Alternative theories to Big Bang

[OmegaX7]

:) Hey all. You know, we're beggining to drift from the opening question. First, "Are there any other theorys to the existance of the universe?", I think it was. And a question on the "Steady State" theory. There are a few theorys that are "almost" good, but each one has it's own problems explaining "every" problem. They each come to different conclusions in an attempt to explain the same things. So - - we have a cunundrum:shrug: , which theory "DO YOU" subscribe to??? We could debate all day long which theory covers all the bases. No one, repeat, "No One" has the answer to explain "How all this mass got here?" Sometimes, as science progresses,ideas and proposals have to be modified to accomodate new discoveries and experimental techniques. The "Inflationary" model of the universe is the best to date. It explains why everything is so "symetric" in all directions throughout space/time. It should be studied closely before one falls behind the mainstream. There is no reason to beleive the inflationary period is no more than a specific point on a ring of events. The hardest thing to explain is, 1, "How did the mass of the universe get here?" And 2, "How do we get rid of all this mass so as to return to our starting point?" Number 1 can only be answered knowing what happened before "The Plank Length" and number 2 will only be answered after we learn what "Omega" is. It should be "1". Read up on "GravityWaves."

[Harry Costas]

Hello

 

<spamlink removed>

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/bang.html

http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V10NO1PDF/V10N1ANT.pdf

 

The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed-- inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent examples. Without them, there would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory.

 

In no other field of physics would this continual recourse to new hypothetical objects be accepted as a way of bridging the gap between theory and observation. It would, at the least, RAISE SERIOUS QUESTIONS ABOUT THE VALIDITY OF THE UNDERLYING THEORY.

 

But the big bang theory can't survive without these fudge factors. Without the hypothetical inflation field, the big bang does not predict the smooth, isotropic cosmic background radiation that is observed, because there would be no way for parts of the universe that are now more than a few degrees away in the sky to come to the same temperature and thus emit the same amount of microwave radiation." and so on read the link

red shift comment

quote:link:http://www.electric-cosmos.org/arp.htm

 

"These sets of objects are not illusions or mirages - rather, they are visual proof that Arp is indeed correct in what he says: Young, high redshift objects are ejected from the centers of active galactic nuclei (AGNs) and Seyfert galaxies. The images show exactly that happening.

 

The most (in)famous of these supposed "mirages" is the so-called "Einstein Cross" which is simply another example of objects in the process of being formed and ejected from the nucleus of an active galaxy. Arp has observed plasma clouds (whose light is strongly redshifted) connecting the ejected objects in the Einstein Cross.

 

So, modern mainstream astronomy is full of "illusions" and "mirages" (their explanation of why we should not believe our eyes) and "strange and dark" energy, matter, "neutron stars" and "black holes", none of which have ever been seen or photographed but whose existence they continually invoke in order to save their otherwise failed theories. Their attitude is, "Don't believe what you see; believe what we tell you!"

 

Arp says we should believe our own eyes rather than the tall tales of black-holes, and gravitational lensing told by the defenders of mainstream astronomy and cosmology whose continued research funding depends on their not rocking the boat of established theory"

 

Big Ban busted by 33 scientists;

re link:http://www.rense.com/general53/bbng.htm

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

I look at the universe as being endless, a word that means "ALL" and a home for the parts within. These parts go through the normal process of recycling and some will expand others will contract, others will collide and all the parts will behave as units either with themselves or part of a bigger picture.

 

Man through history have predicted many processes, some in line with the BBT, others in line with the steady state and so on.

 

In the last 30 years many scientists have moved away from the BBT simply because it does not work with respect to the endless universe.

 

Man has visibly seen into deep field about 13.2 Billion light years in either direction and observed existing galaxy formations old and new. Something that the BBT scientists were quite surprised and rock their boat.

------------------------------------------------------------------------

[OmegaX7]

Hey all. Harry: I can sympathize with your sceptisizim but many, many results, discoveries and predictions have been "only hypothetical" before confirmed. It is up to the "most insightfull" among us to assimalate and evaluate the obvious results before us and come forth with the proper explanations. The work of Maxwell was met with sceptisizim. Einstein predicted the bending of light from distant stars during solar eclipses and was proven right; and he wasn't even there to observe it. We could go on but surely you get the idea. This may not happen in many other fields of expertise, but it does happen. Where else could you be wrong in your field, say, 50% of the time, or more, except by being a weatherman. You see how often their wrong, yet their employed.

[infamous]

 

Even the earth people 500 years ago knew this-- why the problem now?

 

And a considerable time before that, they 'knew' that the earth was flat???.............................go figure.

[FRIPRO]

Hello

 

http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/bang.html

http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles/V10NO1PDF/V10N1ANT.pdf

 

The big bang today relies on a growing number of hypothetical entities, things that we have never observed-- inflation, dark matter and dark energy are the most prominent examples. Without them, there would be a fatal contradiction between the observations made by astronomers and the predictions of the big bang theory.

 

etc...

 

I agree with you the Big Bang as the creator of the Universe is dead! But I do not diagree, the big bang did happen-- but it really was a 13 billion years ago a local bang. The Universe is so much larger than 13 billion years-- in fact it is eternal (alway was and always will be) FRIPRO

 

Perhaps our readers should look at Universe's Intelligent Design by Evolution! (UIDE) a complete pre-released manuscript, in the works, E Book (you can google it at fripro) If the censors let you do so!!!!!

How else in a string can we give evidence to prove or disprove all these alligations? I will say a string will not always be , it is not eternal HA!

[OmegaX7]

:) Well, it seems the Big Bang is out of the question for the majority of you. I'll stick around for a few more posts in case I'm wrong. I might at least ask of you all to not dismiss the Big Bang with it's "inflationary" period.:hihi: In a nutshell, I'll try to regain your confidence in the theory; including "infinity.":phones: Put on your thinking caps and be open minded, as I simply cannot go into enough detail in this short space. Keep in mind, we're going to be moving thru a "cycle." For reference let's start at "A Moment Of Creation", the Big Bang, if you will. 1. - theres some "quantum fluctuation" in an emtey, cold, dead, timeless region of space, not "space/time." The explosion of excessive energy created mass where there was none. 2. - the matter created expands at great volocity and evolves into a working universe. 3. - As "All Systems" must do, the universe "winds down" and matter is converted "back into energy" thru "black hole" processing and other associated processes which convert matter back into energy. 4. - When "all matter" is gone, in about 15 or 16 trillion years or so, the universe will once again be cold, dark, and timeless; "just as it was before." 5. - This period of "nothingness" can extend "for infinity!" You must realize that "Mass is required for "TIME" to exist." Therein you have"space/time." When "nothing" is present you have "only space." And finally #6. - When the mass of the universe is gone and there is "no time", this state can last for a trillionth of a second, or a billion, trillion, qazillion years; what does it matter without mass present, "There Is No Time!" "ANY LENGTH OF TIME IN THIS STATE, OF NO MASS, IS CONSIDERED INFINIT." And in this "quantum state", when the slighest fluctuation of energy occures, and it will because in this timeless state you can wait forever:hihi: , you will then have "another Big Bang." Time will start over again, and the cycle repeats itself. "There" you have nothing becoming energy, energy becoming matter, matter converting back to energy, a quantum period of nothing, and finally the energy exploding again back in to matter. Thats about it, 6 segments to the cycle of infinity, but one segment in the cycle "has no time associated with it." And "That" is the infinity your looking for. Without mass, there can be no time; without time, there is infinity. This provides a smooth cycle and still gives us an "infinity" to refer to. :lol: Hope everyone doesn't think I'm looney.

L8R - - - OmegaX7.

[InfiniteNow]

Hope everyone doesn't think I'm looney.

You raise some interesting points, Omega... However, it might be good for you to make statements with less certainty, or start by saying "I think that..." or, "It seems that..." This gives you some wiggle room, because people can come off like a horses *** when they claim to know absolute truths...

 

Oh... and you REALLY need to find the Enter key (carriage return) my friend!

 

 

Cheers. :hihi:

[lindagarrette]

Both ancient Indian and Greek Philosophy correctly realized that something is never created from nothing ‘ex nihilo’, thus something has eternally existed! (WSM)

The fact we are here means the Universe eternally exists. I agree no one (not even a God )can create something out of nothing!

 

Nothing and infinity are impossible for most people, if not everyone, to conceptualize but they exist. Whatever philosophers dictate is interesting but not scientific. Math and science, philosophy and religion are not compatible. Ancient Indians and Greeks did not know about quantum mechanics.

[Harry Costas]

Hello Omega

 

You said

"Well, it seems the Big Bang is out of the question for the majority of you. I'll stick around for a few more posts in case I'm wrong. I might at least ask of you all to not dismiss the Big Bang with it's "inflationary" period. In a nutshell, I'll try to regain your confidence in the theory; including "infinity." Put on your thinking caps and be open minded, as I simply cannot go into enough detail in this short space. Keep in mind, we're going to be moving thru a "cycle." For reference let's start at "A Moment Of Creation", the Big Bang, if you will. 1. - theres some "quantum fluctuation" in an emtey, cold, dead, timeless region of space, not "space/time." The explosion of excessive energy created mass where there was none. 2. - the matter created expands at great volocity and evolves into a working universe. 3. - As "All Systems" must do, the universe "winds down" and matter is converted "back into energy" thru "black hole" processing and other associated processes which convert matter back into energy. 4. - When "all matter" is gone, in about 15 or 16 trillion years or so, the universe will once again be cold, dark, and timeless; "just as it was before." 5. - This period of "nothingness" can extend "for infinity!" You must realize that "Mass is required for "TIME" to exist." Therein you have"space/time." When "nothing" is present you have "only space." And finally #6. - When the mass of the universe is gone and there is "no time", this state can last for a trillionth of a second, or a billion, trillion, qazillion years; what does it matter without mass present, "There Is No Time!" "ANY LENGTH OF TIME IN THIS STATE, OF NO MASS, IS CONSIDERED INFINIT." And in this "quantum state", when the slighest fluctuation of energy occures, and it will because in this timeless state you can wait forever , you will then have "another Big Bang." Time will start over again, and the cycle repeats itself. "There" you have nothing becoming energy, energy becoming matter, matter converting back to energy, a quantum period of nothing, and finally the energy exploding again back in to matter. Thats about it, 6 segments to the cycle of infinity, but one segment in the cycle "has no time associated with it." And "That" is the infinity your looking for. Without mass, there can be no time; without time, there is infinity. This provides a smooth cycle and still gives us an "infinity" to refer to. Hope everyone doesn't think I'm looney.

L8R - - - OmegaX7."

 

Omega your points 1 to 6.

 

Your right in that the universe recycles. But! that all

The Big Bang never happened, I could list the reasons or just read the following.

 

As for time, time cannot be ajusted or stopped. Does not need mass or energy.

 

 

The universe is not expanding and there has never been a Big Bang.

http://redshift.vif.com/JournalFiles...F/V10N1ANT.pdf

http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/BIGBANG/Bigbang.html

http://www.rense.com/general53/bbng.htm

http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/UNIVERSE/Universe.html

http://www.geocities.com/CapeCanaver...5/G_Reber.html

http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homep...p5/explode.htm

http://www.electric-cosmos.org/arp.htm

http://www.fixall.org/bigbang/bigblackbang.htm

http://www.setterfield.org/staticu.html

 

http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/QUASARS/Quasars.html

 

The universe is endless it cannot expand or contract. But! it is home to all the parts within. These parts can expand and contract and recycle. Because the universe is endless it is not probable for it to end up in one place. So! the idea of having nothing, emty space is not the way to go.

[OmegaX7]

:evil: Hello all. I'm not sure what to say. I guess I'm outnumbered. I reviewed the sites sent to me. I'm afraid theres nothing there which I haven't disspelled quite some time ago. I may have to politely excuse myself. "I have" read and studied, "a lot." Dozens of books. Many I've read more than once. These books are written by the likes of "Feynmen", "Roades", "Hawking", "Greene", and I just don't see any of these names within the sites reccommended to me. What's up with that?? Why aren't "any" of these names found? I'm currently reading a title by "Roger Penrose" called "The Road To Reality." Published 2004. The very latest (within 2 years ) understanding of the "Quantum" world we've inherited. It's 1048 pages long; quite detailed I'm sure you would think.

I can't read this and interpet it as you all would. I respect your opinions greatly. I'm sure most of you would like me if we met.

I do comprehend "nothing" and "infinity." Their both a conceptual thing. I must ask; "Do any of you think that energy can exist without the presence of matter?" Keep in mind that the energy contained within our universe is all there is. Energy can not be created nor destroyed.

I was once just as sceptical as the mass of you sound. An unproven theory may very well be considered a "fudge factor". There have been many over the years which simply had to be accepted. Since Thales (650 bc) to Gallilio, to Newton, thru Einstein and up to Hawking and Penrose, theories have guided us, sometimes down fruitless roads, but often towards great discoveries and revelations in physics. I must turn the computer over to the kids now.

I'm anxious to hear your opinions and thoughts on the "energy" question.

Thank you all for your patience.

L8R - - - - OmegaX7.

[Harry Costas]

Hello All

 

The energy question.

 

99% of all matter is in the state of PLASMA.

[FRIPRO]

Nothing and infinity are impossible for most people, if not everyone, to conceptualize but they exist. Whatever philosophers dictate is interesting but not scientific. Math and science, philosophy and religion are not compatible. Ancient Indians and Greeks did not know about quantum mechanics.

 

 

I agree, and so does the theory of UNIVERSE's INTELLIGENT DESIGN by EVOLUTION (UIDE)©**** FRIPRO

[FRIPRO]

Hello All

 

The energy question.

 

99% of all matter is in the state of PLASMA.

 

ANSWER:

Harry I can not agree with you on this one. Newton's Ether is the all prevading dark matter of the Universe, and the Plasma state is built from the Ether particles (the WIT particels that make up the Universe's Ether sea that all electromagnetic waves traverse. And all Mass conversions)

 

The Plasma state (I agree with you) is important but is usualy part of suns, stars, galaxies and other mass that are converting to radiation. The Plasma state is ionized gas. These gases in the plasma state are ejected from the sun and other bodies in the Universe.(Early scientist have call the Plasma state the next state of matter! FRIPRO References UNIVERSE's INTELLIGENT DESIGN by EVOLUTION (UIDE)©

[Harry Costas]

Your definition of Plasma is limited.

 

Therfore your conclusions are limited.

[FRIPRO]

Your definition of Plasma is limited.

 

Therfore your conclusions are limited.

 

FRIPRO's answer:

 

My friend from Australia: I looked at your reference of Plasma and it is TV screens? What does that have to do with http://www.fripro.com/AIDE.html UNIVERSE's INTELLIGENT DESIGN by EVOLUTION (UIDE)© [/url][/b]

 

Plasma is a extension of the state of matter: reference ionized gas, an example He+ It also is the radiation from the sun known as radiation from sun spots, also the plasma in an arc welder. Or a laser energy beam column (refer to

 

http://www.fripro.com/AIDE.html I have given you a link that might help you understand why it is not fair to label my theory with Therfore your conclusions are limited FRIPRO

[InfiniteNow]

FRIPRO's answer:

 

My friend from Australia: I looked at your reference of Plasma and it is TV screens?

FRIPRO,

 

To clarify a slight misunderstanding, Harry never attached a link to his posting. The "plasma" link you viewed is part of a new advertising system that has been implemented on Hypo to help bring in money for maintenance and server stuff. It had absolutely nothing to do with Harry's post, just was inserted by the new ad system. You will see these throughout the threads now... Hope that clarifies.

 

 

Cheers. :)

[Harry Costas]

Hello

 

Got to smile,,,,,,,,,

 

as for plasma,,,,,,,

 

the sun is made from

 

The core of the sun is the key to the show.

 

Its history is based on a star that ejected its skin leaving behind a neutron star core.

See this link

http://web.umr.edu/~om/report_to_fcr/report_to_fcr1.htm

 

Plasma see these links

 

http://www.plasmaphysics.org.uk/research/

 

http://www.plasmaphysics.org.uk/research/redshift.htm

 

http://www.plasmaphysics.org.uk/

 

Sorry there are many links to expalin what Plasma is.

 

Also

 

http://public.lanl.gov/alp/plasma/papers.html

 

Maybe by reading these you may come to some conclusions about Plasma in our universe and not just our TV.

 

 

I get carried away with links sorry.