The Largest Structures in the Universe: The Great Walls - "Do They Contradict The Big Bang Theory?

Originally posted by Seabas1123
I once heard Brian Cox say that there is not enough atoms in out entire visible universe to count how many years the universe will be around.

I just think that numbers and equations are irrelevant when it comes to the grand scale of the universe, Lets just say that man is really insignificant.

Dr Manhattan from the Watchmen "Life is a highly over rated phenomenon"

Yep, I agree.

Who cares about how it all started, everything is cyclic and this is the grand design of the creator in everything - whether you believe in something or don't, you cannot deny the sheer brilliance of creation and the magnitude.

The universe is a giant fractal, take us, humans and this planet and scale it up, you have the milky way, we are just one part of an arm on that spiralling galaxy, which is just one part of a much larger spiral and so on.

I recently read in the Quran that "The Creator has left signs in his creation for men of understanding" - I have read similar statements in many other religious texts all eluding to the same thing, that there is a supreme intelligence out there:

Creation: a spectacular tapestry, so vast and diverse in design, that the power of it's creator, must surpase all human understanding

This puts everything into perspective...we worry about the smallest things, not realising just how grand the universe is and how tiny our role maybe in this universe.

Originally posted by solsticks
I love this. When I was very small, maybe 2 years old, I would make my own mind ache thinking about the infinity of the universe...extending forever in one direction and forever in the next direction...forever in every direction. I always wanted to 'ask' someone. But, then I figured everyone felt the same. Ha. Silly me.

The other day my husband was saying something like, "you know they are just now discovering that there are 'planets' in other galaxies'. And, he said it all excited-like. I just looked up at him with a 'huh?' look on my face. I mean, I knew that all along. Didn't/doesn't everyone know that??? hmmm. (: Thanks for a great post.

Infinity. Definitely one of my favorite words. Definitely.

Hrm not really you never 'knew' that you guessed it until it was proven by the great men and women who work in the field of science and astronomy. We must be grateful to them that they worked very arduously to discover these exo-planets we are now finding i congratulate them.

We used to dwell on the thought me as well that there was many other vast amounts of planets in the universe but we didn't 'know' we THOUGHT

Knowing takes observations and when you were 2 years old we didn't have the Data at that time so i wouldn't try to take credit away from these people who work to discover these things!

reply to post by totalmetal


"Certain groups" also admit that they have no idea how the universe was created they just further understand that it is far more likely that God created the universe since everything within the universe speaks so clearly to intelligent design as opposed to the theory that a tornado that hits a building can produce a perfectly functional 747.

Originally posted by carlo ph
My questions would be:

1. Of all the things that may come out of this Universe why Consciousness ever existed/created/appeared, can our Universe go without Consciousness?

2. Did our Universe created Consciousness or the other way around?

3. Does Consciousness only exist if there is Life?

4. How long does it take for our Universe to come up with Consciousness?

5. If Life is only possible only here on Earth, what is Universe after the Earth is gone? Can we say that the Universe is created for Earth?

Wow! Fascinating questions! I feel the Universe itself is one big conscious entity. The great Indian sage, Vivekananda said, we (consciousness) are part of the Universe and the Universe is part of us within and without. But the million dollar question is, when did this consciousness come about?

We will never be able to decipher or comprehend this mystery until we graduate to a higher level of thought, until we rise to a Type II or Type III civilization. Our brains are not yet wired for it as yet. Perhaps another hundred thousand years? Till then, we will keep groping in the dark for answers!

Originally posted by Illustronic
reply to post by satron

 

Who actually knows? At least 'science' follows the scientific process of discovery, being something isn't 'proven' until it can be observed as a repeatable phenomenon through experimentation or observation.

You got something better than that?

Oh please tell...

Ummmm.........how about, Buddhism, or Hinduism, or Judaism, Or........you get my drift.......ALL...of the quote, unquote, "religions"........observed that when you proceed inward......i.e., "microscopically"........all things become vibration.......or waveform......

Before you attempt to dispute this, "do your research"............Dont you find it a bit odd that cosmology and sub-quantum physics, tends to "agree", with five thousand year old............science.....?

YouSir

reply to post by OrionHunterX


Great thread! However, just because we got the age wrong, doesn't mean we got the mechanism wrong...

The author seems to be mixing theories here, thinking that the disproving of one means the disproving of another....

Slly rabbit...

The universe is an illusion for the mind. It's not really there.. it was never meant to be more than a virtual space for the mind to expand and evolve it's learning.

Interconnected with our universe are many other dimensions; all with their own sets of realities, only designed for the mind to engage and grow. If you lock it down to reality then you've missed the truly organic nature it presents the mind - a feature understood by quantum mechanics.

Originally posted by quietlearner
what we humans call "time" is just the comparison of the change of an event to another, we compare other rate of changes to the rate of change from our clocks and thats what we call time. I believe time in it selfs does not exist but is an illusion created by the conscious mind. In other worlds time is a way for our minds to make sense of the changing universe as observed by our consciousness. IMO The universe is changing regardless of the presence of a conscious mind.

Ummmm.......If I may?...........time defines entropy,.....entropy, describes the decay of matter back into "energy"..........from energy, matter is "created" and entropically becomes energy once again, over and over and over........if you consider that E=Mc2, then matter "is" energy, or "light".........hard light.

Further, if you consider what glues or holds the "hardlight" together, to define "form" and more precisely "understanding" of form and function.........you have "consciousness"

Further, if you consider that observation "by" consciousness, or the "force" read "energy" of consciousness "creates", change in phenomena, simply by the act of observation alone.........one can extrapolate that, "consciousness is creative", simply by "being" without prerequisite physical, motive force.

Perhaps...........a prerequisite or catalyst, for the observable transformation of energy into matter is "consciousness" and not "happenstance", or "simply because"......

YouSir

As far as i know there are only two things that have no end. They are the Universe and our imagination. It makes you wonder if there is a correlation. Is the Universe simply a manifestation of conciousness? I propose that there is a planet of curvacious brunettes that worship MY image. There is a planet of inside out marshmallow people whom survive solely on nutrients derived from their soda pop oceans! Prove me wrong, I dare 'ya. Perhaps by my thinking it, it has no become a reality somewhere!

Originally posted by OrionHunterX
And now the bombshell.....

Recently, cosmologists have estimated that some of these galactic walls may have taken from 80 billion to 100 billion, to 150 billion years to form in a direct challenge to current age estimates of the age of the Universe following the Big Bang.

Apparently this was raised 20 years ago by a guy named Lerner, and this claim was debunked here:

The existence of superclusters of galaxies and structures like the "Great Wall" which would take too long to form from the "perfectly homogeneous" Big Bang.

Are these criticisms correct? No, and they were known to be incorrect in 1991 when Lerner wrote his book.

Let us look at the superclusters first.

Lerner gives the example of filaments or sheets 150 million light years apart in Figure 1.1, and then asserts that material would have to travel 270 million light years to make the structure. Obviously 75 million light years would do the trick. With material traveling at 1000 km/sec, that would take 22.5 billion years, which is about twice as long as the probable age of the Universe. But when the Universe was younger, everything was closer together, so a small motion made early in the history of the Universe counts for much more than a motion made later. Thus it was easier for the material to clump together early in the history of the Universe. Lerner's math here is like ignoring interest when planning for retirement. If you save $1000 per year for 50 years, you don't retire with $50,000. If the interest rate was 7 percent throughout the 50 years, you will have a $460,000 nest egg....

The T&C don't allow me to post the entire debunking here but has anything changed in the 20 years since this idea was debunked 20 years ago? Or to ask it another way, do proponents of this idea represent a majority view or a minority view?

reply to post by Arbitrageur

Interesting! But it's one theory against the other! These are just conjectures. Them using the word 'debunked' is incorrect. It would have been correct if it was scientifically proven. So a theory cannot be 'debunked' by another theory! In other words it's groping in the dark for answers!

LOL the great wall of china is older than the earth.
China did take a long time to build it.
I have never heard of this before, the space wall!

As for the big bang.
a small crumb of food has mould growing on it.
a microbe on it says
"wow the universe is big.
I wonder if any thing is beyond it or older?.
no! Impossible. we have dated the crumb universe."

we "humans" are argent.
We still think we are the centres of All.
we just live on a small bit of the universe.
and yes one day all of this will be gone.
to start again.

stop thinking we are the best, gods chosen.
one day god will wash the floor and wash us off.

Originally posted by Jordan River
Almost every where we turn there is something, sky, a star, a jet. obviously something must be outside, nothing does not exist, if nothing did exist, what material would nothing be made out of??

Ummmm.........Nothingness, or void, is "consciousness", or rather " a non-focused awareness, state", not, impinging upon energy. Void consciousness, surrounded by a condensate of energy, or forces, untill a focusing of consciousness, "births", matter

In this vein, one can attain "Enlightenment" or Gnosis" , through "void" meditation.......not........a simplistic "thinking of not-thinking", rather a meditation "without thought or visualization" a quelling of thought, awareness, without an effort or attempt to conceptualize........not.........a passive, "willful" non-consideration of thought flow, rather, a state where thought itself does not impinge..........

YouSir

Great thread

I put some information together a while ago about the MANY MANY flaws in the big bang theory -(including the inexplicable formation of large structures within the universe).

and why I think that the big bang theory has endured despite all these flaws

LINK

I would love to know what you think

Just throwing this out there since there is no real description of what forces formed matter, that 4.6% of the Universe we can actually see and touch.




As said, theories are just theories, aren't they.

Originally posted by OrionHunterX

Originally posted by carlo ph
My questions would be:

1. Of all the things that may come out of this Universe why Consciousness ever existed/created/appeared, can our Universe go without Consciousness?

2. Did our Universe created Consciousness or the other way around?

3. Does Consciousness only exist if there is Life?

4. How long does it take for our Universe to come up with Consciousness?

5. If Life is only possible only here on Earth, what is Universe after the Earth is gone? Can we say that the Universe is created for Earth?

Wow! Fascinating questions!

I feel the Universe itself is one big conscious entity. The great Indian sage, Vivekananda said, we (consciousness) are part of the Universe and the Universe is part of us within and without. But the million dollar question is, when did this consciousness come about?

We will never be able to decipher or comprehend this mystery until we graduate to a higher level of thought, until we rise to a Type II or Type III civilization. Our brains are not yet wired for it as yet. Perhaps another hundred thousand years? Till then, we will keep groping in the dark for answers!

Thanks,

It is difficult to understand why we were created with awareness but not knowing why we exist and doesn't understand most things in Universe,

But one thing we take for granted is the thing we keep on doing, we ask question and we want to know the answers.

Could this be the answer for what our purpose is?

But still, why? And what for? What will we do when we already understand everything?

End of the road? Consume the whole Universe?

Originally posted by OrionHunterX
reply to post by Arbitrageur

 

Interesting! But it's one theory against the other! These are just conjectures. Them using the word 'debunked' is incorrect. It would have been correct if it was scientifically proven. So a theory cannot be 'debunked' by another theory!

It depends on how you define scientifically proven. Scientific ideas are always subject to change if better evidence comes along.

So for example if someone plugs in known constants like the gravitational constant into a model, and shows with the model that the great wall could have formed in 14 billion years, wouldn't that disprove the idea that "it's impossible" for it to have formed in 14 billion years? The model still may not answer the question definitively about how long it actually took, but it at least disproves the assertion that the big bang must be false (though it doesn't prove it's true either, it only shows it's possible).

That's sort of what George Smoot did which he presents here:
www.ted.com...
He mentions the great wall several times at about 7:22, 8:00 and 9:11, then he starts describing his model at about 10 minutes.

I think my original question still stands about what's the majority view and what's the minority view? There are always some minority views in the world of science, but there's usually a reason they are the minority view. Some could be right, but most probably aren't.

I already knew this. I used to meditate and I would get dizzy and very overwhelmed thinking about infinity. These concepts aren't meant to be understood. The only thing we can do is be happy we have a job, eat some cheetos and try to get to disneyland every once in a while.

reply to post by carlo ph


Ummmm.........Perhaps we simply become non-corporate and then in a time of our choosing, choose to forget all that we know and "incorporate" back into the physical........to experiance "the all", once again, to explore the infinite.........besides, in infinity, lies the infinite.........that possibility does not reside in that small corner of what is imaginable at a given time.........perhaps consciousness, evolves, that our small corner grows......however, infinity being what it is......one never quite catches up and oroborus, never really swallows his tail.......

YouSir

reply to post by itsatrap

Great post Itsatrap. Very well put. Amazing that science, so eager to distance itself from religion, has itself become a religion for those who practice within its narrow tenets. I wrote a piece on this on my website. Check it out if you wish.
The Physics of Oz

I do have to say, though, that in taking undergrad-level biology classes at Harvard Extension School, I did find that professors were more likely to say, "we don't know," than the high school chem/bio teachers I had in high school. So, there are those who have less ego in the field than the usual "high priests" of rational thought, ha ha.

This is one of the better posts I've seen - more questions, less ranting than usual.