Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
Like tossing a ball straight up in the air, it rises to a point where it can rise no more and before it almost immediately falls for less than a nanosecond there is a singularity where it is neither rising nor falling. You have described the singularity between the big crush and the big bank.Again, we do not know, although we highly suspect, that within the boundary of ≈ 13.799±0.021 billion light-years beyond the origin of the universe, only a few localized phenomena have that characteristic. An example might be a "Black Hole.=;" a localized place with such a gravitational impact that no form of electromagnetic radiation may escape. The gravitational field crushes all energy of a system as a result of the Black Hole's gravitational field. This crush compresses all the constituent resonating particles that the gravitational field counteracts the resonant frequency and brings all to a stop.
Energy still existed prior to the existence of our universe, and it is highly questionable that our universe is a closed system.Energy can neither be created or destroyed.It is actually Inflation THEOLOGY, and it is not in any way scientific, YOUR own source Lederman says so.It’s called inflation theory and it is the leading cosmological model, dumbass.
"When you read or hear anything about the birth of the universe, someone is making it up. We are in the realm of philosophy. Only God knows what happened at the Very Beginning (and so far She hasn't let on)."
- The Beginning…
By Leon M. Lederman
That only applies if inflation is considered to include the creation of energy prior to the expansion of the universe. Otherwise inflation is not part of the beginning which has no data in the Lederman quote.
In a closed system. When the laws of our universe apply. Neither of those were necessarily true prior to the existence of our universe.
You don't believe it exists, well that settles it, it does exist.I'd like to have a discussion on dark energy with you.
I don't believe it exists. What's your take on that?
Interisting that your first link is to a Christian Philosophy of Theology site.I have already nailed you in that lie on several other threads, and hear you are repeating what you know is a lie on yet another thread.energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing
A real miracle would be to get you to tell the truth!
It isn't a lie. It may not be true, but ding has posted some interviews with Alexander Vilenkin in which he describes the idea of the universe being generated from nothing. For example (although I don't know that ding linked to these specific things):
Alexander Vilenkin and the Universe From Nothing
https://mm-gold.azureedge.net/science/physics/a_vilinkin/universe_from_nothing.pdf
Interisting that your first link is to a Christian Philosophy of Theology site.I have already nailed you in that lie on several other threads, and hear you are repeating what you know is a lie on yet another thread.energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing
A real miracle would be to get you to tell the truth!
It isn't a lie. It may not be true, but ding has posted some interviews with Alexander Vilenkin in which he describes the idea of the universe being generated from nothing. For example (although I don't know that ding linked to these specific things):
Alexander Vilenkin and the Universe From Nothing
https://mm-gold.azureedge.net/science/physics/a_vilinkin/universe_from_nothing.pdf
Which Vilenkin said jokingly which Ding chose to take seriously, and seeming has taken you in also. Did you know that in many of Vilenkin's writings he puts the "nothing" in quotes?
Vilenkin's "nothing" is equal amounts of gravitational energy and matter. For there to actually be "nothing" gravity and matter would have to CANCEL each other out. But Vilenkin and Ding also, but unwittingly, say gravity and mater are in BALANCE, so they are both NOT nothing before and after inflation.
“The way the universe gets around that problem is that gravitational energy is negative,” Vilenkin says. That’s a consequence of the fact, mathematically proven, that the energy of a closed universe is zero: The energy of matter is positive, the energy of gravitation is negative, and they always add up to zero. “Therefore, creating a closed universe out of nothing does not violate any conservation laws.”
It's a bit like an old-fashioned measuring scale. You can put a heavy weight on one side, so long as it is balanced by an equal weight on the other. In the case of the universe, the matter goes on one side of the scale, and has to be balanced by gravity.
Physicists have calculated that in a flat universe the energy of matter is exactly balanced by the energy of the gravity the mass creates. But this is only true in a flat universe. If the universe had been curved, the two sums would not cancel out.
Energy still existed prior to the existence of our universe, and it is highly questionable that our universe is a closed system.Energy can neither be created or destroyed.It is actually Inflation THEOLOGY, and it is not in any way scientific, YOUR own source Lederman says so.It’s called inflation theory and it is the leading cosmological model, dumbass.
"When you read or hear anything about the birth of the universe, someone is making it up. We are in the realm of philosophy. Only God knows what happened at the Very Beginning (and so far She hasn't let on)."
- The Beginning…
By Leon M. Lederman
That only applies if inflation is considered to include the creation of energy prior to the expansion of the universe. Otherwise inflation is not part of the beginning which has no data in the Lederman quote.
In a closed system. When the laws of our universe apply. Neither of those were necessarily true prior to the existence of our universe.
That's right, he and others are talking about a MATHEMATICAL zero, not a PHYSICAL "nothing." Saying that the universe came from "nothing" gets more attention than saying the universe was in balance. So yes Vilenkin was using "nothing" as a tongue-in-cheek attention getter. Of course Ding jumped on the mathematical zero as if it was a physical nothing, not getting the pun.Interisting that your first link is to a Christian Philosophy of Theology site.I have already nailed you in that lie on several other threads, and hear you are repeating what you know is a lie on yet another thread.energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing
A real miracle would be to get you to tell the truth!
It isn't a lie. It may not be true, but ding has posted some interviews with Alexander Vilenkin in which he describes the idea of the universe being generated from nothing. For example (although I don't know that ding linked to these specific things):
Alexander Vilenkin and the Universe From Nothing
https://mm-gold.azureedge.net/science/physics/a_vilinkin/universe_from_nothing.pdf
Which Vilenkin said jokingly which Ding chose to take seriously, and seeming has taken you in also. Did you know that in many of Vilenkin's writings he puts the "nothing" in quotes?
Vilenkin's "nothing" is equal amounts of gravitational energy and matter. For there to actually be "nothing" gravity and matter would have to CANCEL each other out. But Vilenkin and Ding also, but unwittingly, say gravity and mater are in BALANCE, so they are both NOT nothing before and after inflation.
“The way the universe gets around that problem is that gravitational energy is negative,” Vilenkin says. That’s a consequence of the fact, mathematically proven, that the energy of a closed universe is zero: The energy of matter is positive, the energy of gravitation is negative, and they always add up to zero. “Therefore, creating a closed universe out of nothing does not violate any conservation laws.”
It's a bit like an old-fashioned measuring scale. You can put a heavy weight on one side, so long as it is balanced by an equal weight on the other. In the case of the universe, the matter goes on one side of the scale, and has to be balanced by gravity.
Physicists have calculated that in a flat universe the energy of matter is exactly balanced by the energy of the gravity the mass creates. But this is only true in a flat universe. If the universe had been curved, the two sums would not cancel out.
Vilenkin was joking? What do you base that on?
Besides, it isn't as if Vilenkin is the only one to propose or consider the idea that the universe was generated from nothing.
And again, the point is that it is not a lie just because you believe it to be incorrect.
Until someone else PROVES the First Law of Thermodynamics is wrong, energy can neither be created nor destroyed stands as the Law before during and after the universe, the rest is conjecture with NO evidence to support it.Energy still existed prior to the existence of our universe, and it is highly questionable that our universe is a closed system.Energy can neither be created or destroyed.It is actually Inflation THEOLOGY, and it is not in any way scientific, YOUR own source Lederman says so.
"When you read or hear anything about the birth of the universe, someone is making it up. We are in the realm of philosophy. Only God knows what happened at the Very Beginning (and so far She hasn't let on)."
- The Beginning…
By Leon M. Lederman
That only applies if inflation is considered to include the creation of energy prior to the expansion of the universe. Otherwise inflation is not part of the beginning which has no data in the Lederman quote.
In a closed system. When the laws of our universe apply. Neither of those were necessarily true prior to the existence of our universe.
You can't actually know if energy (as we understand it, anyway) existed prior to the universe.
We can know ithat energy as we know it has never existed forever in this universe.Energy still existed prior to the existence of our universe, and it is highly questionable that our universe is a closed system.Energy can neither be created or destroyed.It is actually Inflation THEOLOGY, and it is not in any way scientific, YOUR own source Lederman says so.
"When you read or hear anything about the birth of the universe, someone is making it up. We are in the realm of philosophy. Only God knows what happened at the Very Beginning (and so far She hasn't let on)."
- The Beginning…
By Leon M. Lederman
That only applies if inflation is considered to include the creation of energy prior to the expansion of the universe. Otherwise inflation is not part of the beginning which has no data in the Lederman quote.
In a closed system. When the laws of our universe apply. Neither of those were necessarily true prior to the existence of our universe.
You can't actually know if energy (as we understand it, anyway) existed prior to the universe.
Inflation theory explains how energy can be created from nothing without violating the first law of thermodynamics.Until someone else PROVES the First Law of Thermodynamics is wrong, energy can neither be created nor destroyed stands as the Law before during and after the universe, the rest is conjecture with NO evidence to support it.Energy still existed prior to the existence of our universe, and it is highly questionable that our universe is a closed system.Energy can neither be created or destroyed.That only applies if inflation is considered to include the creation of energy prior to the expansion of the universe. Otherwise inflation is not part of the beginning which has no data in the Lederman quote.
In a closed system. When the laws of our universe apply. Neither of those were necessarily true prior to the existence of our universe.
You can't actually know if energy (as we understand it, anyway) existed prior to the universe.
It’s an isolated system.Energy still existed prior to the existence of our universe, and it is highly questionable that our universe is a closed system.Energy can neither be created or destroyed.It is actually Inflation THEOLOGY, and it is not in any way scientific, YOUR own source Lederman says so.It’s called inflation theory and it is the leading cosmological model, dumbass.
"When you read or hear anything about the birth of the universe, someone is making it up. We are in the realm of philosophy. Only God knows what happened at the Very Beginning (and so far She hasn't let on)."
- The Beginning…
By Leon M. Lederman
That only applies if inflation is considered to include the creation of energy prior to the expansion of the universe. Otherwise inflation is not part of the beginning which has no data in the Lederman quote.
In a closed system. When the laws of our universe apply. Neither of those were necessarily true prior to the existence of our universe.
As energy was being created it was balanced by gravity such that the net energy of the universe was always zero throughout the process of the creation of energy.That's right, he and others are talking about a MATHEMATICAL zero, not a PHYSICAL "nothing." Saying that the universe came from "nothing" gets more attention than saying the universe was in balance. So yes Vilenkin was using "nothing" as a tongue-in-cheek attention getter. Of course Ding jumped on the mathematical zero as if it was a physical nothing, not getting the pun.Interisting that your first link is to a Christian Philosophy of Theology site.I have already nailed you in that lie on several other threads, and hear you are repeating what you know is a lie on yet another thread.energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing
A real miracle would be to get you to tell the truth!
It isn't a lie. It may not be true, but ding has posted some interviews with Alexander Vilenkin in which he describes the idea of the universe being generated from nothing. For example (although I don't know that ding linked to these specific things):
Alexander Vilenkin and the Universe From Nothing
https://mm-gold.azureedge.net/science/physics/a_vilinkin/universe_from_nothing.pdf
Which Vilenkin said jokingly which Ding chose to take seriously, and seeming has taken you in also. Did you know that in many of Vilenkin's writings he puts the "nothing" in quotes?
Vilenkin's "nothing" is equal amounts of gravitational energy and matter. For there to actually be "nothing" gravity and matter would have to CANCEL each other out. But Vilenkin and Ding also, but unwittingly, say gravity and mater are in BALANCE, so they are both NOT nothing before and after inflation.
“The way the universe gets around that problem is that gravitational energy is negative,” Vilenkin says. That’s a consequence of the fact, mathematically proven, that the energy of a closed universe is zero: The energy of matter is positive, the energy of gravitation is negative, and they always add up to zero. “Therefore, creating a closed universe out of nothing does not violate any conservation laws.”
It's a bit like an old-fashioned measuring scale. You can put a heavy weight on one side, so long as it is balanced by an equal weight on the other. In the case of the universe, the matter goes on one side of the scale, and has to be balanced by gravity.
Physicists have calculated that in a flat universe the energy of matter is exactly balanced by the energy of the gravity the mass creates. But this is only true in a flat universe. If the universe had been curved, the two sums would not cancel out.
Vilenkin was joking? What do you base that on?
Besides, it isn't as if Vilenkin is the only one to propose or consider the idea that the universe was generated from nothing.
And again, the point is that it is not a lie just because you believe it to be incorrect.
Vilenkin wasn’t involved in the formulation of inflation theory. His contribution to it came afterward. I believe his role had something to do with eternal inflation.Interisting that your first link is to a Christian Philosophy of Theology site.I have already nailed you in that lie on several other threads, and hear you are repeating what you know is a lie on yet another thread.energy in the universe popped into existence out of nothing
A real miracle would be to get you to tell the truth!
It isn't a lie. It may not be true, but ding has posted some interviews with Alexander Vilenkin in which he describes the idea of the universe being generated from nothing. For example (although I don't know that ding linked to these specific things):
Alexander Vilenkin and the Universe From Nothing
https://mm-gold.azureedge.net/science/physics/a_vilinkin/universe_from_nothing.pdf
Which Vilenkin said jokingly which Ding chose to take seriously, and seeming has taken you in also. Did you know that in many of Vilenkin's writings he puts the "nothing" in quotes?
Vilenkin's "nothing" is equal amounts of gravitational energy and matter. For there to actually be "nothing" gravity and matter would have to CANCEL each other out. But Vilenkin and Ding also, but unwittingly, say gravity and mater are in BALANCE, so they are both NOT nothing before and after inflation.
“The way the universe gets around that problem is that gravitational energy is negative,” Vilenkin says. That’s a consequence of the fact, mathematically proven, that the energy of a closed universe is zero: The energy of matter is positive, the energy of gravitation is negative, and they always add up to zero. “Therefore, creating a closed universe out of nothing does not violate any conservation laws.”
It's a bit like an old-fashioned measuring scale. You can put a heavy weight on one side, so long as it is balanced by an equal weight on the other. In the case of the universe, the matter goes on one side of the scale, and has to be balanced by gravity.
Physicists have calculated that in a flat universe the energy of matter is exactly balanced by the energy of the gravity the mass creates. But this is only true in a flat universe. If the universe had been curved, the two sums would not cancel out.
Vilenkin was joking? What do you base that on?
Besides, it isn't as if Vilenkin is the only one to propose or consider the idea that the universe was generated from nothing.
And again, the point is that it is not a lie just because you believe it to be incorrect.
It’s nothing more than a fudge factor.You don't believe it exists, well that settles it, it does exist.I'd like to have a discussion on dark energy with you.
I don't believe it exists. What's your take on that?
I will give you a tease since your Inflation Theology is involved.
Accelerating Universe and Dark Energy - The Big Bang and the Big Crunch - The Physics of the Universe
Like dark matter, cosmic inflation (even if it is not actually proven beyond all doubt) is now usually seen as part of the standard Big Bang theory, and to some extent the two additional concepts rescue the Big Bang theory from being completely untenable. However, other potential problems still remain.
God has spoken! No one dare question the pontifications of DingDong.We can know ithat energy as we know it has never existed forever in this universe.Energy still existed prior to the existence of our universe, and it is highly questionable that our universe is a closed system.Energy can neither be created or destroyed.That only applies if inflation is considered to include the creation of energy prior to the expansion of the universe. Otherwise inflation is not part of the beginning which has no data in the Lederman quote.
In a closed system. When the laws of our universe apply. Neither of those were necessarily true prior to the existence of our universe.
You can't actually know if energy (as we understand it, anyway) existed prior to the universe.
Sure, a fudge factor that accelerates matter.It’s nothing more than a fudge factor.You don't believe it exists, well that settles it, it does exist.I'd like to have a discussion on dark energy with you.
I don't believe it exists. What's your take on that?
I will give you a tease since your Inflation Theology is involved.
Accelerating Universe and Dark Energy - The Big Bang and the Big Crunch - The Physics of the Universe
Like dark matter, cosmic inflation (even if it is not actually proven beyond all doubt) is now usually seen as part of the standard Big Bang theory, and to some extent the two additional concepts rescue the Big Bang theory from being completely untenable. However, other potential problems still remain.
That's YOUR lie.Inflation theory explains how energy can be created from nothing without violating the first law of thermodynamics.Until someone else PROVES the First Law of Thermodynamics is wrong, energy can neither be created nor destroyed stands as the Law before during and after the universe, the rest is conjecture with NO evidence to support it.Energy still existed prior to the existence of our universe, and it is highly questionable that our universe is a closed system.Energy can neither be created or destroyed.
In a closed system. When the laws of our universe apply. Neither of those were necessarily true prior to the existence of our universe.
You can't actually know if energy (as we understand it, anyway) existed prior to the universe.
Maybe. Or maybe it’s that the speed of light isn’t constant throughout the universe. Maybe between galaxies it is some other speed.Sure, a fudge factor that accelerates matter.It’s nothing more than a fudge factor.You don't believe it exists, well that settles it, it does exist.I'd like to have a discussion on dark energy with you.
I don't believe it exists. What's your take on that?
I will give you a tease since your Inflation Theology is involved.
Accelerating Universe and Dark Energy - The Big Bang and the Big Crunch - The Physics of the Universe
Like dark matter, cosmic inflation (even if it is not actually proven beyond all doubt) is now usually seen as part of the standard Big Bang theory, and to some extent the two additional concepts rescue the Big Bang theory from being completely untenable. However, other potential problems still remain.
