysteries! Please sign in or create an account to start posting and to access a host of extra features.


- - - - -

The Myth of the Big Bang


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
291 replies to this topic

#286    Ben Masada

Ben Masada

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,101 posts
  • Joined:06 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 24 April 2012 - 08:02 PM

View PostJayMark, on 24 April 2012 - 07:42 PM, said:

Mutation and adaptability aren't forces. They are causual phenomenons driven by the forces of nature (physics) as far as the theory of evolution is concerned and as far as I understand it.

I tend to think that there is something else behind it all but that belongs to my beleifs. Not science.

Peace.

Well, IMO, that something else could be what Albert Einstein answered to the question if he believed in God. He said that all his life was trying
to catch God at His work of creation. Then, as he was asked if he was an atheist, he said, "Never, what I find hard to believe is in a personal God,
but an atheist, I have never been one." You don't believe in the beliefs of science? Don't you think that to believe that the big bang is a fact, is
to believe by faith, just like a common theist? As far as I am concerned, I see no difference.
Ben


#287    JayMark

JayMark

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 941 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Non-Local

  • Our universe was created out of a desire. A desire to experiment, interact and evolve within a multitude of planes of consciousness.

Posted 24 April 2012 - 08:02 PM

View PostBen Masada, on 24 April 2012 - 07:53 PM, said:

Yes, but some atheists have claimed that the big bang is a fact, but none can give answer to my question. Even Mythyo Kakko, you know, that Japanese astrophysicist, I watched him on the channel History the other day, saying that "the theory of the big bang could any time be proven innacurate as we are not sure about any thing." That's what I call being cautious with what we think we know. Please, do not think I discard the possibility that it really occurred. I just don't put all my eggs in the same basket. (Sorry if I have mispelled the name of the astrophysicist just mentioned here.)
Ben

Fair enough.

Calling it a fact is also wrong to some degree.

Peace.

Bartender says: "Sorry, we don't serve faster-than-light neutrinos here."

So you have these two faster-than-light neutrinos walking into a bar...

#288    JayMark

JayMark

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 941 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Non-Local

  • Our universe was created out of a desire. A desire to experiment, interact and evolve within a multitude of planes of consciousness.

Posted 24 April 2012 - 08:13 PM

View PostBen Masada, on 24 April 2012 - 08:02 PM, said:

Well, IMO, that something else could be what Albert Einstein answered to the question if he believed in God. He said that all his life was trying
to catch God at His work of creation. Then, as he was asked if he was an atheist, he said, "Never, what I find hard to believe is in a personal God,
but an atheist, I have never been one."

Well obviously, at least part of Einstein's beleif was wrong. He refused to accept some of the fundamental quantum physics principles because he didn't like the idea that "God plays dice with the universe". Unfortunately for him, that dosen't change the fact that what he didn't beleive in is actually very real as far as I know.

Quote

You don't believe in the beliefs of science? Don't you think that to believe that the big bang is a fact, is
to believe by faith, just like a common theist?

I do not beleive that science is wrong at all neither that the big bang is a proven fact. My beleifs do not go against current scientific facts at all. I think that science is just as right as it is concerning the physical part of reality. What differs with me is that I also beleive in an "immaterial" part of reality that in entangled to everything and driving it. So yes, it could go against some scientific theories but never against what is set-in-stone, as far as I know.  

Quote

As far as I am concerned, I see no difference.
Ben

There is a big diffrence. Science isn't about faith, it's about facts.

Peace. I like where this is going.

Edited by JayMark, 24 April 2012 - 08:15 PM.

Bartender says: "Sorry, we don't serve faster-than-light neutrinos here."

So you have these two faster-than-light neutrinos walking into a bar...

#289    Ben Masada

Ben Masada

    Poltergeist

  • Member
  • 3,101 posts
  • Joined:06 Apr 2012
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Israel

Posted 24 April 2012 - 08:44 PM

View PostCybele, on 18 April 2012 - 03:09 AM, said:

I posted a video elsewhere a while back of a lecture by the Albert Einstein Professor of Physics at Princeton University. When a layperson talks about "The Big Bang Theory", they assume it goes along with the assertion that the Big Bang was the beginning of everything. In the video, it was pointed out that the theory, as understood by professional cosmologists and physicists, is actually a logical reversal in time of the observable and highly replicated fact that the universe is both expanding and cooling. If the universe is cooling and expanding, obviously it was very dense and very hot as far back as we can observe. The Big Bang Theory only goes back to this point. It cannot say whether or not there was something before that. It is not proven or agreed upon unanimously that this was the beginning of everything.

Watch this video, if you're interested:



I can't believe myself but I did waste half an hour of my time watching the video you suggest above and I got tired of listening to mere verbal juggling of nonsense. I am sorry. To begin with, the speaker started by saying that the big bang was from nothing. There was nothing and, all of sudden there was the big bang. This is simply balderdash as far as I am concerned. Then, something like the universe multiplies itself many times in a fraction of a second. For heaven's sake is it what you guys base all your wisdom? Such a confusion only leaves one more and more confused. I came to the conclusion that there is not much to learn in this kind of "inflation and dark energy." To me, it sounds as if the big bang happened like the
rabbit that comes out of the hat of the magician. What a wasting of time!
Ben


#290    JayMark

JayMark

    Conspiracy Theorist

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 941 posts
  • Joined:08 Jun 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Non-Local

  • Our universe was created out of a desire. A desire to experiment, interact and evolve within a multitude of planes of consciousness.

Posted 24 April 2012 - 09:02 PM

View PostBen Masada, on 24 April 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

I can't believe myself but I did waste half an hour of my time watching the video you suggest above and I got tired of listening to mere verbal juggling of nonsense. I am sorry. To begin with, the speaker started by saying that the big bang was from nothing. There was nothing and, all of sudden there was the big bang. This is simply balderdash as far as I am concerned. Then, something like the universe multiplies itself many times in a fraction of a second. For heaven's sake is it what you guys base all your wisdom? Such a confusion only leaves one more and more confused. I came to the conclusion that there is not much to learn in this kind of "inflation and dark energy." To me, it sounds as if the big bang happened like the
rabbit that comes out of the hat of the magician. What a wasting of time!
Ben

Dude... as far as I'm concerned, your post is what I call non-sense. Seems to me that what you call non-sense is simply matter that you do not understand and/or missinterpret.

Before bashing on a theory like this, you should at least make the effort of understanding what you are talking about. Otherwise, you are just having a biaised opinion.

Don't worry, it happens even to the bests of us.  :lol:

Just an advise here. Feel free to ignore it.

Peace.

Edited by JayMark, 24 April 2012 - 09:05 PM.

Bartender says: "Sorry, we don't serve faster-than-light neutrinos here."

So you have these two faster-than-light neutrinos walking into a bar...

#291    Cybele

Cybele

    Married to the Void

  • Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,432 posts
  • Joined:26 Jan 2008
  • Gender:Female

  • Prick your finger it is done
    The moon has now eclipsed the sun
    The angel has spread its wings
    The time has come for bitter things

Posted 25 April 2012 - 12:38 AM

View PostBen Masada, on 24 April 2012 - 08:44 PM, said:

I can't believe myself but I did waste half an hour of my time watching the video you suggest above and I got tired of listening to mere verbal juggling of nonsense. I am sorry. To begin with, the speaker started by saying that the big bang was from nothing. There was nothing and, all of sudden there was the big bang. This is simply balderdash as far as I am concerned. Then, something like the universe multiplies itself many times in a fraction of a second. For heaven's sake is it what you guys base all your wisdom? Such a confusion only leaves one more and more confused. I came to the conclusion that there is not much to learn in this kind of "inflation and dark energy." To me, it sounds as if the big bang happened like the
rabbit that comes out of the hat of the magician. What a wasting of time!
Ben

I'm guessing you either didn't understand the video or are just trolling. Either way, I'm done talking to you and anyone else who decides it's okay to take a quote out of context, change words in the original quote, use it to fit their agenda, and then ignore questions regarding their apparently blatant dishonesty.

Edited by Cybele, 25 April 2012 - 12:42 AM.

My sig: "Cryptorchid", Marilyn Manson

#292    Paranoid Android

Paranoid Android

    ????????

  • 26,454 posts
  • Joined:17 Apr 2005
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Sydney

  • Paranoid Android... Gorram it kid, let's frak this thing and go home! Make it so!

Posted 25 April 2012 - 06:42 AM

Ben Masada,

In reference to the "scientific myth", it has been explained to you several times that you have taken Sagan's words out of context, and yet you refuse to accept this.  I'm not certain whether you are intentionally ignoring the context or if you just can't grasp the context properly.  Whatever the case, after 20 pages of circular arguing on this, I don't see much point in keeping the thread open.  When you acknowledge the proper context of Sagan's quote, send me a PM and I will consider reopening the thread (depending on what point/s you think could be worthy of discussion).  Thank you,

~ Paranoid Android (Forum Mod. Team)


Posted Image

My blog is now taking a new direction.  Dedicated to my father who was a great inspiration in my life, I wish to honour his memory (RIP, dad) by sharing with the world what he had always kept to himself.  More details, http://www.unexplain...showentry=27811




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users