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: BURT on 19 May 2010 14:30 On May 17, 11:45 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 17, 1:43 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 17, 10:53 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On May 4, 4:27 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. > > > > No, I don't think so, Mitch. > > > There are people that challenge that smoking is bad for your health. > > > Does this challenge require resolution? > > > There are people that believe the Earth is 6600 years old. Does this > > > challenge require resolution? > > > There are people that challenge that metals are made of atoms? Does > > > this challenge require resolution? > > > > One of the key ingredients to intelligence is knowing which challenges > > > are worth completely ignoring. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > This challenge is worth debating as it can lead science to a place of > > better understanding. > > As I said, just because it's a challenge does not make it worth > debating. > > > > > What we want a better understanding of is the > > Absolute Beginning of the universe. > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - "The problem in physics is to find the problem." Richard Feynmann How then does the universe expand against infinite gravity of a metterial singularity? This question is worth debating. Mitch Raemsch
From: PD on 19 May 2010 16:00 On May 19, 1:30 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 17, 11:45 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 17, 1:43 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On May 17, 10:53 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 4, 4:27 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. > > > > > No, I don't think so, Mitch. > > > > There are people that challenge that smoking is bad for your health.. > > > > Does this challenge require resolution? > > > > There are people that believe the Earth is 6600 years old. Does this > > > > challenge require resolution? > > > > There are people that challenge that metals are made of atoms? Does > > > > this challenge require resolution? > > > > > One of the key ingredients to intelligence is knowing which challenges > > > > are worth completely ignoring. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > This challenge is worth debating as it can lead science to a place of > > > better understanding. > > > As I said, just because it's a challenge does not make it worth > > debating. > > > > What we want a better understanding of is the > > > Absolute Beginning of the universe. > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > "The problem in physics is to find the problem." Richard Feynmann And knowing which things are not problems. > > How then does the universe expand against infinite gravity of a > metterial singularity? What infinite gravity? The gravity outside even a black hole's event horizon isn't infinite. > > This question is worth debating. > > Mitch Raemsch
From: BURT on 19 May 2010 17:08 On May 19, 1:00 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On May 19, 1:30 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 17, 11:45 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On May 17, 1:43 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 17, 10:53 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On May 4, 4:27 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. > > > > > > No, I don't think so, Mitch. > > > > > There are people that challenge that smoking is bad for your health. > > > > > Does this challenge require resolution? > > > > > There are people that believe the Earth is 6600 years old. Does this > > > > > challenge require resolution? > > > > > There are people that challenge that metals are made of atoms? Does > > > > > this challenge require resolution? > > > > > > One of the key ingredients to intelligence is knowing which challenges > > > > > are worth completely ignoring. > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > This challenge is worth debating as it can lead science to a place of > > > > better understanding. > > > > As I said, just because it's a challenge does not make it worth > > > debating. > > > > > What we want a better understanding of is the > > > > Absolute Beginning of the universe. > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > "The problem in physics is to find the problem." Richard Feynmann > > And knowing which things are not problems. > > > > > How then does the universe expand against infinite gravity of a > > metterial singularity? > > What infinite gravity? The gravity outside even a black hole's event > horizon isn't infinite. > > > > > > > This question is worth debating. > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text - The sigularity is infinite gravity even according to Stephen Hawking. "GR predicts its own downfall by predicting singularities." Mitch Raemsch
From: purple on 19 May 2010 17:52 On 5/19/2010 3:00 PM, PD wrote: > On May 19, 1:30 pm, BURT<macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: >>> As I said, just because it's a challenge does not make it worth >>> debating. >> >>>> What we want a better understanding of is the >>>> Absolute Beginning of the universe. >> >>>> Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - >> >>> - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - >> >>> - Show quoted text - >> >> "The problem in physics is to find the problem." Richard Feynmann > > And knowing which things are not problems. > >> >> How then does the universe expand against infinite gravity of a >> metterial singularity? > > What infinite gravity? The gravity outside even a black hole's event > horizon isn't infinite. > >> >> This question is worth debating. >> >> Mitch Raemsch Gravity is weak.
From: PD on 19 May 2010 17:53
On May 19, 4:08 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On May 19, 1:00 pm, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 19, 1:30 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On May 17, 11:45 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On May 17, 1:43 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > On May 17, 10:53 am, PD <thedraperfam...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On May 4, 4:27 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. > > > > > > > No, I don't think so, Mitch. > > > > > > There are people that challenge that smoking is bad for your health. > > > > > > Does this challenge require resolution? > > > > > > There are people that believe the Earth is 6600 years old. Does this > > > > > > challenge require resolution? > > > > > > There are people that challenge that metals are made of atoms? Does > > > > > > this challenge require resolution? > > > > > > > One of the key ingredients to intelligence is knowing which challenges > > > > > > are worth completely ignoring. > > > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > > > This challenge is worth debating as it can lead science to a place of > > > > > better understanding. > > > > > As I said, just because it's a challenge does not make it worth > > > > debating. > > > > > > What we want a better understanding of is the > > > > > Absolute Beginning of the universe. > > > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > "The problem in physics is to find the problem." Richard Feynmann > > > And knowing which things are not problems. > > > > How then does the universe expand against infinite gravity of a > > > metterial singularity? > > > What infinite gravity? The gravity outside even a black hole's event > > horizon isn't infinite. > > > > This question is worth debating. > > > > Mitch Raemsch- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text -- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > > The sigularity is infinite gravity even according to Stephen Hawking. But that's at the singularity. The universe isn't expanding at the singularity. It's expanding outside the event horizon. > "GR predicts its own downfall by predicting singularities." > > Mitch Raemsch |