Not even Time(age),Space,Matter and other dimensions could ever exist with out a source or a CREATOR

Originally posted by angel of lightangelo
As long as you are just ignoring me anyway. I do need to ask if English is your first language. If not, that might be part of the problem here. That is not a mockery but there may be a difference in word choices that send a different message than the one that is being received by some.

It's not my first. And i know that it might be a cause for all these miss understandings. Because i feel that i am moving in circles

Originally posted by spy66
It's not my first. And i know that it might be a cause for all these miss understandings. Because i feel that i am moving in circles

OK, now let me try this ONE MORE TIME. I will politely explain that must be part of the problem and I will leave you to your theory. I am trying to be respectful and leave. I do not do that often if ever, please do not follow it up with an insult like last time. I am sure Goodwolf can tell you what an annoying ass I can be so let's just agree that you and I will not agree. Good luck!

Originally posted by spy66
If you have a infinite universe. With a infinite amount of Finite would it really take that long for a Big Bang. I dont think so.

Take how long? What are you talking about?
Time doesn't exist (as we know it) until after the Big Bang lol.


[edit on 24-12-2008 by TruthParadox]

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by Good Wolf
reply to post by spy66

 

Yes and no. Time was not something that came out of the rubble of a cosmic explosion. The big bang is actually a rather bad title, as it was more a rapid expansion of dimensions and energy from a singularity. As soon as the expansion (from a singularity of infinite dimension apparently) time started.

Have you done any research into Big Bang Theory?

Yes i have. That's why i have these arguments.

Lets do some math to give a better picture.

Zero is 0. It cant be anything else. It cant be More or less. Because then it ain't 0 any more. 0 Is the main platform.

The only way you can have other 0's is within the main 0. That is the only logical way to explain other infinite Dimensions.

Because to have a dimension you need to have it. And the only way to have another dimension is within another dimension. If not you dont have another dimension. You have just the one(0).

Lest say you where to make a dimension on you monitor.To even begin you would first need a Monitor and a space to put it, in the first place.

To have two dimensions(two monitors) you would need more space to have room for the new one. The space i am talking about is 0 the infinite.

Dimensions................infinite..........Dimensions

10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1........0........1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10

All these 20 different dimensions need to be made within the one in the middle. Because no Mather where you put something in a infinite it will always be in the center. The infinite has no edge.

If you have three different dimensions. They would still be in the center of the infinite(0). But to one another they would have a direction.

Dose this give you a better understanding.

Now that we know what a dimension is.

Have can you use a rapid expansion of other dimensions to explain Big Bang.

A dimension within the infinite cant expand. It already is infinite. It cant expand.

Unless someone delivered a new dimension into the main one. So it could expand. Which won't happen.

Wouldn't it make more sense if a Finite worked within the dimensions.
Because the dimensions will never change. They are constant to the main dimension. And each other.

Ok lest go a bit further.

If you dont have a dimension(more then one) before the Big Bang. How would you get a Bang. One dimension is just a dot. A infinite dot. A constant. And a constant cant just explode on its own.

The Explosion wouldent have anywhere to go.

For a explosion to go anywhere you need at least two references. A two dimension. So the explosion can expand from one place to another. From point A to point B. Or from anywhere between point A and point B.

But that tels us that a dimension is not what is exploding. Something can only explode within a dimension(more then one).

Are you with me so far!



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by spy66
If you have a infinite universe. With a infinite amount of Finite would it really take that long for a Big Bang. I dont think so.

Take how long? What are you talking about?
Time doesn't exist until after the Big Bang lol.

I know its hard. If you cant keep up dont comment. Do some reading instead

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by spy66
If you have a infinite universe. With a infinite amount of Finite would it really take that long for a Big Bang. I dont think so.

Take how long? What are you talking about?
Time doesn't exist until after the Big Bang lol.

I know its hard. If you cant keep up dont comment. Do some reading instead

lol that's the thing - it's not hard...
The only thing that's hard is watching you make all these assumptions about the universe and not backing them up one bit.
Do as you well lol... but I think you need to at least read the definitions of the words you're using.

I point out a flaw in your 'theory' and then you act as though I'm the stupid one. I know delusion when I see it.
Have fun.

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by TruthParadox

Originally posted by spy66
If you have a infinite universe. With a infinite amount of Finite would it really take that long for a Big Bang. I dont think so.

Take how long? What are you talking about?
Time doesn't exist until after the Big Bang lol.

I know its hard. If you cant keep up dont comment. Do some reading instead

lol that's the thing - it's not hard...
The only thing that's hard is watching you make all these assumptions about the universe and not backing them up one bit.
Do as you well lol... but I think you need to at least read the definitions of the words you're using.

I point out a flaw in your 'theory' and then you act as though I'm the stupid one. I know delusion when I see it.
Have fun.

I will

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by spy66

Originally posted by Good Wolf
reply to post by spy66

 

Yes and no. Time was not something that came out of the rubble of a cosmic explosion. The big bang is actually a rather bad title, as it was more a rapid expansion of dimensions and energy from a singularity. As soon as the expansion (from a singularity of infinite dimension apparently) time started.

Have you done any research into Big Bang Theory?

Yes i have. That's why i have these arguments.

Lets do some math to give a better picture.

Zero is 0. It cant be anything else. It cant be More or less. Because then it ain't 0 any more. 0 Is the main platform.

The only way you can have other 0's is within the main 0. That is the only logical way to explain other infinite Dimensions.

Because to have a dimension you need to have it. And the only way to have another dimension is within another dimension. If not you dont have another dimension. You have just the one(0).

Lest say you where to make a dimension on you monitor.To even begin you would first need a Monitor and a space to put it, in the first place.

To have two dimensions(two monitors) you would need more space to have room for the new one. The space i am talking about is 0 the infinite.

Dimensions................infinite..........Dimensions

10,9,8,7,6,5,4,3,2,1........0........1,2,3,4,5,6,7,8,9,10

All these 20 different dimensions need to be made within the one in the middle. Because no Mather where you put something in a infinite it will always be in the center. The infinite has no edge.

If you have three different dimensions. They would still be in the center of the infinite(0). But to one another they would have a direction.

Dose this give you a better understanding.

Now that we know what a dimension is.

Have can you use a rapid expansion of other dimensions to explain Big Bang.

A dimension within the infinite cant expand. It already is infinite. It cant expand.

Unless someone delivered a new dimension into the main one. So it could expand. Which won't happen.

Wouldn't it make more sense if a Finite worked within the dimensions.
Because the dimensions will never change. They are constant to the main dimension. And each other.

Ok lest go a bit further.

If you dont have a dimension(more then one) before the Big Bang. How would you get a Bang. One dimension is just a dot. A infinite dot. A constant. And a constant cant just explode on its own.

The Explosion wouldent have anywhere to go.

For a explosion to go anywhere you need at least two references. A two dimension. So the explosion can expand from one place to another. From point A to point B. Or from anywhere between point A and point B.

But that tels us that a dimension is not what is exploding. Something can only explode within a dimension(more then one).

Are you with me so far!

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

Now lets talk more about the dimension.

What can the dimension be made up off!

Can the dimensions be made of a matter that is in a conflict with another.

NO!!! What ever a dimension is made up of it has to be made up of a infinite amount of the same.It has to be neutral. Because it is infinite(0).

Now i probably would have to remind you about what i told you before. "Another dimension can only exist within another dimension".

They are all zero's. Infinite within the infinite. That's what makes up a dimension.

And since it is neutral(0) It cant make anything. It's just existing. It is just space.

So what can create a Big Bang. Well we have to put Finite(Matter) into the space, so that it can interact and create something. Something like the Big Bang.

If Finite was infinite. It would be a solid. Which would mean the whole infinite space would be a solid. But!! it's not, is it.
If it was. It sure couldn't explode it would have no where to go.

If something is 0 it cant be 1,or 2,or 3. Because then it becomes something else. So space is 0. And finite is 1. And to get a 1. You would have to create it. Because a infinite(0) cant ever be 1.

Because how can nothing(0) create a nothing(0). Or have can nothing(0) create a (1).
0+0 is not=1 It is an other 0. another infinite dimension within the main(0).

But the dimension(0) is infinite so it cant create it self. And if it cant create it self it sure cant create anything else. LOGIC.

LoL are we getting closer to God now

Math is also simple logic.



[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

Im sorry this is all just ramblings that doesn't sound at all like Big bang theory. You're failing to gasp simple concepts. You seem to think that marco level logic can be applied to the beginning of time ans since it doesn't make sense it must be God.

No...


Do you're self a favour and go look it up again.

Originally posted by Good Wolf
Im sorry this is all just ramblings that doesn't sound at all like Big bang theory. You're failing to gasp simple concepts. You seem to think that marco level logic can be applied to the beginning of time ans since it doesn't make sense it must be God.

No...


Do you're self a favour and go look it up again.

Well God did say there would be a bunch of deniers among his people.

And i am not trying to make something that is just the same as in the books. These are my thought's on how it all is. Right or not. Well who is to judge.





[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

reply to post by spy66


Just your thoughts. Fair enough. They don't jive with me, they don't make sense. But that's just me, I haven't thought like you, a believer, for nearly 3 months so..

Well i could use the bible and science to prove what i am saying.

Just by stating this.
Science expresses the universe in terms of: time, space, matter, and energy.
In Genesis chapter one we read: In the beginning (time) God created the heavens (space) and the earth (matter)…Then God said, “Let there be light (energy).

To me it's all logic. The one fits the other.

reply to post by spy66

Well i could use the bible and science to prove what i am saying.

Then you aught to use science.

Science expresses the universe in terms of: time, space, matter, and energy.

And dark energy, dark matter, anti matter, and the quantum mech.

In Genesis chapter one we read: In the beginning (time) God created the heavens (space) and the earth (matter)…Then God said, “Let there be light (energy).

My concordance informs me that heavens meant 'sky' (skyline) and earth meant 'ground'. What's more is that the bible also describes things like earth being a 'circle earth' which rests on water, 'the deep'.

It's entirely subjective and means what you want it to mean, especially when you don't use a concordance.

To me it's all logic. The one fits the other.

Cept it's bollocks. The creation story suggests all things were made in 6 days. It say the the sun and other 'heavenly bodies' were made after the earth which is wrong. The animal creation order is wrong (and devoid of evolution), there are no dinosaurs in there either. It's a fantasy.

reply to post by Good Wolf


I just got to tell this joke here to.

God is having a conversation with a scientist. And the scientist say!!
Hay God i can make life in my lab.
And God say: I have to see this

So the scientist takes out his buns and burners. And starts making life.
And walla he makes life.
God is shaking his head and laughing,And the scientist say. WHAT!!!! I just made life.
And God say!! YEAH but with my material.

sorry but event the joke makes sense.





[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

reply to post by spy66


No one has knowingly managed to make life in the lab yet, but abiogenesis is a young science. However the joke doesn't have much to do with the topic. It's a christian joke running on the assumption that God did in fact 'make' the universe, an un-provable, un-falsifiable theory. It also suggests that the scientist and God would be adversaries.

Your point is moot really.

Originally posted by Good Wolf
reply to post by spy66

 

No one has knowingly managed to make life in the lab yet, but abiogenesis is a young science. However the joke doesn't have much to do with the topic. It's a christian joke running on the assumption that God did in fact 'make' the universe, an un-provable, un-falsifiable theory. It also suggests that the scientist and God would be adversaries.

Your point is moot really.

What do you belive in a random creation.

reply to post by spy66


It's not really relevant what I believe is it. We were talking about theories and ther merit of those theories, then you pull out a joke that makes out as if science and the concept of god are at a variance. I pulled you up on it because it's like you're derailing your own thread with a misdirection joke.

I don't believe anything when it comes to the beginning of the universe, I have no freakin idea. I'm in no position to know what cause reality or if it has a purpose. There is no way to tell.

Originally posted by Good Wolf
reply to post by spy66

 

It's not really relevant what I believe is it. We were talking about theories and ther merit of those theories, then you pull out a joke that makes out as if science and the concept of god are at a variance. I pulled you up on it because it's like you're derailing your own thread with a misdirection joke.

I don't believe anything when it comes to the beginning of the universe, I have no freakin idea. I'm in no position to know what cause reality or if it has a purpose. There is no way to tell.

Thanks for saying that. You reminde me of this guy.

www.youtube.com...

And for the record this is my thread i can do what i like


[edit on 27.06.08 by spy66]

reply to post by spy66

And for the record this is my thread i can do what i like

Yes you've made that clear with a resounding arrogance and close minded.

"Atheists admit defeat" ?!!

I'm not admitting defeat, I'm wise enough to know that I'm ignorant on many things. To say that I understand all reality like you guys do is just gratuitous.



[edit on 26/12/2008 by Good Wolf]

Originally posted by Good Wolf
reply to post by atlasastro

 

No I didn't mean that there would be no existence without time, though I can see how my post would come across like that. I was trying to explain that time can't be applied to whatever existence there was "prior" to the event but that it would still be there.

Yes, i think I actually agreed that time as a measure of definition cannot be used. This issue though raises great questions when looking at singularities and their existence. Some argue that Time needs to exist for a singularity to exist. Also all aspects of quantum mechanics rely on time existing, so it would be a existing factor pre-big bang if the universe was inspired via a quantum singularity.