Can You Show the Universe and Earth Was Created by the Big Bang by Showing the Energy?

[Grumblenuts]

Space is warped by mass

There we disagree.

 

[ding]

You aren't arguing with me. You are arguing with George Wald, Nobel Laureate. Good job.

Appeal to Authority fallacy
argumentum ad verecundiam
(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)
Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered. Also see the appeal to false authority .

Yes, you are an internet troll arguing with George Wald, a Nobel Laureate. In this analogy you are the false authority.

 

[ding]

Space is warped by mass and the greater the mass the greater the gravity.

There we disagree.

If you ever agreed with Ed on anything then you are an even bigger idiot than I already thought you were.

 

[Hollie]

There is positive energy of the matter/energy and there is the negative energy of the gravity which is a consequence that space and time are warped and they perfectly balance such that they sum to zero. And since they sum to zero, the creation of space and time from nothing does not violate the law of conservation.

How do you know that spacetime is warped? It's a good model to explan gravity, but it could be an attractive force between two masses. I've read of experiments to show gravity could be different due to the surface at various points on Earth.

I'd suggest we look in the bible for a comprehensive description of gravity. Who needs experiments when ''the gods did it'' answers all questions.

There are no thought experiments to show the creation of spacetime (along which our three dimensions would come with). We can't have quantum mechanics without spacetime. Once that is created, then we have the three dimensions and a beginning. What people are arguing about is what came about after this singularity. There was nothing and then something or beginning. That's the true singulairty. We call this x, y, and z axis of space our universe and it had nothing so it was dark. The atheists have to have this nothing as the beginning for their singularity. Thus, some assume that time and space were always there. Otherwise, it's difficult to explain the beginning of spacetime just happened in my opinion.

So the singularity of infinite temperature and infinite density couldn't possibly exist without spacetime. That nothing state of no spacetime is difficult if not impossible to overcome.

The other thing ding wants is GR and the warping of space. I agree that that's what large masses do, but is that the only explanation? I think both smaller and larger masses still attract each other as our bodies feel that with the Earth. We see that with the apple falling from the tree to the ground. Is ding going to tell me that with GR if I throw the apple that it will curve around the tree that it fell from before falling to the ground?

So with quantum mechanics, that brings up the quantum entanglement or action at a distance topic. We still don't have good explanation for it, but maybe the best one lies with Bell's Theorem. His theorem basically states that it is just a matter of probability that the spin of one photon determines the spin of its entangled pair. He states the times when they aren't the same or not equal will show itself. When we do the experiments to show this, we find that his inequalities do not hold. Einstein thought this was the spooky action at a distance and thought there was some kind of faster than light communications. Instead, Bell thought one of his assumptions were failing in that of locality or physical reality was failing. With QE, it was locality.

Everything You Need to Know About Bell's Theorem

Bell's Theorem helped solidify the idea that the interactions in quantum physics between entangled particles are instantaneous and non-local in nature.

www.thoughtco.com

.

It's a simple theorem, but not easy to explain in action with quantum entanglement. It lead to Einstein and his people thinking of faster than light communications. One can see it in action without the entanglement or measuring being done in the following youtube. Sorry, it's kinda long. Basically it shows the failure of Bell's locality without the QE experiments:

Your notions about "a singularity'' mimic the erroneous nonsense spewed by the ICR and similar creationist ministries. The creationist notion that the universe had a beginning unique to a location (or an entity), is the remnant of an imaginative description by physicists. The term “singularity” used to describe the beginning of the universe is an artifact of the theory of general relativity. The ''singularity'' is a misnomer in that the math resolves to a null value as the equations are unresolvable.

You write of ''we'' doing experiments. Who is this ''we'? We know that the creation ministries do no research so it seems you are relying in the works of evilutionist, atheist scientists who do actual research and publish in peer reviewed journals.

 

[edthecynic]

The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing.

Not quite1

And what does he say?

Because I am almost certain he does not believe as you do that the universe has existed forever.

If you had listened he contradicted your know-it-all claim that the laws of physics and nature are no thing.
Here is another well known scientist saying the same thing in a more jocular manner.

And they all agree with me that the universe popped into existence 14 billion years ago being created from nothing and being hardwired to create intelligence.

They admitted no such thing, they both are arguing that there is no such thing as nothing.
Can't you be honest about anything????

Maybe you should watch the videos, ed.

Obviously you didn't!

In 2012 Krauss wrote a book titled, A Universe from Nothing.

Where he admits nothing is something that actually has weight!!!!
You should read the book!

How do you know I didn’t?

Because it uses words you could never understand.

You mean like... it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero.

The energy of a closed system is NEVER zero, and space/time has a beginning, NOT energy.
Thank you for proving you could never understand a physics book.

 

[ding]

The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing.

Not quite1

And what does he say?

Because I am almost certain he does not believe as you do that the universe has existed forever.

If you had listened he contradicted your know-it-all claim that the laws of physics and nature are no thing.
Here is another well known scientist saying the same thing in a more jocular manner.

And they all agree with me that the universe popped into existence 14 billion years ago being created from nothing and being hardwired to create intelligence.

They admitted no such thing, they both are arguing that there is no such thing as nothing.
Can't you be honest about anything????

Maybe you should watch the videos, ed.

Obviously you didn't!

In 2012 Krauss wrote a book titled, A Universe from Nothing.

Where he admits nothing is something that actually has weight!!!!
You should read the book!

How do you know I didn’t?

Because it uses words you could never understand.

You mean like... it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero.

The energy of a closed system is NEVER zero, and space/time has a beginning, NOT energy.
Thank you for proving you could never understand a physics book.

Now you are arguing with Alexander Vilenkin, the Leonard Jane Holmes Bernstein Professor of Evolutionary Science and Director of the Institute of Cosmology at Tufts University. A theoretical physicist who has been working in the field of cosmology for 25 years, and has written over 260 publications.

 

[edthecynic]

You aren't arguing with me. You are arguing with George Wald, Nobel Laureate. Good job.

Appeal to Authority fallacy
argumentum ad verecundiam
(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)
Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered. Also see the appeal to false authority .

Yes, you are an internet troll arguing with George Wald, a Nobel Laureate. In this analogy you are the false authority.

You are like Tramp, when caught in a fallacy you double down by accusing others of the same fallacy!!!

 

[ding]

You aren't arguing with me. You are arguing with George Wald, Nobel Laureate. Good job.

Appeal to Authority fallacy
argumentum ad verecundiam
(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)
Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered. Also see the appeal to false authority .

Yes, you are an internet troll arguing with George Wald, a Nobel Laureate. In this analogy you are the false authority.

You are like Tramp, when caught in a fallacy you double down by accusing others of the same fallacy!!!

I'm not the one arguing with Nobel Laureates. That would be you.

 

[ding]

I think Ed is getting ready to cry.

 

[edthecynic]

The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing.

Not quite1

And what does he say?

Because I am almost certain he does not believe as you do that the universe has existed forever.

If you had listened he contradicted your know-it-all claim that the laws of physics and nature are no thing.
Here is another well known scientist saying the same thing in a more jocular manner.

And they all agree with me that the universe popped into existence 14 billion years ago being created from nothing and being hardwired to create intelligence.

They admitted no such thing, they both are arguing that there is no such thing as nothing.
Can't you be honest about anything????

Maybe you should watch the videos, ed.

Obviously you didn't!

In 2012 Krauss wrote a book titled, A Universe from Nothing.

Where he admits nothing is something that actually has weight!!!!
You should read the book!

How do you know I didn’t?

Because it uses words you could never understand.

You mean like... it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero.

The energy of a closed system is NEVER zero, and space/time has a beginning, NOT energy.
Thank you for proving you could never understand a physics book.

Now you are arguing with Alexander Vilenkin, the Leonard Jane Holmes Bernstein Professor of Evolutionary Science and Director of the Institute of Cosmology at Tufts University.

Keep them logical fallacies coming!
Appeal to Authority
argumentum ad verecundiam
(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)
Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered. Also see the appeal to false authority .

 

[miketx]

If the universe and Earth was created by the Big Bang, then wouldn't there be much energy created? Where is the evidence for this energy being created?

I learned in high school that energy can’t be created. It can only be converted from one form to another.

Yes I can.

PS: If energy can't be created why do we have planes trains and automobiles?

 

[ding]

The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing.

Not quite1

And what does he say?

Because I am almost certain he does not believe as you do that the universe has existed forever.

If you had listened he contradicted your know-it-all claim that the laws of physics and nature are no thing.
Here is another well known scientist saying the same thing in a more jocular manner.

And they all agree with me that the universe popped into existence 14 billion years ago being created from nothing and being hardwired to create intelligence.

They admitted no such thing, they both are arguing that there is no such thing as nothing.
Can't you be honest about anything????

Maybe you should watch the videos, ed.

Obviously you didn't!

In 2012 Krauss wrote a book titled, A Universe from Nothing.

Where he admits nothing is something that actually has weight!!!!
You should read the book!

How do you know I didn’t?

Because it uses words you could never understand.

You mean like... it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero.

The energy of a closed system is NEVER zero, and space/time has a beginning, NOT energy.
Thank you for proving you could never understand a physics book.

Now you are arguing with Alexander Vilenkin, the Leonard Jane Holmes Bernstein Professor of Evolutionary Science and Director of the Institute of Cosmology at Tufts University.

Keep them logical fallacies coming!
Appeal to Authority
argumentum ad verecundiam
(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)
Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered. Also see the appeal to false authority .

Again... you are an internet troll arguing with Alexander Vilenkin, a world renowned Physicist. In this analogy you are the false authority.

 

[edthecynic]

You aren't arguing with me. You are arguing with George Wald, Nobel Laureate. Good job.

Appeal to Authority fallacy
argumentum ad verecundiam
(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)
Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered. Also see the appeal to false authority .

Yes, you are an internet troll arguing with George Wald, a Nobel Laureate. In this analogy you are the false authority.

You are like Tramp, when caught in a fallacy you double down by accusing others of the same fallacy!!!

I'm not the one arguing with Nobel Laureates. That would be you.

Arguing with a Nobel Laureate is NOT the same as appealing to a Nobel Laureate, IDOIT!!!

 

[edthecynic]

I think Ed is getting ready to cry.

You are projecting!

 

[ding]

You aren't arguing with me. You are arguing with George Wald, Nobel Laureate. Good job.

Appeal to Authority fallacy
argumentum ad verecundiam
(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)
Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered. Also see the appeal to false authority .

Yes, you are an internet troll arguing with George Wald, a Nobel Laureate. In this analogy you are the false authority.

You are like Tramp, when caught in a fallacy you double down by accusing others of the same fallacy!!!

I'm not the one arguing with Nobel Laureates. That would be you.

Arguing with a Nobel Laureate is NOT the same as appealing to a Nobel Laureate, IDOIT!!!

It's actually worse.

 

[ding]

I think Ed is getting ready to cry.

You are projecting!

Your behaviors say otherwise, Ed.

 

[edthecynic]

The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing.

Not quite1

And what does he say?

Because I am almost certain he does not believe as you do that the universe has existed forever.

If you had listened he contradicted your know-it-all claim that the laws of physics and nature are no thing.
Here is another well known scientist saying the same thing in a more jocular manner.

And they all agree with me that the universe popped into existence 14 billion years ago being created from nothing and being hardwired to create intelligence.

They admitted no such thing, they both are arguing that there is no such thing as nothing.
Can't you be honest about anything????

Maybe you should watch the videos, ed.

Obviously you didn't!

In 2012 Krauss wrote a book titled, A Universe from Nothing.

Where he admits nothing is something that actually has weight!!!!
You should read the book!

How do you know I didn’t?

Because it uses words you could never understand.

You mean like... it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero.

The energy of a closed system is NEVER zero, and space/time has a beginning, NOT energy.
Thank you for proving you could never understand a physics book.

Now you are arguing with Alexander Vilenkin, the Leonard Jane Holmes Bernstein Professor of Evolutionary Science and Director of the Institute of Cosmology at Tufts University.

Keep them logical fallacies coming!
Appeal to Authority
argumentum ad verecundiam
(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)
Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered. Also see the appeal to false authority .

Again... you are an internet troll arguing with Alexander Vilenkin, a world renowned Physicist. In this analogy you are the false authority.

I have reduced you to a broken record!

 

[ding]

The problem is that for matter and energy to do what matter and energy do, there has to be rules in place for matter and energy to obey. The formation of space and time followed rules. Specifically the law of conservation and quantum mechanics. These laws existed before space and time and defined the potential of everything which was possible. These laws are no thing.

Not quite1

And what does he say?

Because I am almost certain he does not believe as you do that the universe has existed forever.

If you had listened he contradicted your know-it-all claim that the laws of physics and nature are no thing.
Here is another well known scientist saying the same thing in a more jocular manner.

And they all agree with me that the universe popped into existence 14 billion years ago being created from nothing and being hardwired to create intelligence.

They admitted no such thing, they both are arguing that there is no such thing as nothing.
Can't you be honest about anything????

Maybe you should watch the videos, ed.

Obviously you didn't!

In 2012 Krauss wrote a book titled, A Universe from Nothing.

Where he admits nothing is something that actually has weight!!!!
You should read the book!

How do you know I didn’t?

Because it uses words you could never understand.

You mean like... it is possible for matter to have a beginning. In a closed universe the gravitational energy which is always negative exactly compensates the positive energy of matter. So the energy of a closed universe is always zero.

The energy of a closed system is NEVER zero, and space/time has a beginning, NOT energy.
Thank you for proving you could never understand a physics book.

Now you are arguing with Alexander Vilenkin, the Leonard Jane Holmes Bernstein Professor of Evolutionary Science and Director of the Institute of Cosmology at Tufts University.

Keep them logical fallacies coming!
Appeal to Authority
argumentum ad verecundiam
(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)
Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered. Also see the appeal to false authority .

Again... you are an internet troll arguing with Alexander Vilenkin, a world renowned Physicist. In this analogy you are the false authority.

I have reduced you to a broken record!

Winning hands keep getting played, Ed.

 

[edthecynic]

You aren't arguing with me. You are arguing with George Wald, Nobel Laureate. Good job.

Appeal to Authority fallacy
argumentum ad verecundiam
(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)
Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered. Also see the appeal to false authority .

Yes, you are an internet troll arguing with George Wald, a Nobel Laureate. In this analogy you are the false authority.

You are like Tramp, when caught in a fallacy you double down by accusing others of the same fallacy!!!

I'm not the one arguing with Nobel Laureates. That would be you.

Arguing with a Nobel Laureate is NOT the same as appealing to a Nobel Laureate, IDOIT!!!

It's actually worse.

Only to a fool, but it certainly isn't a FALLACY, IDIOT!!!!!

 

[ding]

You aren't arguing with me. You are arguing with George Wald, Nobel Laureate. Good job.

Appeal to Authority fallacy
argumentum ad verecundiam
(also known as: argument from authority, ipse dixit)
Description: Insisting that a claim is true simply because a valid authority or expert on the issue said it was true, without any other supporting evidence offered. Also see the appeal to false authority .

Yes, you are an internet troll arguing with George Wald, a Nobel Laureate. In this analogy you are the false authority.

You are like Tramp, when caught in a fallacy you double down by accusing others of the same fallacy!!!

I'm not the one arguing with Nobel Laureates. That would be you.

Arguing with a Nobel Laureate is NOT the same as appealing to a Nobel Laureate, IDOIT!!!

It's actually worse.

Only to a fool, but it certainly isn't a FALLACY, IDIOT!!!!!

I'm going to have to trust you on that since you are an expert on being a fool, Ed.