The concept of "origin" is like dividing by zero.

[BoyNextDoor]

I think the "Big-Bang" may be a bunch of bullshit

First, it's important to know that the big bang wasn't an explosion of matter into empty space—it was the rapid expansion of space itself. This means that every single point in the universe appears to be at the center. Think of the universe as an empty balloon with dots on it.

That underlined sentence seems to obfuscate a LOT of the bullshit.

I am not sure that inflation is all that necessary. The universe always was and always will be.

The concept of "origin" is like dividing by zero.

 

[eyer]

I think the "Big-Bang" may be a bunch of bullshit

First, it's important to know that the big bang wasn't an explosion of matter into empty space—it was the rapid expansion of space itself. This means that every single point in the universe appears to be at the center. Think of the universe as an empty balloon with dots on it.

That underlined sentence seems to obfuscate a LOT of the bullshit.

I am not sure that inflation is all that necessary. The universe always was and always will be.

The concept of "origin" is like dividing by zero.

That's the problem all you godless wannabes share equally:

All you can possibly do is mindlessly "think"...

...because none of your invalid philosophies provide any particular answers for universal truths.

It's called being "lost"...

...fool.

 

[phrodeau]

I think the "Big-Bang" may be a bunch of bullshit

First, it's important to know that the big bang wasn't an explosion of matter into empty space—it was the rapid expansion of space itself. This means that every single point in the universe appears to be at the center. Think of the universe as an empty balloon with dots on it.

That underlined sentence seems to obfuscate a LOT of the bullshit.

I am not sure that inflation is all that necessary. The universe always was and always will be.

The concept of "origin" is like dividing by zero.

The Big Bang theory is one of many, but it currently has the most credibility. The discovery of cosmic background radiation fifty years ago strongly confirmed it, and very little has since been seen to undermine it.

But we're still learning and discovering, and as more evidence is collected, theories get stronger or weaker, and a new top dog may arise at any moment. The "bullshit" of which you speak is another thing that the scientific method seeks to explain, but isn't quite there yet.

 

[Colonel Hogan]

I think the "Big-Bang" may be a bunch of bullshit

First, it's important to know that the big bang wasn't an explosion of matter into empty space—it was the rapid expansion of space itself. This means that every single point in the universe appears to be at the center. Think of the universe as an empty balloon with dots on it.

That underlined sentence seems to obfuscate a LOT of the bullshit.

I am not sure that inflation is all that necessary. The universe always was and always will be.

The concept of "origin" is like dividing by zero.

But if you believe in a "rapid expansion" then you imply two questions: how fast? and from how small?

What caused the acceleration? And if you wish to divorce the expansion of "space itself" from the very existence of matter (much less the explosion of it), then please tell me what there is to "expand"? Other than stars and galaxies accelerating away from each other, what evidence is there that the very nothingness of space itself expands or contracts? In fact, one could argue that not even the relative motion of galaxies have such an implication. Space itself could simply be an infinitely large "container" within which a finite volume of matter moves.

Besides, this link says that the very elements which make up all matter have different ages. The very concept of "age" implies origin. http://astrosociety.org/edu/publications/tnl/56/ancient4.html

 

[Sammael Bard]

I think the "Big-Bang" may be a bunch of bullshit

First, it's important to know that the big bang wasn't an explosion of matter into empty space—it was the rapid expansion of space itself. This means that every single point in the universe appears to be at the center. Think of the universe as an empty balloon with dots on it.

That underlined sentence seems to obfuscate a LOT of the bullshit.

I am not sure that inflation is all that necessary. The universe always was and always will be.

The concept of "origin" is like dividing by zero.

It depends on how you choose to define Universe.

There is a term called "nothingness". The universe is surrounded by this nothingness, where we assume its boundary to be.

You might have head the term that the Universe is expanding. What does that mean? The balloon, and the area it covers is expanding out into the nothingness.


ETA: Theories keep changing, and currently Big Bang is the most reasonable one around. I'm sure we'll have more theories in the future.

 

[wistfall1]

That's the problem all you godless wannabes share equally:

All you can possibly do is mindlessly "think"...

...because none of your invalid philosophies provide any particular answers for universal truths.

It's called being "lost"...

...fool.

Generally, when one speaks about God/god/or godless, it's a reference to the God/god of the bible, the one in the Old Testament and the one in the New Testament said to be one and the same.

If that is what you speak of when you say "godless" and "lost" and "fool", I'd ask if this God/god that your speaking of is supposed to be for real, therefore without error. If so, please know that the bible which purports to speak of this same god is full or errors and contradictions and easily verifiable.

As to the big bang, there is question about it, and several theories, including multiverses and daughter universes. And yes, science is still seeking answers, but it may be an unknowable puzzle--still, not static like the bible.

w

 

[eyer]

Generally, when one speaks about God/god/or godless, it's a reference to the God/god of the bible, the one in the Old Testament and the one in the New Testament said to be one and the same.

If that is what you speak of when you say "godless" and "lost" and "fool", I'd ask if this God/god that your speaking of is supposed to be for real, therefore without error. If so, please know that the bible which purports to speak of this same god is full or errors and contradictions and easily verifiable.

As to the big bang, there is question about it, and several theories, including multiverses and daughter universes. And yes, science is still seeking answers, but it may be an unknowable puzzle--still, not static like the bible.

w

1. Why do you have a need to sign your posts with a "w"? Was just plain "wistful" already taken? What exactly is it that you vaguely or regretfully long for?

2. Do you believe in "this God/god that" I spoke of?

3. Is that part in that bible you spoke of "verifiable" when it says one who does not believe in that "God/god that" I spoke, one who does not possess his Spirit...

...can never even begin to understand His Word?

4. What philosophy ever known to man...

...gives answers to every single philosophical question man has ever asked?

5. Why does the term, "modern science" exist?

 

[eyer]

It depends on how you choose to define Universe.

There is a term called "nothingness". The universe is surrounded by this nothingness, where we assume its boundary to be.

You might have head the term that the Universe is expanding. What does that mean? The balloon, and the area it covers is expanding out into the nothingness.

What total hogwash...

...it's logically impossible for both "nothingness" and anything else to exist in any way together.

If something - the universe - exists in the middle of your "nothingness"...

...that "nothingness" is, in fact, occupied by something and cannot be logically accepted as "nothingness" because that something is most definitely in it.

This is a physical existence...

...there can never be nothing because there is always something.

No sound, you say?

Yet there remains silence.

A ball in this hand...

...but nothing in the other, you say?

Yet there remains air.

"nothingness" is a fantasy that factually exists nowhere in the natural world...

...because it is repugnant to the physical laws of nature itself.

Such "nothingness" imbecility is exactly what utopia is made of...

...and, as such, only serves as a meaningless game for mindless wankers.

 

[Aglaopheme]

"eyer"

Totally possible when using quotation marks.

 

[Sammael Bard]

...there can never be nothing because there is always something.

Look, people!

A jobless nut argues the points made by Stephen Hawkings and CERN itself.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

"eyer"

Totally possible when using quotation marks.

"And" don't "forget"...

..."the" ellipses.

http://media.giphy.com/media/VZWHnlpAta6pq/giphy.gif

 

[Aglaopheme]

Silly me...
...."eyer"....
....."nothingness".........

 

[eyer]

a. eyer = something

b. nothingers & and a racist piece of shit = can't help themselves but to prove a.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

"nothing" ness...

...to...

...nothing "ness."

wannabe wanker statist sex offending creampie cuckolded "daddy" playground cunts....

...too "friggin" funny.

http://33.media.tumblr.com/219b11e09538ffc6d10489700b260766/tumblr_nels72aZ9l1u0y8l9o1_500.gif

nothingnessssssssss

ssssss

sssss....

 

[Learin]

"nothing" ness...

...to...

...nothing "ness."

wannabe wanker statist sex offending creampie cuckolded "daddy" playground cunts....

...too "friggin" funny.

http://33.media.tumblr.com/219b11e09538ffc6d10489700b260766/tumblr_nels72aZ9l1u0y8l9o1_500.gif

nothingnessssssssss

ssssss

sssss....

Lol....where do you get all these gifs from?

 

[BoyNextDoor]

@wistfall1

I see you are a virgin and all so I will ask nicely. Please don't quote it in threads I start. Thank you.

 

[Ulaven_Demorte]

Let's see, given the options of:

A: We're not really sure how it all happened but we have some theories about the origins of the universe based on observable data.

-or-

B: A magical, all knowing, all powerful, being conjured it all up through sheer force of will and left the telling of it to his OTHER creations to scribble down millions , erm.. sorry, thousands of years later.


I'll take "Magic"!

 

[phrodeau]

I think of God as an empty balloon with dots on him.

 

[IrezumiKiss]

I think of God as an empty balloon with dots on him.

No, those are "ellipses"...

...see?

http://www.reactiongifs.com/r/2011/09/illK6U.gif

 

[Aglaopheme]

You know........

.....I used to like them, now they're turning into "nothingness".

 

[Desiremakesmeweak]

Or like multiplying the checksum by nine.

 

[Desiremakesmeweak]

What was the origin of the triangle?

 

[Recidiva]

The concept of origin has to do with altering your perceptions of how space, energy, matter and time work. It's complicated but worth the study and brain stretch.

On that note, quoting scripture:

"But he said to him, 'If they do not listen to Moses and the Prophets, they will not be persuaded even if someone rises from the dead'"

So if you don't bother to listen to Feynman, Tyson and Hawking, what I have to say won't do squat.

Listen to the masters.

 

[eyer]

4. What philosophy ever known to man...

...gives answers to every single philosophical question man has ever asked?

5. Why does the term, "modern science" exist?

~ crickets ~

 

[phrodeau]

~ crickets ~

Get used to it, dumbass.