It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

The Big Bang Theory is Wrong

page: 5
5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 09:00 AM
link   
No one has been able to detect or measure the distortion of spacetime
successfully, but i think there is still a lot of support for the theory.

No one has detected or has been able measure or show gravitons neither

I think that the big bang thoery is only a temporary theory, it is hard to remove bbt even though it provides more questions than anwsers, but i dont thoery is very good and i believed it was rushed.




posted on Feb, 3 2008 @ 07:34 PM
link   

Originally posted by thesun
No one has been able to detect or measure the distortion of spacetime
successfully, but i think there is still a lot of support for the theory.



First of all , contrary to what you say, it has been proved that relative speed, relative acceleration and gravity do distort tme.

For example, muons are created in two stages at the upper atmosphere when nuclei of atoms in the air are impacted by cosmic ray. Muons have an extremely short life span. Calculation shows that that won't be able to reach the face of the earth in that short time. However, because they travel near the speed of light, time is dilated on the muons relative to earth. So a lot of muons can reach the surface of the earth.

The atomic clocks on the GPS satellites would go faster than the clocks on surface of the earth by about 45.9 microseconds per day due to the weaker gravitational field up there. But they would go slower by 7.2 microseconds per day due to time dilation in orbital speed. So the atomic clocks on the GPS satellites were set to run about 38 microsecond faster per day to compensate the changes or distortion before launching.

Special relatively also shows that length may contract in a LINEAR mode more prominently at near light speed, not in an absolute sense, but from the perspective of an observer who sees the object at high speed.

So you see distortion of time is a scientific fact. I also believe in in length contraction due to relativistic effect. So you may say distortion of spacetime is a fact too because distortion of the time part of spacetime has been proven.

What I am against is the wrong idea or wrong wording that three dimensional space, not spacetime, can be curved, bended, warped or distorted. Because that would imply displacement of space. But in reality there is no displacement of space at all but only that the property of flat space has been changed.
It is wrong that some scientists think they have proved the curvature of space because light is bended near a massive star. The light is actually bended by the gravitational field of the massive star and has nothing to do with curvature of space at all.


Mod Edit: Proper quoting


[edit on 3-2-2008 by GAOTU789]



posted on Feb, 6 2008 @ 02:08 PM
link   
"the universe was created in one great big explosion of matter into the great void of nothingness at the beginning of time"

Although this is also what i was bought up to believe, reading it then, i thought how silly it sounds. It reminded me of hitch hikers guide to the galaxy, in which is a group of people who believed the universe was snotted out by a huge nose. I remember finding it funny becuase of how wierd it was. I'm pretty sure someone new to the current explenation would think the same as i did in the film.



posted on May, 22 2008 @ 08:46 PM
link   
meh i believe in a god...a higher power shall we say....this worlds to advanced and too well suited for are lifetimes to be created by molecules or some scientific logically washed up explanation....noses to smell,ears to hear,mouths to eat and speak with,parts to expose of our waste(lol),a sun for daylight a moon for night,water to drink,food to eat,trees and plants to produce oxygen so we can breath...a little to welllllll suited for our lifeform for some big bang theory suggesting two molecules came out of no where to create this amazing universe...with many lifeforms....is another attempt to discredit religion....even though who really knows i guess eh? we will find out when we die



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 02:54 PM
link   
Excellent OP, so many people just take things for granted because they were taught it as little kids and never thought about whether it might be wrong



posted on May, 23 2008 @ 03:18 PM
link   
I just wanted to take a moment and thank you all for the reply's. Its good to know that im not the only one out there looking into these things and that im not the only one who can have his mind changed on the subject. Thank You Simon for the great contributions :-)



posted on Jul, 31 2008 @ 07:34 PM
link   
reply to post by uberarcanist
 

the universe never comes into being the same way it is never annihilated.it is a causal chain that goes in a circle O. with forward causation and backward...you didnt go to work today just because you woke up and went, you went to work today because you were going to come home from there. there is equal inertia for both. like monkeys evolving to meet some future potentiality. had we evolved based on the past/preasent then we would be behind. it was the fact that we had/have a future potential that sees us through.



posted on Aug, 13 2008 @ 05:28 PM
link   
hey. i am a student researching the big bang theory and catholic and scientific responses... i was wondering if you could please give me your views on this theory that would great. my email is aalderton@stkevins.school.nz... thanks



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 01:43 AM
link   
Heres some further good info on why the big bang is wrong -

The Electric Universe
www.thunderboltsproject.com...
www.kronia.com...
www.the-electric-universe.info...
www.fixedearth.com...

Enjoy



posted on Oct, 22 2008 @ 09:56 AM
link   
reply to post by Grock
 


And here's a bunch of evidence showing some kind of big bang happened.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 03:14 AM
link   
reply to post by dave420
 


Sorry bro, not buying it. Everything posted there is exactly the counterpoint to what i and others here have been saying... to expound upon what you have been told without thinking outside the box just isnt going to persuade me, every bit of that info I am aware of... its outside that info (and therefore what we have blindly accepted as truth) that is at the forfront here...

Thanks for the input tho, it does further clarify the points being made.



posted on Nov, 6 2008 @ 10:33 AM
link   
reply to post by Grock
 


But unlike your points, those points are backed up by evidence. By actual objective observations, made by multiple instruments and multiple people on multiple occasions - you know, evidence.



posted on Nov, 9 2008 @ 01:42 AM
link   
reply to post by dave420
 


you obviously havent been reading my links - those are actual scientific evidence as well... sorry, your arguement still holds no water (especially since you havent even looked at my glass).



posted on Nov, 20 2008 @ 10:07 AM
link   

Originally posted by dave420
reply to post by Grock
 


But unlike your points, those points are backed up by evidence. By actual objective observations, made by multiple instruments and multiple people on multiple occasions - you know, evidence.


Evidence is in the eye of the paradigm holder. What is clear evidence in one paradigm, might be evidence for an entirely different explanation in another paradigm. Some questions and answers also become irrelevant, and out of context.

I think science does itself a major disservice by churning out physicists who have not even been trained in the basic principles of the paradigmatic structures themselves, within which they work.



posted on Nov, 21 2008 @ 12:42 AM
link   
What made the bib bang happen and where did it happen. Where did the components come from and what produced the physics for it to happen from "Nothing"?

Sorry I guess I am a little simple.

Or just maybe I am missing something about the thinking of Primates and I missed out in class..... LOL..

Perhaps I am one of those throw out primates because I was not given a brain.. LOL..

Are there any Primate Brothers, sisters or just any Primate, related to me that can provide some simple answers?



posted on Nov, 21 2008 @ 12:48 AM
link   
I for one believe it is possible that reality itself is simply a figment of an imagination, and we are all personalites created by a lonely singularity.

Of course, none of this is founded (but how could you possibly prove or disprove such a claim?), but it sure is fun to think about.

[edit on 11/21/2008 by prototism]



posted on Nov, 21 2008 @ 01:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by prototism
I for one believe it is possible that reality itself is simply a figment of an imagination, and we are all personalites created by a lonely singularity.

Of course, none of this is founded (but how could you possibly prove or disprove such a claim?), but it sure is fun to think about.

[edit on 11/21/2008 by prototism]



Hmmmm you Might just be closer to the Truth than you think.

Many Truths are said in jest!!!!

Can you give us more of your thoughts Please....



posted on Nov, 21 2008 @ 01:18 AM
link   
reply to post by The Matrix Traveller
 
Another one is that the Universe works on an infinite cyclical schedule. A Big bang, expansion, a big crunch, rinse and repeat; where the matter singularity, pre-big bang, is the "leftovers" from the big crunch. It is truly a perpetual motion machine, since it hypothetically would adhere to the Law of Conservation. Matter is compressed and expanded, but never destroyed.

In addition, I propose there are actually two "layers" of Universe: the physical, tangible Universe, where said cyclical event occurs; and the illusionary, intangible Universe, where the "lonely singularity" resides in a timeless void.

Again, because of the nature of this theory, it can be neither proven, nor disproven. Also, I think parts of this is echoed in some Eastern Religions.

[edit on 11/21/2008 by prototism]

[edit on 11/21/2008 by prototism]

[edit on 11/21/2008 by prototism]



posted on Nov, 21 2008 @ 03:47 AM
link   
reply to post by prototism
 


Have you ever explored the possibility of the Universe being Holographic in nature and may be the ultimate in Virtual Reality?

Did you know that this Idea is actually thousands and thousands of years old?

You can find all over the Earth Geometric pattern work in Government buildings Palaces Public places in parks walk ways, Churches, church windows, mosaic floors and ceilings, temples and many other ancient buildings and structures, related to the components, language and workings of what I show in my Avatar !!!

You can find hundreds if not thousands of writings describing this system.

The Lattice work in my avatar is a partitioning map of the underside of what is called the Soul.

But the soul is Not understood by any today.



posted on Jan, 12 2009 @ 08:31 PM
link   
reply to post by uberarcanist
 


God is actually the connection between two entities -- one of which resembles THE FATHER the other THE MOTHER.

THE MOTHER is all matter made up of a completely stagnant neutrons with absolutely no energy -- thus it's core temperature resided at Absolute Zero

THE FATHER AKA HOLY SPIRIT is pure energy consisting of completely disintegrated matter -- residing at Planck's Temperature (opposite of absolute zero)

THE FATHER, having no fear, decided to descend into the chaotic core of darkness and since THE FATHER IS made up of pure energy . . . well let's just say every "Neutron" was divided into a proton and electron -- this division is only possible because of the holy spirit.

Guess you could say that the THE FATHER penetrated THE MOTHER and out came the UNIVERSE -- much like MALES penetrate FEMALES on earth through Sexual Intercourse and out comes CHILDREN.


Eventually, the combinatino of these two energies created light . . . than God . . . the connection between two opposing entities . . . got bored and decided to make man -- their supreme creation.

God realized that man was unhappy and God spliced man into two beings -- one resemebling energetic properties of THE FATHER while the other resembles more or less the energetic properties of the MOTHER.

This is why females appreciate material possessions more than males and males appreciate the "How to make the material possessions" more than females.

When Adam ate the apple, essentially what happen was the two energies switched -- man acted like woman and women acted like man. Unfortunately, women are very much influenced by the energy state that males reside in -- in other words males need to be the first gender to resort back to their natural state . . . .

. . . in other words when the Son of Man returns . . . which I'm pretty sure is ME but I could be wrong



new topics

top topics



 
5
<< 2  3  4    6 >>

log in

join