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.
Originally posted by Ark005
So if I get this right basically the Big Bang was more like the Big Split.
Where the negative and the positive ,which had been existing together, be came two separate entities (universes).
Which would inply that there is a Negative Universe. Not like we would be able to tell that as any interaction with it would be negated by the very nature of our two universes.
I only say this because if the Big Bang created this universe then that would imply that the positive universe (ours) split from the negative universe thereby creating both.edit on 1/11/11 by Ark005 because: found an error
Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
Oh well forgive me for using the term incorrectly. I don't know if you are technically correct, but I'll take your word for it.
Originally posted by Mister_BitWell in layman's term....
If I write the game rules I win the game. Simple really.
What we know to be correct or incorrect is only decided by those rules (mathematics,physics etc) that mankind has created.
I am concerting a real concept into a mathematical concept, I clearly explained that in the OP. If I have 0 things in my thing-box, I can say I have NO THINGS in my thing-box. It's not that hard to conceptualize, 0 simply represents an absence of distinct value. Even negative numbers have a distinct value, and it is relative to the ORIGIN POINT. The concept of 'nothing' needs to be considered from a mathematical perspective, not the way you are thinking of it.
You cannot have negative anything or nothing... you may have zero but you can't have nothing
Nothing is absolute, cannot be added to or subtracted from but you can with zero
Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Mister_Bit
I am concerting a real concept into a mathematical concept, I clearly explained that in the OP. If I have 0 things in my thing-box, I can say I have NO THINGS. It's not that hard to conceptualize, 0 simply represent an absence of distinct value. Even negative numbers have a distinct value, and it relative to the ORIGIN POINT. The concept of 'nothing' needs to be considered from a mathematical perspective, not the way you are thinking of it.
You cannot have negative anything or nothing... you may have zero but you can't have nothing
Nothing is absolute, cannot be added to or subtracted from but you can with zero
Does this not make sense to you?
1 + nothing = 1
1 + 0 = 1
1 - nothing = 1
1 - 0 = 1
This math is so simple it could not be wrong. We are talking 3 of the most basic numbers in our number system. The math is simple addition or subtraction. If our number system was wrong at such a fundamental level it wouldn't work for SO MANY things. All mathematical propositions/theorems require undeniable and demonstrable proof of their truth.
IF and I mean IF manmade understanding of mathematics is fundamentally flawed where does all this leave your theory?
Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Mister_Bit
This math is so simple it could not be wrong. We are talking 3 of the most basic numbers in our number system. The math is simple addition or subtraction. If our number system was wrong at such a fundamental level it would work for SO MANY things. All mathematical propositions/theorems require undeniable and demonstrable proof of their truth.
IF and I mean IF manmade understanding of mathematics is fundamentally flawed where does all this leave your theory?
edit on 1-11-2011 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)
Yes, but the Big Bang theory claims that all the energy essentially came from the void of nothingness. That's why they say before the Big Bang 'nothing' existed. It was the spark that started everything. It created that apple. The apple may exist now, but you must ask where did it initially come from? It came from nothing! It's illogical to say that the Universe started with things in it, because there's no rational way to explain where they came from. The natural state of reality is nothing. My theory simply aims to explain how things (like in the Big Bang) could actually come from nothing. There is always a logical way to explain these things (haha). You can't just say it came from nothing and that's that. You need to explain the mechanism behind it, which is what my theory aims to do.
If you had nothing and I mean Nothing I cannot "add" to that, because Nothing is absolute... I could give you an apple, then you have an apple.... but I have not "added" that apple to Nothing, that apple already existed in its own state.
Originally posted by Mister_Bit
If you had nothing and I mean Nothing I cannot "add" to that, because Nothing is absolute... I could give you an apple, then you have an apple.... but I have not "added" that apple to Nothing, that apple already existed in its own state.
By the same account, if you took the apple away from me, you are not subtracting from nothing, you are moving the apple.
That is reality, now if you look at it from the "mathematical" point of view then correct, but we live in reality not some equation.
The Big Bang theory is exactly that though, a theory and a theory based on theoretical mathematics.
Originally posted by ChaoticOrder
reply to post by Mister_Bit
Yes, but the Big Bang theory claims that all the energy essentially came from the void of nothingness. That's why they say before the Big Bang 'nothing' existed. It was the spark that started everything. It created that apple. The apple may exist now, but you must ask where did it initially come from? It came from nothing! It's illogical to say that the Universe started with things in it, because there's no rational way to explain where they came from. The natural state of reality is nothing. My theory simply aims to explain how things (like in the Big Bang) could actually come from nothing. There is always a logical way to explain these things (haha). You can't just say it came from nothing and that's that. You need to explain the mechanism behind it, which is what my theory aims to do.
If you had nothing and I mean Nothing I cannot "add" to that, because Nothing is absolute... I could give you an apple, then you have an apple.... but I have not "added" that apple to Nothing, that apple already existed in its own state.
edit on 1-11-2011 by ChaoticOrder because: (no reason given)
Originally posted by xxsomexpersonxx
Originally posted by Mister_Bit
If you had nothing and I mean Nothing I cannot "add" to that, because Nothing is absolute... I could give you an apple, then you have an apple.... but I have not "added" that apple to Nothing, that apple already existed in its own state.
By the same account, if you took the apple away from me, you are not subtracting from nothing, you are moving the apple.
That is reality, now if you look at it from the "mathematical" point of view then correct, but we live in reality not some equation.
You are talking about moving mass around, and then 'debunking' by saying it's only getting moved around. Strawman. The real situation we're talking about, lacks that error, so it's pointless to use it.
Uhm. I think there might be a problem with the concept. If you have a -1 or a + 1 you still have something since you are speaking in terms of an opposite or third state.. Saying -1 + 1 = 0 is the same as saying 1+ -1 = 0 correct? So either way you would have to have had something from nothing just to begin the formula?
Originally posted by Therian
reply to post by xxsomexpersonxx
I know I am nary a math geek or even very good at it but. I do believe I already debunked the OPs theory. Or Maybe what I stated was so ignorant that the op simply decided to ignore my statements.
Originally posted by Mister_Bit
The Big Bang theory is exactly that though, a theory and a theory based on theoretical mathematics.
Now the apple analogy I used has just given me an idea... that apple wasn't an apple to start with, it was a seed and grew to be an apple.
Could it not be that the Universe "grew" from something infinitely small (and I don't mean a bang), in that it still came from something but something so small we are yet to be able to quantify it?