The Universe has always existed based on new evidence !

No it can't.

But the limit of 1/x as x approaches 0+ is infinity

The limit of 1/x as x approaches 0- is -infinity

When it occurs in nature it's called resonance

 

This is what happens when people who don't know what they're talking about try to make it look like they do.

 

Can you elaborate?

 

In elementary school you learned that there are 3 states of matter, liquid, solid and gas.

In physics and chemistry you eventually learn that there is a 4th state, plasma.

 

Energy cannot become matter.

 

Sure it can. Would you like to see the proof?

 

It can. It is the inverse of particle annihilation, when two or more massless particles convert into 1 massive particle.

- - - Updated - - -

Not really

Great sig though

 

Energy does not have particles.

 

What a surprise.

 

but don't you know, they believe an all knowing jealous God always existed as it would be less complicated then to think energy always existed


.

 

This will come as a shock for those Christians who think the universe is 6000 years old!

 

Tell that to einstein

 

Eh, not really.

Energy is a wave and a particle, simultaneously. The photon is an excellent example. YouTube the double slit experiment.

 

I'm not disputing that. Energy is transmitted in descreet packets, as per quantum theory.

And as e=mc^2 shows, matter can be converted into energy and back again.

Heck, the whole idea of the Big Bang theory was energy spreading throughout the universe and cooling into solid matter

 

When you get down to it all particles move as waves, I remember a slow motion video in physics of a 100 mph baseball, it moved up and down in flight, illustrating that fact

 

The packets are a wave and a particle simultaneously.

 

One can only follow the evidence. Prior to the discovery of bacteria, you would have been quite justified in denying that germs cause disease. That was the scientific position. New evidence came along, and now we know that bacteria do indeed cause illnesses.

Anyway - none of the OP is even remotely verified. It's at the hypothesis stage, if that. Interesting stuff though. Physics is on the edge of a big leap forward.

 

Because you are so much smarter than us, please explain in a way that simple minded folks can understand...starting with the word "theory".

 

Global warming is not in dispute. The effect man has on global warming is in dispute.

 

Where on earth did you get the idea that we are at the centre of the universe? We're not even at the centre of our own galaxy.
https://www.google.co.uk/search?q=w...om%2F2011%2F09%2F14%2Fearth-glance%2F;277;239
In a sense, though, you're correct. In a continually expanding universe where everything is moving away from everything else, wherever you are situated gives the appearance that, because everything is moving away from you, where you are is central. Except that it is not.

 

You'll have to take it up with Brewskier who apparently disagrees. No dispute from me.

Principally by those men who want to continue contributing to global warming, it seems to me.

 

IMO there are millions of extraterrestrial civilizations throughout the Universe. And with the exception of how each of us might appear, given enough time all of them will evolve as we have to so-called intelligent species. But one thing I'll bet they all have in common is not knowing how or if the Universe started and whether or not there are multi-verses, etc. I can further guess that all civilizations are handicapped as we are incapable of SOL space travel, or other yet to be discovered space travel. Therefore, we all sit isolated on our own biological rocks, trying to solve a question to which we simply have no clue. Sure we can theorize, and we can make assumptions that fit nicely in solving our equations, but without a (*)(*)(*)(*)load more empirical data from billions of years ago and billions of light-years away from us, isn't it kind of preposterous? Don't get me wrong...I love everything science and exploration and discovery, and Einstein as well, but what Einstein gave us is probably only the tiniest tip of an iceberg of knowledge regarding the physics of the Universe and beyond...

 

IYO, how many of those civilizations are composed of flying spaghetti monsters?

 

ALL of the evidence for the Big Bang taken SEPARATELY can have alternate explanations. All of the evidence taken as a GROUP points to the Big Bang as the best theory to fit the data. And I like how you openly declare that it doesn't have evidence to support it, and then name evidence that supports it. Just because you can have "alternate explanations" doesn't mean those alternate explanations are plausible. Fossils of sea animals can be found on tops of mountain. Why? Plate tectonics. But some naive Christians think that it's evidence for the Flood. Doesn't mean that "there is no evidence for plate tectonics" just because you can come up with stupid alternate hypotheses.

 

I didn't say we were at the center of our galaxy.



If we are not at the center of the universe, why are we surrounded by older galaxies in all directions? Wouldn't we see newer galaxies on one hemisphere if we were not in the center? Why is the CBR distributed evenly in all directions?