How Roy Masters tried to disprove the Big Bang
in [Relativity]
|
Prev: Twins Paradox doesn't add up with light
Next: Terra incognita, Sacred ground, Mysterious territory.
From: contact on 15 May 2010 21:11 On May 5, 11:58 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 5, 3:50 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 4, 5:27 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On May 4, 2:04 pm, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 4, 12:45 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > The problem Mr. Masters has pointed out is the gravity of the first > > > > > matter must keep it from expanding. Gerard Hooft shows the solution to > > > > > this problem set out by Roy Masters. Hooft proposed a ring Big Bang > > > > > where energy is created spread out and expansion of the universe > > > > > overcomes its original gravity. Edward Witten also proposes an > > > > > original spread out energy but for him it was string. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > Real physicists do not care what some radio guru with no remaining > > > > brain cells says about science. > > > > Still the challenge requires resolution. > > > What challenge?- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > I guess you missed it. The Big Bang's gravity is the challenge. How it > must get over it to expand. > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - gravitydrivenuniverse-response.com
From: BURT on 16 May 2010 01:48 On May 15, 6:11 pm, cont...(a)gravitydrivenuniverse-response.com wrote: > On May 5, 11:58 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 5, 3:50 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > On May 4, 5:27 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 4, 2:04 pm, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > > > > > > On May 4, 12:45 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > The problem Mr. Masters has pointed out is the gravity of the first > > > > > > matter must keep it from expanding. Gerard Hooft shows the solution to > > > > > > this problem set out by Roy Masters. Hooft proposed a ring Big Bang > > > > > > where energy is created spread out and expansion of the universe > > > > > > overcomes its original gravity. Edward Witten also proposes an > > > > > > original spread out energy but for him it was string. > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > > > > Real physicists do not care what some radio guru with no remaining > > > > > brain cells says about science. > > > > > Still the challenge requires resolution. > > > > What challenge?- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > I guess you missed it. The Big Bang's gravity is the challenge. How it > > must get over it to expand. > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > gravitydrivenuniverse-response.com- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - It is absolutely true that the universe must begin with space. Then spreed out energy must be created at the Big Bang beginning of time. Gerhard Hooft named this the Ring Big Bang contrary to Stephen Hawkings matterial singularity. Mitch Raemsch
From: Thomas Heger on 16 May 2010 16:48 BURT schrieb: > On May 15, 6:11 pm, cont...(a)gravitydrivenuniverse-response.com wrote: >> On May 5, 11:58 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >> >> >> >> >> >>> On May 5, 3:50 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: >>>> On May 4, 5:27 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>> On May 4, 2:04 pm, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: >>>>>> On May 4, 12:45 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>>>>>> The problem Mr. Masters has pointed out is the gravity of the first >>>>>>> matter must keep it from expanding. Gerard Hooft shows the solution to >>>>>>> this problem set out by Roy Masters. Hooft proposed a ring Big Bang >>>>>>> where energy is created spread out and expansion of the universe >>>>>>> overcomes its original gravity. Edward Witten also proposes an >>>>>>> original spread out energy but for him it was string. >>>>>>> Mitch Raemsch >>>>>> Real physicists do not care what some radio guru with no remaining >>>>>> brain cells says about science. >>>>> Still the challenge requires resolution. >>>> What challenge?- Hide quoted text - >>>> - Show quoted text - >>> I guess you missed it. The Big Bang's gravity is the challenge. How it >>> must get over it to expand. >>> Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - >>> - Show quoted text - >> gravitydrivenuniverse-response.com- Hide quoted text - >> >> - Show quoted text - > > It is absolutely true that the universe must begin with space. Then > spreed out energy must be created at the Big Bang beginning of time. > Gerhard Hooft named this the Ring Big Bang contrary to Stephen > Hawkings matterial singularity. > > Mitch Raemsch Personally I think, the 'big-bang' is a totally flawed idea. To illustrate this we had to reduce the dimensions of spacetime to three (two for space and one vertical for time). In this picture a circle means a sphere. If we look into the sky, we perceive space as expanding away from us. This is in this simplified view that of an expanding circle in time (or a set of spherical shells, which are older if larger). Since the arrow of time would point in our direction (the 'outskirts' are actually older), this would build a cone, with us at the top (as observers). Than the singularity, where the universe had its origin, had to be here on or near the Earth. But that would somehow violate the cosmological principle, that this location is not of specific significance (except for us). Greetings TH
From: BURT on 16 May 2010 16:55 On May 16, 1:48 pm, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: > BURT schrieb: > > > > > > > On May 15, 6:11 pm, cont...(a)gravitydrivenuniverse-response.com wrote: > >> On May 5, 11:58 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > >>> On May 5, 3:50 am, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > >>>> On May 4, 5:27 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>> On May 4, 2:04 pm, Igor <thoov...(a)excite.com> wrote: > >>>>>> On May 4, 12:45 am, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > >>>>>>> The problem Mr. Masters has pointed out is the gravity of the first > >>>>>>> matter must keep it from expanding. Gerard Hooft shows the solution to > >>>>>>> this problem set out by Roy Masters. Hooft proposed a ring Big Bang > >>>>>>> where energy is created spread out and expansion of the universe > >>>>>>> overcomes its original gravity. Edward Witten also proposes an > >>>>>>> original spread out energy but for him it was string. > >>>>>>> Mitch Raemsch > >>>>>> Real physicists do not care what some radio guru with no remaining > >>>>>> brain cells says about science. > >>>>> Still the challenge requires resolution. > >>>> What challenge?- Hide quoted text - > >>>> - Show quoted text - > >>> I guess you missed it. The Big Bang's gravity is the challenge. How it > >>> must get over it to expand. > >>> Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > >>> - Show quoted text - > >> gravitydrivenuniverse-response.com- Hide quoted text - > > >> - Show quoted text - > > > It is absolutely true that the universe must begin with space. Then > > spreed out energy must be created at the Big Bang beginning of time. > > Gerhard Hooft named this the Ring Big Bang contrary to Stephen > > Hawkings matterial singularity. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > Personally I think, the 'big-bang' is a totally flawed idea. > To illustrate this we had to reduce the dimensions of spacetime to three > (two for space and one vertical for time). In this picture a circle > means a sphere. > If we look into the sky, we perceive space as expanding away from us. > This is in this simplified view that of an expanding circle in time (or > a set of spherical shells, which are older if larger). Since the arrow > of time would point in our direction (the 'outskirts' are actually > older), this would build a cone, with us at the top (as observers). > Than the singularity, where the universe had its origin, had to be here > on or near the Earth. But that would somehow violate the cosmological > principle, that this location is not of specific significance (except > for us). > > Greetings > TH- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - The 4D hypersphere model Big Bang has spread out energy in the surface and expansion is possible. Mitch Raemsch
From: Sam Wormley on 16 May 2010 22:35
On 5/16/10 3:48 PM, Thomas Heger wrote: > Personally I think, the 'big-bang' is a totally flawed idea. Then it make sense to study the argument and evidence the big bang theory. http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/nocenter.html http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/infpoint.html Also see Ned Wright's Cosmology Tutorial http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmology_faq.html http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/CosmoCalc.html WMAP: Foundations of the Big Bang theory http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html WMAP: Tests of Big Bang Cosmology http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni/uni_101bbtest.html |