History of the universe in 10 minutes

Nope! Even the thoughts within a persons mind are arbitrary and are randomly selected to meditate upon.

 

People should listen to The Big Bang Theory theme song. One can understand the history (and the mystery) of the universe in under 2 minutes.

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=REw5-_rpFDE"]The Big Bang Theory Theme Song | Lyrics - YouTube[/ame]

 

I'll give a to this post.

 

Many of us don't (like myself, for example), but some do... Stephen Hawking, anyone?

First off, we now know what gravity is. Gravity, as described by Albert Einstein is the effect of matter on the fabric of spacetime. This has, in fact, been proven by the Gravity Probe B, which "imaged" (in a way) that very effect by measuring the pull on a gyroscope attached to the satellite that was predicted by Albert Einstein himself.

This effect is what holds stuff together... usually. But the thing is, the center of a galaxy, even one like a black hole (a gravity sink) does not cause enough of an effect to "hold together" a galaxy the size of, say, the Milky Way. There really is only once conclusion to this, especially now that the most important prediction of Relativity has proven true: there is another source of gravity within the universe.

What it is, nobody knows. But we know it's there, and we know it's effecting spacetime.

Gravity would not be pulling the universe apart. As gravity is not actually a force, but an effect, it quite simply can't. Which means that something is tearing the universe apart.

What it is, nobody knows. But we know it's there, and we know it's effecting the universe.

See what I'm saying? Does that help you to understand Dark Matter and Dark Energy, at least?

I honestly don't know enough about Dark Flow to comment further on it. But since you've brought it up, I'll do more research...

So it would be more akin to saying "we know 2 + 2 = 4, but we keep getting this erroneous calculation saying that 2 + 2 = 5. The math is good... nearly flawless, in fact. The only thing we can do to save this is change the equation to 2 + 2 + 1 = 5. Now the math works... but we must figure out why the "+ 1" is there in the first place."

An interesting thought... I wonder if Theoretical Physicists like Stephen Hawking, Leonard Mlodinow, Leonard Susskind, and Michio Kaku have thought of that.

One of my favorite flowcharts.

No, they do not use "15 billion years ago". This is now the third time I'm posting this information. I will not post it again:

Seriously Incorporeal... if you can't even get the basic numbers right, then stop arguing this, because you only prove your ignorance (or perhaps dishonesty?) by continually repeating the claim "scientists say it's 15 billion years" after I've already showed you (with sources) that they don't.

Except that science challenges basic tenets of faith... such as "we humans were created separately from the animals".

There are a small number of YECs who hold to Archbishop Ussher's calculation of October 23, 4004 BC as the first day of Creation, but they are a very small number of YECs, and I have not been a member of PF long enough to know if any of the Creationists here hold to it...

(BTW... could somebody reading this please reassure me that I'm not the only one who thinks "Pink Floyd" whenever I see the name of this site abbreviated to "PF"... please...)

 

So what experiment did scientist do that would explain where matter came from?

 

And so if I'm proven to be right, and the Nobel is awarded those who were contributors, will the Co-winners be listed as: Stephen Hawking, Leonard Mlodinow, Leonard Susskind, Michio Kaku , and OverDrive?

I'm already planning on what to do with my $$$.....

 

You know, by golly, I think you are right. some of them use other guesswork numbers such as "10 to 20 Billion years". http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/352563.stm Even in that article they use the term 'estimate' which is nothing more than 'guesswork'. So whether I said 15 billion or 20 billion or even 100 trillion, it would make no difference, because they admit to it being guesswork or personal opinion.

"es·ti·mate (st-mt)
tr.v. es·ti·mat·ed, es·ti·mat·ing, es·ti·mates
1. To calculate approximately (the amount, extent, magnitude, position, or value of something).
2. To form an opinion about; evaluate: "While an author is yet living we estimate his powers by his worst performance" (Samuel Johnson).
n. (-mt)
1. The act of evaluating or appraising.
2. A tentative evaluation or rough calculation, as of worth, quantity, or size.
3. A statement of the approximate cost of work to be done, such as a building project or car repairs.
4. A judgment based on one's impressions; an opinion."

 

I'm sorry, but I'm highly confused as to what part of my post you are responding to...

I don't recall saying anything about the origins of matter...

Some people will never learn...

 

You are right. Some people will never learn to pay attention to the words that are used in some statements, which impact negatively upon previously accepted thoughts on particular subject matters. Especially such every day words like "estimate".

 

This question is actually for those who subscribe to the theory of evolution

The part that says, The Scientific Method. Since many scientists believe in the theory of evolution and the Big Bang, what experiment did they do that they think would explain where matter came from for there to be a Big Bang?

I know you did not.

 

Sure you did. When you made mention of the creation of the earth, you indirectly mentioned the origin of matter, unless of course you are proposing the notion that the earth was created out of matter that was not created during the big bang. Are you suggesting such a notion?

 

What is the source of your quote there rstones?

 

Why?

[ame="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QxhVvXqBiDc"]A Talk for World Peace - YouTube[/ame]

http://youtu.be/74d3gWJOV-4

 

First off, evolution only deals with the origin of species. It doesn't say anything about the origin or life... or matter.

As far as the Big Bang and the origin of matter... I have no idea. I am, however, fully aware of what the evidence for the Big Bang Theory is, and what the BBT states: that the universe has been expanding and cooling over time. To quote cosmologist P. J. E. Peebles, "You will notice I have said nothing about an 'explosion' - the big bang theory describes how our universe is evolving, not how it began."

Here's an article focusing on some misconceptions about the Big Bang Theory. Please read the whole thing. I don't provide these links just to make my posts look pretty...

Um... no. The theory behind the creation of the earth and our solar system, the Nebular Hypothesis, only concerns the origin of matter insofar as assuming that the matter already exists. It says nothing about the origin of matter.

It's like evolution. Evolution says nothing about the origin of life beyond assuming that life already exists. As long as life exists, evolution doesn't care where it came from or how it got here.

 

ar·bi·trar·y/ˈärbiˌtrerē/Adjective: 1.Based on random choice or personal whim, rather than any reason or system.
2.(of power or a ruling body) Unrestrained and autocratic in the use of authority.


ar·bi·trar·y   /ˈɑrbɪˌtrɛri/ Show Spelled [ahr-bi-trer-ee] Show IPA adjective, noun, plural -trar·ies.
adjective
1. subject to individual will or judgment without restriction; contingent solely upon one's discretion: an arbitrary decision.
2. decided by a judge or arbiter rather than by a law or statute.
3. having unlimited power; uncontrolled or unrestricted by law; despotic; tyrannical: an arbitrary government.
4. capricious; unreasonable; unsupported: an arbitrary demand for payment.
5. Mathematics . undetermined; not assigned a specific value: an arbitrary constant.


We do not use an arbitrary system of measurement. We may have arbitrarily assigned symbols to the values of measurement, but the basis of the measurements are scientifically arrived at.

Take the decimal system. We certainly don't have an arbitrary number of digits.

Temperature scale. celcius degrees are not arbitrary in the least.

Our units of measure are not arbitrarily arrived at.

The results of measurement are definitive, not arbitrary.

 

It turns people into non-thinking sheep.

PS: I have no beef with Buddhism. That religion does not have a false central figure who gets people all riled up over nothing.

 

I'm afraid in some ways the method used to represent the magnitude of things measured is indeed arbitrary. To look at your examples:

Decimal is a system with 10 digits. The number of digits was chosen arbitrarily because we have 10 fingers, as can be shown by the fact that systems like binary, hex, octal and so on all work perfectly fine too.

Celsius degrees are unfortunately also arbitrary. We could just as easily have arbitrarily chosen the freezing and boiling point of nitrogen to use as references for the zero and 100 degree points - but water was much more convenient so it was chosen arbitrarily.

So it is with most units of measurement - the name we give to the measurements and the scale on which they are measured are arbitrary when you get right down to it. Perhaps there are exceptions when you get down to the quantum level, I dont know enough to judge.

But none of that arbitrariness changes a thing. If you arbitrarily use one revolution of the Earth around the Sun as the time unit called a 'year', then as long as all measurements of time use the same units then the measurements are relative to each other and we can make judgements on that basis. Whatever other arbitrary measurement of time we might use, we would ALWAYS get down to the fact that the Earth is vastly older than 6000 years or it's equivalent in whatever arbitrary measurement system you chose to use.

 

And here we go with the rationalizations (excuses). Answer the question. Was the earth made of some matter that was not a part of the big bang? Regardless of your rationalization, if you are talking about the creation of the earth, then you are talking about the matter that is used to create the earth, which would mean the creation of that matter. Now answer the question and stop the rationalizations (excuses).

 

All the matter that makes up the visible of the universe came out of an inflation event that occurred around 13.75 billion years ago. So the answer to your question is that the earth is made out of matter that came from the Big Bang.

But that has absolutely no bearing on how the earth was made. When you create something, where the material you use to create that thing come from is of no direct importance to the project. As long as those things exist, that's all that matters.

Even if the matter that makes up the earth didn't come from the Big Bang... so what? We're talking about how the Earth was created, not where the material that created it came from.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Measurement

"With the exception of a few seemingly fundamental quantum constants, units of measurement are essentially arbitrary; in other words, people make them up and then agree to use them. Nothing inherent in nature dictates that an inch has to be a certain length, or that a mile is a better measure of distance than a kilometre. Over the course of human history, however, first for convenience and then for necessity, standards of measurement evolved so that communities would have certain common benchmarks. Laws regulating measurement were originally developed to prevent fraud in commerce."

Learn what you are talking about.

 

What's your IQ?

http://youtu.be/qGyPuey-1Jw

 

Around 135. What's yours?

 

I doubt about. I doubt also that you took the time to hear really what the Dalai Lama had said there. 1h 20m is a long time for the most people today.
It was indeed very interesting and nearly everything what he said there is compatible with the christian religion.

Buddha Shakyamuni is the central figure of Buddhism. And the Dalai Lama - a reincarnation of Buddha Avalokiteshvara - is also a central figure of Buddhism.

It seems to me you hate exclusively the catholic church (="religion" for you) - perhaps in the same way how big parts of the chinese government hate the Dalai Lama.

http://youtu.be/r364h19dXio

 

What's the name of the test you made?

Wether I'm an idiot nor not is not important for me. We Bavarians say something like: "Everyone can be stupid - one should only be able to help oneselve"

http://youtu.be/D4insqFNx_M

 

OK? You can doubt it all you want.

Humans and the 'not in my back yard' syndrome are funny. When you look in on something from the outside, you have a better perspective on something than someone who is on the inside of something. A great example of this religion. No doubt religion plays an import part in the way people think. So much so that you have millions of people thinking the same in regions across the world. Foreign and internal policies driven not by common sense, but driven by insane and irrational beliefs in boggy men.

And when you say that people under the spells of religion become sheeple who cannot think for themselves, you get asked what is your IQ and its from the people on the inside, which is not a surprise. Some people really need to wake up, climb out the box and see what religion has done and is still doing to the human race. Lose the 'not in my back yard' syndrome.

And the ' central figure of Buddhism' does not get people riled up to kill others, take rights away from others, etc.

I get that humans are spiritual. And when I talk to people, I suggest Buddhism for those who need spiritual guidance for the above reasons.

I dislike the church, Mormons, Christians and Catholics in the USA because this is my 'house' so to speak. First you must take care of your own home before worrying about others (middle east). I would love to wake to an America where a woman who gets raped can get an abortion, no questions asked. A gay couple can get married in all 50 states. I could go on and on about policies but I'll stop.