A Galaxies Cluster Older Than Possible! Scientists say.

page: 3
83
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join

posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:30 PM
link   

Originally posted by Stuffed
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


Blind worship of ANYTHING is just that, blind. As for if it's insanity I'm going to have to say no, seeing as how many people do take part in blind faith/worship (insanity being abnormal mental or behavioral problems)

As for your comment of Darwinism, this is not about evolution, it is about cosmology. Just because the very nature of science is to question its' validity and to test it resulting in either proof or disproof, doesn't mean that all scientific theories should face the same intensity of questioning as the actual theory in question. If you claim there is no evidence of species to species in evolution you're just choosing not to look at the evidence. If you on the other hand of another theory that would explain this better present the evidence, or present the evidence that would shine evolution in the negative light you feel it needs to be shown in.


Back to the topic at hand, this is pretty amazing, i love it when something upsets current knowledge. Getting rid of as many as possible false beliefs is the goal here people. Truth is Truth
edit on 15-12-2010 by Stuffed because: typo



Many members here intermingle the theory of evolution and the big bang theory. Using one to provide evidence of how accurate science is. Kind of like, if this one is correct, then the other one is too - type of illogical thought pattern. I, myself, have had this type of argument thrown at me many times.

Well, while it is still early, it sure looks like the big bang theory is going to be proven false.

Which definitely would undermine these members argument.

Just because all of our current knowledge implies evolution, does not make it so.

Based on the very nature of science to keep testing the validity of every theory, isn't it foolish to accept any theory as a fact?

Just like all of our current knowledge before today implied a big bang - but after today it does not.

So may our future knowledge of specie development be upset by some new finding.

Since this is the nature of science, wouldn't you say that this is true?

So please do not force feed the big bang theory, or the theory of evolution, or any other theory down our throats or more to the point, don't try to stop other theories from being taught.

The truth will come out in the end. Just be open minded. After all, the Truth will set you free.




posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:37 PM
link   

Originally posted by mrvdreamknight

Originally posted by Stuffed
reply to post by sonofliberty1776
 


Blind worship of ANYTHING is just that, blind. As for if it's insanity I'm going to have to say no, seeing as how many people do take part in blind faith/worship (insanity being abnormal mental or behavioral problems)

As for your comment of Darwinism, this is not about evolution, it is about cosmology. Just because the very nature of science is to question its' validity and to test it resulting in either proof or disproof, doesn't mean that all scientific theories should face the same intensity of questioning as the actual theory in question. If you claim there is no evidence of species to species in evolution you're just choosing not to look at the evidence. If you on the other hand of another theory that would explain this better present the evidence, or present the evidence that would shine evolution in the negative light you feel it needs to be shown in.


Back to the topic at hand, this is pretty amazing, i love it when something upsets current knowledge. Getting rid of as many as possible false beliefs is the goal here people. Truth is Truth
edit on 15-12-2010 by Stuffed because: typo



Many members here intermingle the theory of evolution and the big bang theory. Using one to provide evidence of how accurate science is. Kind of like, if this one is correct, then the other one is too - type of illogical thought pattern. I, myself, have had this type of argument thrown at me many times.

Well, while it is still early, it sure looks like the big bang theory is going to be proven false.

Which definitely would undermine these members argument.

Just because all of our current knowledge implies evolution, does not make it so.

Based on the very nature of science to keep testing the validity of every theory, isn't it foolish to accept any theory as a fact?

Just like all of our current knowledge before today implied a big bang - but after today it does not.

So may our future knowledge of specie development be upset by some new finding.

Since this is the nature of science, wouldn't you say that this is true?

So please do not force feed the big bang theory, or the theory of evolution, or any other theory down our throats or more to the point, don't try to stop other theories from being taught.

The truth will come out in the end. Just be open minded. After all, the Truth will set you free.


It would appear that you didn't understand my point then. Science doesn't claim to know everything you know this, i know this, but that is not to say that we can throw out all theories if one turns out to be wrong WITHOUT EVIDENCE. Any other such nonsense is just an attempt to preserve personal beliefs. I have no problem with a theory being proven wrong, but untill then that is what we have to work with. We can't know anything "FOR SURE" so it's pointless to speak in terms of 100% certainty, in that sense a theory is a good foundation to work towards true understanding.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:41 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


No. They just guessed the wrong speed of acceleration. This really doesn't change anything.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:45 PM
link   
reply to post by Arken
 


This just goes to show us we we really know about everything, which is very very little.

We will probably find, through better technology and over time, that the universe is much bigger than what we thought and the laws that we believed governed its existence mean nothing.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:47 PM
link   
Its the proof that Quantumn Physics needed. We are in a fish tank, the universe, and there is a jet stream of bubbles; each bubble is a universe. Dimensions collide and merge as is the way of existence. One Universe eats another until the one true reality is known. Then there is no turning back. Shangri La

reply to post by Arken
 



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:49 PM
link   
We need to forget about time and forget about using it as a measuring stick. There is no time, just collapsing waves of probability. Time is the one purely subjective phenomenon. It's an impediment to understanding.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:50 PM
link   

Originally posted by stumason

Originally posted by sonofliberty1776
It is amazing just how many scientific theories are embraced and cleaved unto as fact, just to be disproved later. Makes you wonder if blind worship of ANY scientific theory is a sign of insanity????


If you speak to most sensible scientists and those that are of a sciencey mind, no one has a "blind belief" in anything.

They have their theories (and please don't use that word to mean something is just an idea - a scientific theory is based upon observed data and is on "fairly" solid ground as opposed to "I have a theory my wife is shagging my brother") and they then seek to either prove or disprove these.

If they disprove it, they will work up a new theory or alter the previous one to fit the new observed data. At least with science, they try to find answers, rather than the idiotic cop out of "God did it"...


I dont think sonofliberty was knocking science. He is knocking those of you that believe that certain theorys are 100% fact. Some people come off as science is infallible and we have all the answers. The big bang is fact etc.

We dont know jack $hit basically but saying you know what happened 13 billions years ago without actually being there is as naive as believing a divine creator started it.

Some people are just tired of certain people especially atheists coming off as anything scientist say is a fact rather its theory or not.

I just think its hilarious that modern man has only been around but the blink of a eye yet have the audacity to think we know how the universe was created. Point is noone knows and theory's are proven wrong all the time. So stop stating certain things as facts that arent 100% proven.

They teach the Big bang like its a 100% case closed proven and it isnt.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:53 PM
link   
reply to post by Stuffed
 


Science doesnt claim to know everything but some people come off as what is said about the Big Bang is set in stone . Go to any science museum or watch any tv show on science they all teach the big bang as basically fact.



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:54 PM
link   
How the hell they work these things out I will never know. Mind you give it a few years and we will be told this is also wrong. The universe is sooo big all we can do atm is look...so it all basically give it your best guess type work.

Oh and who could have guess god and religion would appear on this thread



posted on Dec, 15 2010 @ 11:58 PM
link   

Originally posted by whoocares
reply to post by Rocketgirl
 


ok.. where to begin...
you obviously missed the point..they didnt mean it literally...
they are correct that 'it shouldnt exist' with the way we think today (todays standard)
but guess what? it does...so now we need to look at things differently to begin to understand...

get it?


Umm no, I read the Op post correctly. That's why I bascily stated that anything goes in space and that anything can happen. Now do you get that? No I don't think you do.

You're the one who read too much into what I posted (Which some of you people do that with other material anyways, but that's a different story).. So you can back off now.
edit on 16-12-2010 by Rocketgirl because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:02 AM
link   
reply to post by ker2010
 


I haven't seen any TV show or museum preaching it as 100% fact so i don't think i can adequately respond to that comment, perhaps a link to a particular show claiming this please. (I'm not trying to come off as rude i would just genuinely like to see such a claim so i can respond accordingly)

But based off of what i have seen, how would you prefer they teach it? Like i stated earlier, these are our working models. We build off of them and because we can't know anything 100% certainly, teaching theories may come off as fact to you because in practicality until contradicting evidence comes forward they are given such regards. Not just any idea becomes a theory, it's an arduous process.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:03 AM
link   
Let's not jump the gun here. Maybe those galaxies just seem to be that old.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:11 AM
link   
I would not scrap the books just yet.Redshift measurements from SED modeling are inherently less accurate than spectroscopy.Such "systemic uncertainties" in the determination of the distances of these galaxies might still allow for approximate agreement between observations and model predictions.

The findings appear in The Astrophysical Journal, published online Nov. 24 in advance of print publication on Dec. 10, 2010. "We have found a relatively large number of very massive, highly luminous galaxies that existed almost 12 billion years ago when the universe was still very young, about 1.5 billion years old. These results appear to disagree with the latest predictions from models of galaxy formation and evolution," said Tufts astrophysicist Danilo Marchesini, lead author on the paper and assistant professor of physics and astronomy at the Tufts School of Arts and Sciences.



If half of the massive galaxies are assumed to be slightly closer, at redshift z=2.6, when the universe was a bit older (2.5 billion years old) and very dusty (with dust absorbing much of the light emitted at ultra-violet and optical wavelengths), then the disagreement between observations and model predictions becomes only marginally significant.


Source: www.sciencedaily.com...
Source: www.tufts.edu...
edit on 16-12-2010 by flyingfish because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:15 AM
link   

Originally posted by iSHRED
yes isnt it odd how nearly every religion teaches love, yet no one does it.
anyways back on topic. There are still countless things we dont know about earth, it would be foulish to think you know anything about space. New studies will continually contadict previous "theories" about space. It's almost a waste of money studying it (other then seeing if a giant astroid is headed our way). All that money should go towards improving transport to and from space and colonizing the moon and mars. Then from there we can work our way outward.


Your post was so funny....I had to read it again!

Love it!



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:15 AM
link   
reply to post by Stuffed
 


Easy enough..
History Channel's

The Universe.

What put the bang in the big bang episode..

No they dont state IF the big bang happened what caused it. They come off as the big bang is a fact.


edit on 16-12-2010 by ker2010 because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:20 AM
link   
I don't think this evidence collapses "The Big Bang" Theory. I think scientist may have just found a specific Galaxy Cluster point in time space where Matter and Anti-Matter started to cancel one another out and leave the particulates for Galaxy Cluster Creation and that is why it is as old as it is. This is just my hunch as to why this cluster got a jump start on the others, albeit a huge one!



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:20 AM
link   
reply to post by ker2010
 


Alright, i'll check it out, thanks.

Although i have a hard time taking the History Channel seriously to begin with, what with all of the doomsday, prophecies, and ancient aliens (even though i love that show) that they constantly play. Oh and those two American pickers...but that's a different conversation haha.


Edit: Okay i just watched the preview for the episode (while trying to look for a full episode) but the very first thing they lead with explaining the big bang is "We're really not sure but..."
Hardly sounds like claiming it as fact so far, so this episode better be some pure preaching.
edit on 16-12-2010 by Stuffed because: (no reason given)



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:20 AM
link   

Originally posted by mydarkpassenger
reply to post by Arken
 


Could it be that when two universes bump into each other, if sufficiently similar in physical laws, perhaps a galaxy or entire cluster from a much older universe could be transferred to a much younger universe at the point of maximum congruency?





Drop a couple tablespoons of oil in a pot of very hot water.

Watch it break up and join...expand, contract.

Could be as simple as that.



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:24 AM
link   
reply to post by Stuffed
 


Just for reference i dont believe in organized religion. Im not a follower of any faith. I do kinda believe in a higher power.

But from my point of view people who think we know how it all started and the bigbang is infallible are just as naive
as the ones who think we are the only ones in this vast cosmos.

Guess im just saying we all should come off as more humble .



posted on Dec, 16 2010 @ 12:32 AM
link   
reply to post by Stuffed
 


Their is a part and i cant link it cause for some reason my browser isnt displaying the addie.

Anyways people email their questions.

One guy emails asking what put the bang in the big bang.

Then one of History Channels scientists explains how he think it happened.





new topics

top topics



 
83
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join