Time did not begin with the Big Bang - Stephen Hawking

[evenflow1969]

`
I don't believe in "infinity." It's just another way of saying it's a number so vast, it is beyond human comprehension.
`

Ha...no...it is a mathematical concept, and it is quite real. The summation of infinite series was a breakthrough in human thought and got us over the most fundamental of philosophical paradoxes.

Infinity is real and can be represented in mathmatics when x or y can has no limit on it's answers. this happens in many equations.

 

[evenflow1969]

There will be much discussion of this.

Time did not begin with the Big Bang - Stephen Hawking

"The boundary condition of the universe ... is that it has no boundary," Hawking tells the National Geographic's Star Talk show this weekend.

In other words, there is no time before time began as time was always there.

Time is a condition of a current event. Without man time is constant list of events, on just this third rack from the Sun. In space it is the same. Example: Earth tilts and seasons change. Moon moves tides change. So the reversing time can not be done. The same goes for gravity that M=G >..>. This is why Stonehenge was created.

This problem is solved by the multivers. If you do cahnge some thing in the past it just flips you into the ubiverse where it did happen but the orrignal universe still exists. I am not statring this as law it is just theory as is all of it when talking about the beginig of the ubiverse.

 

[evenflow1969]

We have so much to learn. I don't think killing off all science funding and accepting a 2,000 year old religion is going to help us find the answers to these questions either.

Hell right now we are not even sure the laws of physics are the same from one galaxy to another. Sure is interesting to think about.

 

[evenflow1969]

There will be much discussion of this.

Time did not begin with the Big Bang - Stephen Hawking

"The boundary condition of the universe ... is that it has no boundary," Hawking tells the National Geographic's Star Talk show this weekend.

In other words, there is no time before time began as time was always there.

Hawking's an ass that has already been proven wrong before. He mainly gets a free ride because of his disability because he promotes public interest in the field..

Time is a function of space-time, and without space you cannot have time since time is an extension of space. To say that time never began (was always there) is the same as saying that space was always there, which violates every accepted principle of the creation of the universe, that it all expanded from a point of creation.

Before the Big Bang, there was no space for time to occur in, in any conventional reference that we can know. Whatever occurred to spark creation came from another plane, another dimension, and no one, not even Hawking understands it, much less can say what boundaries were and were not there. It's all just a big guess.

Hawking is not an ass! Every one makes mistakes with absolutely no exceptions. He is not calling this law it is theory in a direction he is currently leaning, a good bit of theory could be dispelled real soon with the new telescope that is going up. It is a guess just like all theories presented in this subject. His is just a more educated guess than most.

 

[Indeependent]

You said the article said it's now provable

That is not at all what I said. I said mathematical solutions have been found. And that is accurate; they have.

I read it and it says there's no mathematical

Apparently you didn't read carefully enough, because the article actually says there is no "raw physics" to support the idea, which is a reference to experimental evidence.

Oh, I read the article and the sound bite you just posted.
I also read the line you made up out of your ass.
Posting bullshit is a ***** isn't, especially when the article you Linked stated there's no mathematical formula

 

[evenflow1969]

Who cares???

Greg

This is the Science and Technology board. If you don't care about developments in science why do you come here to troll.

A theory is not an advancement.

Theory is a huge advancement. Most every thing we currently know about electricity is currently theory. How ever this theory is working when we build products. So not proven but still yeilding wonderfull advancements in our lives.

 

[Indeependent]

Who cares???

Greg

This is the Science and Technology board. If you don't care about developments in science why do you come here to troll.

A theory is not an advancement.

Theory is a huge advancement. Most every thing we currently know about electricity is currently theory. How ever this theory is working when we build products. So not proven but still yeilding wonderfull advancements in our lives.

There's like a theory for every damn PhD out there; that's how they stay employed.

 

[Selivan]

Oh, I read the article and the sound bite you just posted.
I also read the line you made up out of your ass.
Posting bullshit is a ***** isn't, especially when the article you Linked stated there's no mathematical formula

You better not hide your mustache ...
Grow a beard like a goat ... This will suit you.

 

[evenflow1969]

Who cares???

Greg

This is the Science and Technology board. If you don't care about developments in science why do you come here to troll.

A theory is not an advancement.

Theory is a huge advancement. Most every thing we currently know about electricity is currently theory. How ever this theory is working when we build products. So not proven but still yeilding wonderfull advancements in our lives.

There's like a theory for every damn PhD out there; that's how they stay employed.

Not every theory is a huge advancement but some are!

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

especially when the article you Linked stated there's no mathematical formula

First of all, I didnt link any articles. Secondly, the article linked in the OP (to which I assume you are referring, with your rabid, impotent anger causing your error) neither states nor implies any such thing. You literally pulled every word of that out of your ass.

Look, we get it: you have no idea what the article means to convey, and you dont know fact one about any of this. Instead of throwing a little fit, just pay attention. You just might learn something

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

There's like a theory for every damn PhD out there; that's how they stay employed.

Those are hypotheses, not scientific theories.

 

[Indeependent]

There's like a theory for every damn PhD out there; that's how they stay employed.

Those are hypotheses, not scientific theories.

Are they “mathematically provable”?

 

[Indeependent]

especially when the article you Linked stated there's no mathematical formula

First of all, I didnt link any articles. Secondly, the article linked in the OP (to which I assume you are referring, with your rabid, impotent anger causing your error) neither states nor implies any such thing. You literally pulled every word of that out of your ass.

Look, we get it: you have no idea what the article means to convey, and you dont know fact one about any of this. Instead of throwing a little fit, just pay attention. You just might learn something

Bulllllllshitttttt...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

especially when the article you Linked stated there's no mathematical formula

First of all, I didnt link any articles. Secondly, the article linked in the OP (to which I assume you are referring, with your rabid, impotent anger causing your error) neither states nor implies any such thing. You literally pulled every word of that out of your ass.

Look, we get it: you have no idea what the article means to convey, and you dont know fact one about any of this. Instead of throwing a little fit, just pay attention. You just might learn something

Bulllllllshitttttt...

You are embarrassing yourself...no more responses for you ...

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

Before that there was nothing

*possibly as far as we could ever discern.

So how do you define "nothing"?

Greg

Not sure. Why do you ask?

 

[Indeependent]

especially when the article you Linked stated there's no mathematical formula

First of all, I didnt link any articles. Secondly, the article linked in the OP (to which I assume you are referring, with your rabid, impotent anger causing your error) neither states nor implies any such thing. You literally pulled every word of that out of your ass.

Look, we get it: you have no idea what the article means to convey, and you dont know fact one about any of this. Instead of throwing a little fit, just pay attention. You just might learn something

Bulllllllshitttttt...

You are embarrassing yourself...no more responses for you ...

Look dickhead, you said you read it and it said it’s provable and now you’re trying not to look like the bullshit artist you are.

 

[IsaacNewton]

especially when the article you Linked stated there's no mathematical formula

First of all, I didnt link any articles. Secondly, the article linked in the OP (to which I assume you are referring, with your rabid, impotent anger causing your error) neither states nor implies any such thing. You literally pulled every word of that out of your ass.

Look, we get it: you have no idea what the article means to convey, and you dont know fact one about any of this. Instead of throwing a little fit, just pay attention. You just might learn something

Bulllllllshitttttt...

You are embarrassing yourself...no more responses for you ...

Look dickhead, you said you read it and it said it’s provable and now you’re trying not to look like the bullshit artist you are.

It's the science forum, you're looking for The Rubber Room or The Angry For No Reason forum.

 

[Fort Fun Indiana]

especially when the article you Linked stated there's no mathematical formula

First of all, I didnt link any articles. Secondly, the article linked in the OP (to which I assume you are referring, with your rabid, impotent anger causing your error) neither states nor implies any such thing. You literally pulled every word of that out of your ass.

Look, we get it: you have no idea what the article means to convey, and you dont know fact one about any of this. Instead of throwing a little fit, just pay attention. You just might learn something

Bulllllllshitttttt...

You are embarrassing yourself...no more responses for you ...

Look dickhead, you said you read it and it said it’s provable and now you’re trying not to look like the bullshit artist you are.

It's the science forum, you're looking for The Rubber Room or The Angry For No Reason forum.

He came in here already rabid, swinging with both hands, because he sensed some sort of slight to his pet, magical paradigm. Let him flail and embarrass himself...

 

[Indeependent]

especially when the article you Linked stated there's no mathematical formula

First of all, I didnt link any articles. Secondly, the article linked in the OP (to which I assume you are referring, with your rabid, impotent anger causing your error) neither states nor implies any such thing. You literally pulled every word of that out of your ass.

Look, we get it: you have no idea what the article means to convey, and you dont know fact one about any of this. Instead of throwing a little fit, just pay attention. You just might learn something

Bulllllllshitttttt...

You are embarrassing yourself...no more responses for you ...

Look dickhead, you said you read it and it said it’s provable and now you’re trying not to look like the bullshit artist you are.

It's the science forum, you're looking for The Rubber Room or The Angry For No Reason forum.

I'm looking for people who don't spew bullshit on every Thread like you two do.

 

[Indeependent]

First of all, I didnt link any articles. Secondly, the article linked in the OP (to which I assume you are referring, with your rabid, impotent anger causing your error) neither states nor implies any such thing. You literally pulled every word of that out of your ass.

Look, we get it: you have no idea what the article means to convey, and you dont know fact one about any of this. Instead of throwing a little fit, just pay attention. You just might learn something

Bulllllllshitttttt...

You are embarrassing yourself...no more responses for you ...

Look dickhead, you said you read it and it said it’s provable and now you’re trying not to look like the bullshit artist you are.

It's the science forum, you're looking for The Rubber Room or The Angry For No Reason forum.

He came in here already rabid, swinging with both hands, because he sensed some sort of slight to his pet, magical paradigm. Let him flail and embarrass himself...

No problem...your post and my response are there for all to read.