The Big Bang is Busted

[bobevenson]

My Screw UP!

I think you need more of it on a regular basis.

[SpheresOfBalance]

My Screw UP!

I think you need more of it on a regular basis.

And thanks for making sure I have at least one more!

[bobevenson]

My Screw UP!

I think you need more of it on a regular basis.

And thanks for making sure I have at least one more!

I don't even know where you live.

[SpheresOfBalance]

My Screw UP!

Then:

I think you need more of it on a regular basis.

Then:

And thanks for making sure I have at least one more!

Then:

I don't even know where you live.

Then:

That's to be expected!

[bobevenson]

I don't expect anything, I just take what I can get.

[Godfree]

I don't expect anything, I just take what I can get.

Since nobody else seems brave enough to comment on this site I posted , would you two like to have a go , seems they ask for the proof ,
and when you provide it , silence ,,???
www.bigbangneverhappened.org,
give me your opinion , I think support for a non expanding universe ,
is expanding ,,!!!

[bobevenson]

I don't expect anything, I just take what I can get.

Since nobody else seems brave enough to comment on this site I posted , would you two like to have a go , seems they ask for the proof ,
and when you provide it , silence ,,???
http://www.bigbangneverhappened.org,
give me your opinion , I think support for a non expanding universe ,
is expanding ,,!!!

There is no question of the universe expanding, the only question is whether it is slowing down or speeding up. I'm afraid you're barking up the wrong tree because the general consensus of astrophysicists is totally against what you argue.

[Godfree]

I don't expect anything, I just take what I can get.

Since nobody else seems brave enough to comment on this site I posted , would you two like to have a go , seems they ask for the proof ,
and when you provide it , silence ,,???
http://www.bigbangneverhappened.org,
give me your opinion , I think support for a non expanding universe ,
is expanding ,,!!!

There is no question of the universe expanding, the only question is whether it is slowing down or speeding up. I'm afraid you're barking up the wrong tree because the general consensus of astrophysicists is totally against what you argue.

Apart from the incorrect assumption that the red shift is caused by movement,
what proof/evidence do they have for the universe expanding,,?????
do you understand the pattern of galaxies out there ,,???
nothing like what you would expect in a bb model ,
exactly what you would expect to see in a non expanding universe ,
did you visit the website and therefore dismiss the claim ,
that the Hubble deep field images support a non expanding universe,,??
there is plenty of question the universe is expanding ,
most of the observational evidence suggests it isn't,!!!

[bobevenson]

Ask yourself a simple question: Is the consensus among astrophysicists that the universe is expanding? If the answer is yes, then on what basis can you refute this consensus? You obviously don't know shit about astrophysics, astronomy or mathematics. In fact, I think a psychological workup would conclude that you're a lunatic!

[John]

But I would like you to answer the hypothetical questions below. I'm really not seeking answers for my edification here, but I believe it shall put things into their proper perspective. You should, however post you answers or a dialog as to your view of them, call me curious.[/color]

Say you're in a space ship smack dab in the middle of an infinite universe, and there is nothing else anywhere. You are the only thing. Where are you, how fast are you going, and what is your trajectory? Oh yeah, and what "time" is it?

Sorry, I've been otherwise occupied for the last few days and reading the answers that follow this my own answer will probably be predicatlbe and repetitious.

Properties such as location, speed and trajectory are meaningless without a reference point which I obviously would not have in an infinite and otherwise empty universe.

What time is is would be subjective to any measuring system I chose to initiate so without the movements of the Earth around the Sun to base it on I would have to base it on something else such as the transition frequency of caesium-133. Only elapsed time is relevant though and with regards relativity it would only be relevant if I had another frame of reference to compare them.

Incidentally, if time is not affected relativistically what's is your explanation for time discrepancies in clocks, either those where the theory has been tested or where it is put to practical use such as in GPS systems?

[Godfree]

Ask yourself a simple question: Is the consensus among astrophysicists that the universe is expanding? If the answer is yes, then on what basis can you refute this consensus? You obviously don't know shit about astrophysics, astronomy or mathematics. In fact, I think a psychological workup would conclude that you're a lunatic!

So if 51% of astro physicists support the bbt , then for you thats proof enough???
It is the fact that I understand a lot about science and space ,
that I am able to see that there are better explanations ,
than the bbt ,
If you are so comfortable with consensus ,
do you believe in god , the consensus does ,
are you obese ,,??? , the consensus is ,
to base your belief or understanding on what most people think ,
is the ultimate cop-out ,
you don't have to take responsibility for your decisions ,
you let the people decide ,
I presume you vote for the most popular candidate ,
cos most people did , and you wouldn't want to not be in the majority ,
Let me explain the main difference between the two of us ,
I can and do think for myself , have the courage to form my own opinions,
and have the intellect to back it up ,
you don't seem to think for yourself , or have your own opinions ,
if you could find some courage , go and find out if ,
most astrophysicists support the bb ,
what you don't realize is that I am using the work of astrophysicists to
dis-agree with the bbt ,,,!!!

[bobevenson]

Ask the top 10 scientists involved in this subject, and they will all undoubtedly agree that the universe is expanding. Please, there's no rational way to refute their conclusion, my friend.

[Godfree]

Ask the top 10 scientists involved in this subject, and they will all undoubtedly agree that the universe is expanding. Please, there's no rational way to refute their conclusion, my friend.

Ask the top in any field and they will claim to be right ,,!!!
saying they will all agree , is like saying the top ten priests will ,
agree there is a god , of course they will ,
do you have the courage to ask the top ten against the bbt ,
I believe there is a top ten things wrong with the bbt ,
why no ask them , or don't you want to know ,
try using your brain , if you have one , and think about it ,
THE PATTERN OF GALAXIES DOES NOT FIT AN EXPANDING UNIVERSE
what sort of pattern would you imagine ,
lines radiating out from the "singularity"
that should produce a pattern of bigger and bigger gaps as you get further out , but thats not the case , evenly spaced throughout ,
how could that be ,,???simple , there was no big bang ,,!!!

[SpheresOfBalance]

But I would like you to answer the hypothetical questions below. I'm really not seeking answers for my edification here, but I believe it shall put things into their proper perspective. You should, however post you answers or a dialog as to your view of them, call me curious.[/color]

Say you're in a space ship smack dab in the middle of an infinite universe, and there is nothing else anywhere. You are the only thing. Where are you, how fast are you going, and what is your trajectory? Oh yeah, and what "time" is it?

Sorry, I've been otherwise occupied for the last few days and reading the answers that follow this my own answer will probably be predicatlbe and repetitious.

Properties such as location, speed and trajectory are meaningless without a reference point which I obviously would not have in an infinite and otherwise empty universe.

What time is is would be subjective to any measuring system I chose to initiate so without the movements of the Earth around the Sun to base it on I would have to base it on something else such as the transition frequency of caesium-133. Only elapsed time is relevant though and with regards relativity it would only be relevant if I had another frame of reference to compare them.

Incidentally, if time is not affected relativistically what's is your explanation for time discrepancies in clocks, either those where the theory has been tested or where it is put to practical use such as in GPS systems?

First you have to remember that there is no such thing (clock), that actually measures time itself. In all cases clocks are based upon the rate of change of a process, whether it be a pendulum, decay of a particle or otherwise.

They are viewing two or more identical objects undergoing change under two or more distinctly different sets of conditions, and they notice a change in the amount, count, decay, etc, of those objects, and they assume that time is being dilated. But in fact it could be said that it is only the objects that are being changed (dilated). And that it is a false assumption to attribute these changes to that of time when in fact there is no connection between time and those objects that are changing.

When I apply friction to a mechanical clock, it is the object (the clock) that is being changed, which has absolutely nothing to do with time. If that were true I'd run the hands of my Cuckoo clock backwards so I'd become young again, I wouldn't care how long it would take.

[bobevenson]

When I apply friction to a mechanical clock

You're applying friction to the wrong thing, sweetheart.