I can prove the existance of God. Right now.

Okie... I've worked with more scientists than you can shake at stick at.

 

But are they "real"? And are you one of them? I'll grant you this: If you'd be a little more specific about when the Big Bang theory will be refuted, you'd be advancing a scientific hypothesis which will be tested by events, and either confirmed or discarded. Same goes for Christians who think Jesus is coming again "real soon".

 

Please tell me your vast experience in "hands on" science and working with different projects... beside perhaps some class room ones

and re-read-- I highlighted some keywords..might help
I expect the Big Bang Theory.. to be reassessed here pretty soon, if not completely tossed aside.

the thread is called ;

I can prove the existance of God. Right now

which can't be done... now are you going to do that??

 

Like most threads on Hip Forums, we drifted from the original topic some time ago. I got my two cents in on that early on in arguing, as you do, that it can't be done, i.e., the topic is absurd. I think the Big Bang theory is constantly being reassesed, but so far it seems to be holding up. The "if not tossed aside" part certainly implies that there's something unsound about it. On the basis of current scientific evidence, I don't think that's the case. It's the best we've come up with.

 

I think nobody really knows what happened and we will never know what happened because we were not there to experience it
this science is all ideas and theories... much like religion... hey a yin-yang! :cheers2:

 

What I saying is that every so often there is a rather large leap in our understanding of the universe. For example;

Fermi Paradox... it came about in 1950 when Fermi was talking to a couple of his bomb buddies at Los Alamos... well why have we found any aliens or been visited yet. At that time the Theory was the universe was a lot smaller. First light had barely hit the Hale telescope they then realized the distances were much greater than thought before.
Would Fermi have said they same thing if he had present day knowledge?

Sure in a much smaller world one would expect we would have had some encounters.. ok there is quite a debate about that anyway.I have met some people who say they have seen something. I take a certain about of that with a grain of salt. Although I saw something about 20 years ago in Ca. , that I can only say what it wasn't.

The yardstick jumped quite a bit, with Palomar. Which remained the largest working telescope for decades. The VLA open our eyes pretty well too. Along with the Hubble Deep Field.

We are coming up on another big leap with ALMA and some of the other new developments. That will more than likely will change the scale of things once again. In reality the Big Bang can not be anything more than a Theory until we have viewpoints that are separated by a very large distance, because we lack a true 3d perspective.

We have only really touched the stars for 400 years.. the town I live in is that old .... actually older but it really didn't become a town till the Spanish arrived ... right?

 

Be an old geezer ... I'm not real envious of the economy that you younger folks are looking at.. but I am of the discoveries that will be made

 

ditto... we, humans, are far from knowing...

just an infinite amount of information to be learned in a finite amount of time

 

HAHAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
Such flawed logic, but hey, whatever gives you peace of mind bro.
Just don't push your bullshit on me.

 

???

 

In reality, the Big Bang is nothing more than a theory, just like evolution by process of natural selection is "only a theory". But it's an impressive theory. Theories are the foundation of scientific knowledge.

 

I agree it is a impressive theory .. kind of like a egg hatching

but the achievement of Bose-Einstein condensation kind of knocks it for a loop

it's close to 100 years old but that's okay

 

Sorry I came in on a conversation.
Was only making reference to the original thread not any of you're comments.
Sorry if i confused ya dude.

 

LOL

 

I just ate chicken sammich and God said it was good.

 

im starving :/

 

Fist of all, man, let me apologize for being a dickhead the other night in our overly rude exchange. Your basic point, as I understand it, was to express excitement about the new frontiers of science opening up as a result of changing technology. I second that emotion. But I picked on one little offhand remark you made suggesting that the Big Bang theory might be ready for the scrapheap. What set me off was my annoyance at a certain kind of naturalism (not necessarily yours, you just happened to be there when I vetted my ire) that is a kind of religion in denial based on assumptions about what science will prove or disprove in the future. Let me just say that I don't give a rats ass whether the Big Bang theory stays or goes. If it goes, that's life and science. The theory has already been refined by inflationary theory to take account of a lot of previous objections; whether or not it will resolve the challenges of crispy halos, dwarf galaxies, cold dark matter, and magnetic molopoles remains to be seen, and further refinements of the theory are not unlikely. Yes it's getting up in years, so is Darwin's theory, but so far the old guys seem to be still standing--especially in the absence of plausible alternatives. When it comes to scientific theories, oldies are goodies. The really interesting unresolved questions are whether or not the Big Bang was a one-time event or a recurring one, sequentially over time, laterally in other universes, or recurrently in some kind of Penrose-Hawkings time loop. Of course there are also the assumptions on which the theory rests: the universality of the laws of physics and the homogeneity and isomorphism of the universe.

That being said, let me return to my dickhead role, and ask how in the hell Bose-Einstein blows holes in Big Bang? If anything, I think the Bradley and Davis experiments with Bose-Einstein condensates at the University of Queensland could lead a new understanding of the significance of Big Bang in a broader cosmology. Exciting stuff, but we don't know the answers yet.

 

That being said, let me return to my dickhead role.......lol

Not a problem ... our basic.. and I do mean basic understanding of matter...

When the egg hatched .. the big bang... though there wouldn't have been any noise .. right .. what was the temperature outside .. oh wait there wouldn't have been any outside either

Big Bang while plausible just is a bit too much like our own birth as humans... or chickens
you're alright Okie... glad you got what i was saying.. we/us seem to run in cycles on new discoveries... we cling to existing ones then we have a big spurt of new info and have to readjust or discard existing ones.. that I feel is going to happen again real soon

I firmly believe that evolution is a fact, not a theory ... it's much more hands on and tangible than the Big Bang

 

Is there any valid reason that the Universe had to have a beginning?

Other than our desire to want it to have one.... to be created .. to have a start point

A large number of people believe that God had no beginning... who is God's Daddy? Papa G

When did He have his Bang into existence?

Isn't infinity a two way street?

 

Like a tracker looking for clues in the forest, so must we impress upon the aether.


So far...everything has had a beginning and an end, what people have done is look at things and said what caused that?

The big bang is the point where people went...err ok everything after this point seems to originate here. It is not a question of our impression that made this a fact, its just where we are presently at in our understanding