- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
re: No matter what direction we point a telescope, we always look toward the Big Bang - why?
Posted on 7/28/22 at 9:39 am to Fun Bunch
Posted on 7/28/22 at 9:39 am to Fun Bunch
quote:
I haven't seen a single one of these that is based in any actual science.
Sorry, if you're looking for actual evidence, my tape measure is only 25 feet. Nevertheless, the question is valid. I even have used a metaphor. Why are you being deliberately obtuse and hostile?
0
Posted on 7/28/22 at 9:41 am to TBoy
quote:
There is no principled reason for any religious person to turn away from the physical sciences. If God made everything and placed it here for us to discover and be impressed, how can a Godly person turn away from it or deny its existence? If you believe in creation, that should give you a greater incentive to witness and try to understand what was created for you. When given a wrapped gift, the only thing to do is open it.
Devils(or Gods?) advocate here:
Many believers do embrace science, but not in ALL areas. Additionally, many believe that science has been politicized and corrupted; that many scientists have warped theory to essentially mean proven fact, and do present it to the public as fact. In point-of-fact in some areas they really DO NOT KNOW, but are GUESSING. Educated guessing to be sure, but guessing none-the-less.
Take evolution for instance: it obviously contradicts with the Bible, and scientists are, in essence, guessing about evolution. Each side believes theirs is the “truth”. Of course believers will take exception.
Why wouldn’t they take exception elsewhere?
Finally, many view the science community as worshiping science as a religion, and attempting to supplant God with science in it’s place. The Hubris of man.
The problem is that they and their supporters are now politically ostracizing doubters as though they are pariah’s to be shunned.
Why wouldn’t believers embrace people like this, I just can’t understand.
Posted on 7/28/22 at 9:43 am to squid_hunt
quote:I'm not sure I've seen your point.
13.8 billion years was the calculated age of the universe based on our understanding of physics. If you insist on squabbling about semantics, it is still outside the observable universe. Did you want to address or acknowledge my point?
Posted on 7/28/22 at 9:45 am to Korkstand
quote:
I'm not sure I've seen your point.
We should practically be able to see the edge of the universe unless we are very close to the center. There should be a point where the stars and matter run out. Where is that and why can't we see it?
Posted on 7/28/22 at 9:49 am to squid_hunt
quote:I don't think the estimated age of the universe will change much. Unless some new fundamental type of energy or force is discovered, it's still going to look like everything was on top of everything else 14 billion years ago.
I've already explained my challenge. Specifically. The model that has been used for years is now being challenged and the general attitude seems to be "Ah hah! Just as we predicted!" No. That's not accurate. Be honest. I predict within 5 years the estimated age of the universe will be drastically extended.
Posted on 7/28/22 at 9:54 am to UPT
quote:
Yes, throwing your hands up in the air and just saying, "magic," is always easier. The magic man did it, and his ways are mysterious. That's literally always the easiest answer.
Ha, it is more truthful than Big Bang.
Hey man, did you know - All the matter of the infinite Universe was once in one big ball and then Bang Universe.
What about that speed of light limit thing, oh let us pull inflation out of our arse to ignore rules.
What was before the big bang? frick if we know, but trust us big bang happened.
There is a better chance the Earth is flat, than the Big Bang actually happened. Well pretty sure the Earth is not flat
Posted on 7/28/22 at 9:54 am to Korkstand
quote:
it's still going to look like everything was on top of everything else 14 billion years ago.
Which brings it back to my question and the OP.
Posted on 7/28/22 at 9:57 am to squid_hunt
quote:That's not quite true.
We should practically be able to see the edge of the universe unless we are very close to the center. There should be a point where the stars and matter run out. Where is that and why can't we see it?
The farthest away we can see today is the distance light could have possibly traveled in 13.8 billion years. That is, something that emitted the light from a distance of 13.8 billion light-years away 13.8 billion years ago. It is overwhelmingly likely that there are things farther away in all directions, but the light has not yet had time to reach us. "Past" everything all we see is a kind of uniform field of radiation.
There's no way to know how near to or far from the "center" of the universe we are, because again we can't see an "edge" anywhere. It just looks like endless ocean.
Posted on 7/28/22 at 9:58 am to squid_hunt
quote:
We should practically be able to see the edge of the universe
There is no "edge" of the universe in the simplistic way you are thinking.
In addition, 13.77 billion is the age of the OBSERVABLE universe, and Webb cannot "see" that far, anyway.
Posted on 7/28/22 at 9:58 am to Warfox
quote:
Take evolution for instance: it obviously contradicts with the Bible, and scientists are, in essence, guessing about evolution.
They are not "guessing" in the colloquial sense about evolution.
Evolution is a fact, things evolve.
Posted on 7/28/22 at 10:00 am to Jake88
quote:Stationary relative to what?quote:Can you expand on this a bit more? We aren't stationary, right?
We are not headed in any direction, everything is headed away from us
Posted on 7/28/22 at 10:01 am to squid_hunt
quote:No we shouldn't.
We can't see the edge of the universe. We should be able to with a telescope going 13 billion light years.
quote:Because what's past the distance that light could have traveled in that time is unknowable.
Why not? It's pretty simple.
Posted on 7/28/22 at 10:04 am to I20goon
quote:
Three things...
1. In terms of space-time distance IS time because both are defined by light and it's constant speed. We see things how they were. When you look at the sun you are seeing how it was 8 minutes ago.
2. We don't know if there is an edge to the universe and if there is one where it is. If we assume there is an edge, we don't know where it is because of the passage of time (and distance) by which that light traveled. So if you wait a million years, you add a million years of light but at the same time space is inflating at the speed of light (maybe more). So you will never ever see the edge because the edge is moving away from you at the same rate the light is coming back to you. The only way we've gotten to 13.8 billion years is through our own technology being able to see light at various wavelengths. We don't know if there's more beyond that because either the light hasn't made it to us yet, or we don't have the capability to see that wavelength.
3. Since we don't know where the edge is, we don't know if we are in the middle, we only know we can see a fixed radius out. If you're standing somewhere in a completely dark 20,000 sqft warehouse and your flashlight sucks and only illuminates 10 feet in radius, do you know if you are in the middle or not? No, only if you find a wall do you know and we can't find the wall (the edge of the universe).
We can see 13.8 billion years and they also say the Universe is 13.8 billion years old, his kind of point stands? In theory.
https://www.space.com/24054-how-old-is-the-universe.html
quote:
Age may only be a number, but when it comes to the age of the universe, it's a pretty important one. According to research, the universe is approximately 13.8 billion years old. How did scientists determine how many candles to put on the universe's birthday cake? They can determine the age of the universe using two different methods: by studying the oldest objects within the universe and measuring how fast it is expanding.
Posted on 7/28/22 at 10:10 am to DownshiftAndFloorIt
quote:
But what's outside the balloon????
The bigger super duper bang on and on into infinity
Don’t ask questions - just believe
Posted on 7/28/22 at 10:10 am to DarthRebel
quote:
We can see 13.8 billion years and they also say the Universe is 13.8 billion years old
This isn't 100% true. There were conditions after the big bang where the state of the universe was such that we cannot visualize it within the bound of the measurement sensors that we have. In layman's terms for a while after the be big bang, the universe was too hot and too energetic for us to visualize. All of our measurements are after the universe "cooled" enough for us to "see" it.
But, based on the size and expansion of the observable universe and it's calculated mass, they can calculate how long that took to occur.
This post was edited on 7/28/22 at 10:12 am
Posted on 7/28/22 at 10:12 am to StringedInstruments
quote:
we always look toward the Big Bang
Posted on 7/28/22 at 10:15 am to DarthRebel
What is the Universe expanding into?
Using inflation, the speed of light did not come into play. The Universe was expanding into nothing, therefore the energy needed to propel mass pass that barrier would be negated.
WTF did it explode into??? Define how absolute nothing was there ready to have the Universe expand into?
Using inflation, the speed of light did not come into play. The Universe was expanding into nothing, therefore the energy needed to propel mass pass that barrier would be negated.
WTF did it explode into??? Define how absolute nothing was there ready to have the Universe expand into?
Posted on 7/28/22 at 10:19 am to Lonnie Utah
quote:
This isn't 100% true. There were conditions after the big bang where the state of the universe was such that we cannot visualize it within the bound of the measurement sensors that we have. In layman's terms for a while after the be big bang, the universe was too hot and too energetic for us to visualize. All of our measurements are after the universe "cooled" enough for us to "see" it.
But, based on the size and expansion of the observable universe and it's calculated mass, they can calculate how long that took to occur.
I am not sure this argument is complete. Are you wanting to add an undetermined amount of time to the 13.8 billion?
Posted on 7/28/22 at 10:21 am to DarthRebel
quote:Absolute nothingness is a hard concept to wrap your mind around. I'm not sure anyone can really do it. No matter, no space, no time.
What is the Universe expanding into?
Using inflation, the speed of light did not come into play. The Universe was expanding into nothing, therefore the energy needed to propel mass pass that barrier would be negated.
WTF did it explode into??? Define how absolute nothing was there ready to have the Universe expand into?
Posted on 7/28/22 at 10:22 am to DarthRebel
quote:No, it's not complete. That's why we keep doing science.
I am not sure this argument is complete.
The Webb telescope might fill in some of the blanks, though.
Page 5 of 13
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News