A Science Question For Any Willing Christians.

[Ravenstar]

I'm not good with waiting, but I will endeavour to respect the venerable BAA  

[raoul]

Actually, xtian genius, there are quite a few other science buffs who have stated what I did but included even more 9s after the period than I did. There is NO god creating anything. If there were, he should be taken out, lined up against the wall, and shot for poor creation. As posited by numerous of us, the universe was designed for only one thing and it wasn't the little gods made in the fake god's image. Hint - can you say black holes? As someone posited to me on YouTube recently, maybe there IS a god and its name is 'black hole'?

 

Now come on big boy, impress all of us with more of your blind faith and scientific ignorance along with it.

[bornagainathiest]

I'm not good with waiting, but I will endeavour to respect the venerable BAA  

 

Thank you Ravenstar.

 

However, if you could expand your respect 'envelope' to include SteveBennett and Ironhorse, I'm sure they'd appreciate your patience. 

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[Ravenstar]

Absolutely  

[mymistake]

 

 

I am a Christian. I replied. Do I not get a response?

 

See post #26

 

See post #30

 

 

You got a response.

 

 

 

Edit:

It is not like there is a Pope of Universal Energy who is going to send his Inquisitors to hunt you down for expressing a lack of faith.  What type of a response are you looking for from us?  If you think something is meaningless well that doesn't really affect the rest of us in a meaningful way so . . .  *shrug*.

[mymistake]

 

You mean I was off a bit? Okay, since you just conceded there is absolutely NO purpose to our god created universe, I will GLADLY concede the numbers to you.. ROFL

 

Your turn again Einstein..

Waiting for y'all to scientifically define meaning/purpose......being a "science" question and all. You may want to stay out of this one Raooool.

 

 

Use a dictionary.  It is not for science to decide the definitions of words.

[Ravenstar]

define... meaning?

 

or... purpose?

 

Two different words.  Please, be precise with definitions - it clarifies communication.

[bornagainathiest]

 

 

You mean I was off a bit? Okay, since you just conceded there is absolutely NO purpose to our god created universe, I will GLADLY concede the numbers to you.. ROFL

 

Your turn again Einstein..

Waiting for y'all to scientifically define meaning/purpose......being a "science" question and all. You may want to stay out of this one Raooool.

 

 

Use a dictionary.  It is not for science to decide the definitions of words.

 

 

Hey, didn't you know, MM?

 

There's some mysterious, invisible and intangible force at work in End's life.

 

A force that actively prevents him from finding out anything for himself. 

A force that requires others to spoon feed him with whatever information he wants - because he can't find it out for himself. 

A force that holds any book or dictionaries he picks up, firmly shut!

 

The fact that he's a literate, numerate and educated man, living in 21st century America, with easy access to the Internet during his working day - still doesn't allow him the opportunity to find anything out for himself.

 

That's because there's this weird, inexplicable force stopping him from doing it, MM.

 

Sad, dontcha think?

[mymistake]

Might as well demand that we scientifically define why vanilla is the one real, true ice cream flavor ever invented.  If the word "scientifically" is used then it must be a science question, right?

[bornagainathiest]

Might as well demand that we scientifically define why vanilla is the one real, true ice cream flavor ever invented.  If the word "scientifically" is used then it must be a science question, right?

 

But you can't blame him for demanding stuff from us, MM.

 

It not like he's got any choice.

The ability to find stuff out for himself is denied him - by whatever this invisble force is. 

[Guest end3]

 

 

 

I am a Christian. I replied. Do I not get a response?

 

See post #26

 

See post #30

 

 

You got a response.

 

 

 

Edit:

It is not like there is a Pope of Universal Energy who is going to send his Inquisitors to hunt you down for expressing a lack of faith.  What type of a response are you looking for from us?  If you think something is meaningless well that doesn't really affect the rest of us in a meaningful way so . . .  *shrug*.

 

 

There is very little way he was wanting "all active" Christians to post prior to telling us our errors. He is trapped in that there is no science answer to #1. He is trying to wiggle his way out of responding.

 

Now I'm demanding information? Hardly. Incapable of searching for information...lol.

 

You guys and your non-Christendom...what a hoot.

[Ravenstar]

I think.. and correct me if I am wrong please… that when BAA stated that answer number 1., "it is meaningless", he didn't mean the universe is meaningless, but that the question of the total amount of energy is meaningless… like the concept of 'time' is meaningless 'before' the inflation of the universe because time is a quality of space… no space, no time.

 

Did I get that right, BAA?

[Guest end3]

I think.. and correct me if I am wrong please… that when BAA stated that answer number 1., "it is meaningless", he didn't mean the universe is meaningless, but that the question of the total amount of energy is meaningless… like the concept of 'time' is meaningless 'before' the inflation of the universe because time is a quality of space… no space, no time.

 

Did I get that right, BAA?

Nonetheless, it's an option of five......a science question. I chose #1 and want to talk science. I just finished getting berated over 10 pages of another thread for ideas questioning subjectivity, but when one of the locals does it, OMG, the fucking Christian has comprehension problems.

 

For God sake, you people ALWAYS tout personal responsibility yet can't fathom owning this one. And, Christians are soooo closed minded. ha.

[mymistake]

 

I think.. and correct me if I am wrong please… that when BAA stated that answer number 1., "it is meaningless", he didn't mean the universe is meaningless, but that the question of the total amount of energy is meaningless… like the concept of 'time' is meaningless 'before' the inflation of the universe because time is a quality of space… no space, no time.

 

Did I get that right, BAA?

Nonetheless, it's an option of five......a science question. I chose #1 and want to talk science. I just finished getting berated over 10 pages of another thread for ideas questioning subjectivity, but when one of the locals does it, OMG, the fucking Christian has comprehension problems.

 

For God sake, you people ALWAYS tout personal responsibility yet can't fathom owning this one. And, Christians are soooo closed minded. ha.

 

 

 

Okay you do understand that in a multiple choice format often several of the choices are wrong?  I do hope you comprehend that.

 

 

Yes, Christians generally are closed minded because when they stop being closed minded they usually stop being Christians.  Your lack of ability to communicate an idea is not ex-Christians refusing to own something.

[Guest end3]

 

 

I think.. and correct me if I am wrong please… that when BAA stated that answer number 1., "it is meaningless", he didn't mean the universe is meaningless, but that the question of the total amount of energy is meaningless… like the concept of 'time' is meaningless 'before' the inflation of the universe because time is a quality of space… no space, no time.

 

Did I get that right, BAA?

Nonetheless, it's an option of five......a science question. I chose #1 and want to talk science. I just finished getting berated over 10 pages of another thread for ideas questioning subjectivity, but when one of the locals does it, OMG, the fucking Christian has comprehension problems.

 

For God sake, you people ALWAYS tout personal responsibility yet can't fathom owning this one. And, Christians are soooo closed minded. ha.

 

 

 

Okay you do understand that in a multiple choice format often several of the choices are wrong?  I do hope you comprehend that.

 

 

 

Yes, Christians generally are closed minded because when they stop being closed minded they usually stop being Christians.  Your lack of ability to communicate an idea is not ex-Christians refusing to own something.

 

What's his intention for posting then, to prove someone wrong? To belittle them?

 

Is this all you people are about? It's as bad as fundamentalism.

 

And more deflection.....who would have guessed.

[mymistake]

 

What's his intention for posting then, to prove someone wrong? To belittle them?

 

Is this all you people are about? It's as bad as fundamentalism.

 

And more deflection.....who would have guessed.

 

 

First of all I am not BAA so I can't answer for his intentions.  He said he wanted to wait until SB had a chance to respond.  I don't know why you can't respect that.

 

Helping people get free of fundamentalism is not as bad as fundamentalism.  That is just nonsense.  The cure isn't as bad as the disease.

 

There is no deflection.  You have trouble communicating and you like to blame it on others.

 

We get along great when you are not defending Christianity.

 

You know that.  What is this about?

[bornagainathiest]

Yes Ravenstar, that's right.

 

# 1 takes it's cue from the way Stephen Hawking dealt with the question, "What comes before the singularity that created space and time?"

Since neither space nor time existed, before the initial singularity, the question is meaningless.  It's like arriving at the North pole and asking, how can I go further north?  The simple answer is... you can't, so don't bother asking the question.

 

I included it in case any Christians were familiar with Hawking's words - to give them that option if they wanted to take it.

[bornagainathiest]

End3 wrote...

Nonetheless, it's an option of five...a science question. I chose #1 and want to talk science.

 

---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

And I've politely requested that you exercise some self-control End.

That what you WANT is put on hold, to give other Christians a chance to participate.  Your demand that we talk the science of #1 NOW, when YOU want to, is therefore politely declined.

 

As I said yesterday End, you can take the initiative by simply Googling the relevant information.

It's all there and literally at your fingertips.  You didn't have to write, "What the fuck does that mean....singularity?" in reply to Blood.  I just did a search (twelve keystrokes) which took 0.20 seconds and yielded 4,300,000 hits. 

 

You've no excuse for not finding and not knowing about this stuff, End.

If you want to understand it, I recommend three things.  Open your mind, cultivate some patience and put in the required work.

 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

What is my intention for posting this thread and these questions?

 

You really want to know?

Ok then, I'll tell you all about it.  Sparing no detail.  If you don't understand or don't like my answer - that's not my problem.  You asked the question, deal with the answer.

 

Late last year I bought this book.

http://www.amazon.com/The-Inflationary-Universe-Alan-Guth/dp/0201328402

Before then I thought I had a good hold on cosmology... for an amateur astronomer with no formal training in the sciences, that is.  I was wrong.  My understanding of the Big Bang was hopelessly naïve and well wide of the mark.  Guth's book changed all that.  If you read the synopsis on the Amazon page the key words are these.

 

[Guth's theory] ...states that the big bang was set into motion by a period of hyper-rapid 'inflation' , lasting only a billion-trillion-billionth of a second.

 

See that?

The Big Bang, which I had simplistically assumed to be the ultra-hot, ultra-small origin of our universe... isn't.  What we call the Big Bang... isn't.   What we think of as being the Big Bang...isn't.  Here's the sequence of events, as per Guth's work.

 

1.

The initial singularity creates an energy-filled domain known as the space-time continuum.

That is what the true Big Bang is. The singularity is what Stephen Hawking's comments apply to.  There is no 'before' the singularity.

 

2.

Space-time is filled with a field of energy known as the Higgs field.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_boson

Please note that Guth is a particle physicist and performed his Inflationary calculations in the early 1980's, decades before the Large Hadron Collider actually confirmed the existence of the Higgs boson.  Peter Higgs' prediction (made in 1964) has rightly earned him science's highest accolade... a Nobel prize.

 

3.

The Higgs field isn't stable and rapidly decays.  When it does this, quantum-sized regions of space-time within it (zillions of times smaller than an atom) are inflated in the blink of an eye to become thousands of times larger than the universe around us.  Once all of the Higgs field energy in a given region has fully decayed, inflation stops.  This decay releases the heat and pressure we normally associate with the 'traditional' Big Bang.

 

4.

The traditional Big Bang is not the same as the pre-Inflation Big Bang.  The former was a hypothesis based upon how we observe galaxies moving away from one another in today's universe.  Cosmologists realized that in the early universe, all the galaxies must have been much closer together than they are now.  In the earliest moments of the universe's history all the matter and energy of all the galaxies must have been compressed into a tiny volume of space.  Such compression yields a microscopic region of infinitely great heat and density.  When matter and energy are compressed like this a gravitational singularity is formed.  Black holes are hypothesized to have such singularities in their center's.

 

So the traditional Big Bang theory was seriously flawed.  How can a gravitational singularity (which only ever swallows up matter and energy) create anything?  All black holes ever do is suck stuff in.  How can an entire universe emerge from a black hole?  How can it be that the universe expanded out of a black hole, when nothing can get out of a black hole?  This paradox is answered by Inflationary theory.

 

5.

Steps #1 thru 4 happen faster than we can imagine, but not faster than we can theorize. (Which is why math trumps everything! ) http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Big_Bang  The time periods described in the Planck, Grand Unification, Electroweak and Inflationary epochs are so small as to be essentially 'meaningless' in everyday language.  They are simply beyond our ordinary comprehension.  This explains the last sentence of the Inflationary epoch section.  "In inflationary cosmology, the earliest meaningful time 'after the Big Bang' is the end of inflation."

 

This also explains why so many people harbor a naïve misunderstanding about the Big Bang.  They mistakenly think of it in the traditional sense - a whole universe exploding outwards from the singularity.  Everything radiating outwards from a single, very hot and very dense point in space.  But there is no explosion and there is no space into which the universe expands.  This is a genuine misunderstanding. They've also read or heard that it's meaningless to talk about anything before the Big Bang.  This is true of step #1, where the singularity is the true beginning.  But it is not true of our universe.  That's because our universe owes it's existence, not directly to the singularity but directly to the decay of the Higgs field created by the singularity.  That happens at step # 3.  So, in scientific terms, there is a difference.

 

The problem is that events are happening so fast, with energies so great and on scales so small as to be essentially 'meaningless' in non-technical, non-scientific language.  Science can address these things, but ordinary human language cannot.

 

6.

Evidence that Inflationary theory is correct follows from it's confirmed predictions and from other, more generalized correlations with different aspects of science.

Prediction. The spectrum of the Cosmic Microwave Background radiation will be that of blackbody curve. 

Confirmation.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CMB The match between theory and observation is 100%.

Prediction.  The curvature of the space-time continuum will be flat.

Confirmation.  http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flatness_(cosmology) Confirmed to 99% + confidence.

Prediction.  Deuterium, helium-3, helium-4 and lithium-7 will be produced in the early universe at certain abundances.

Confirmation.  Good agreements, except for lithium-7, a significant discrepancy.

Prediction. A 'traditional' Big Bang yields copious production of Magnetic Monopole particles, but an Inflationary Big Bang dilutes their expected abundance to the point of non-detectability.

Confirmation.  Despite exhaustive searches over many decades there have been no detections of Magnetic Monopoles.  Therefore, Inflationary cosmology is favoured over traditional Big Bang cosmology.

 

Correlation.

Einstein's theory of Special Relativity (1905) predicts an expanding universe.  This theory was formulated twenty years before telescopic evidence of the expanding universe was discovered by astronomers.  Theory pre-empted observation.

Correlation.

Inflation relies on the existence of a Higgs field and therefore the existence of a Higgs particle.  Guth formulated Inflationary theory on 1980, forty-eight (48) years before the discovery of the Higgs particle in 2012.  Once again, theory pre-empts observation.

Correlation.

Like Inflationary theory, String theory and the Many Worlds (Everett) interpretation of quantum mechanics actively predict the existence of a multiverse, an ensemble of other 'pocket' universes that are either spatially removed from ours or existing in parallel to it.  Many scientists find it a matter of significance that three leading theories (all backed up with strong evidence) all seem to be pointing towards a common answer - a multiverse. 

 

Prediction.

The Cosmic Microwave Background radiation will display primordial B-mode polarization.

Confirmation.

The mid-2014 data release of the Planck satellite's data has an outside chance of detecting B-mode polarization.  If it does this will be (in the words of a certain scientist)... "a slam-dunk for inflation."

 

7.

Since joining this forum I've learned a great many things from the members and so, with this new understanding of Inflationary cosmology securely lodged in my brain, I felt that I should share this knowledge.  But why should I limit this knowledge only to Ex-Christians?  If I started up a thread about this without specifically inviting the Christian members, I was pretty certain they'd be, at best, marginally interested.  Most likely they'd take no notice of it at all.

 

Therefore, I made it my business to start up a thread targeted at the Christians, knowing that many other members would either participate or observe silently.  That way I could reach as many people as possible.

 

How should I go about it?

A thread about the non-detection of magnetic monopoles in the space-time continuum, wouldn't cut it.  So I decided to keep things as easy and simple as possible, asking only one question and giving five options for the answer.  The rest is history.

 

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

 

There, End.

 

Now you know.

Now you know exactly why I did what I did.

 

You wanted to talk science... now you've got the science.

 

 

BAA

[Guest end3]

Yes Ravenstar, that's right.

 

# 1 takes it's cue from the way Stephen Hawking dealt with the question, "What comes before the singularity that created space and time?"

Since neither space nor time existed, before the initial singularity, the question is meaningless.  It's like arriving at the North pole and asking, how can I go further north?  The simple answer is... you can't, so don't bother asking the question.

 

I included it in case any Christians were familiar with Hawking's words - to give them that option if they wanted to take it.

Oh, great, this is the motivation behind #1....you fucking assumed we have all read Hawking? Great job communicating there BAA. You do realize this is the Lion's Den where the sole purpose is to shred Christians, right? You want a fucking decent conversation about the other side of some fucking ridiculous word like singularity, then take it to the Coliseum dumb ass.

 

Christians aren't allowed abstract thought like God, yet if it's fucking Hawking, then oh Jesus, let's bow and pray. Good God.

 

What's your motivation behind t he rest? Captain Kangaroo or the fucking Tootsie Pop commercial?

[thereisnoperfect]

 

Yes Ravenstar, that's right.

 

# 1 takes it's cue from the way Stephen Hawking dealt with the question, "What comes before the singularity that created space and time?"

Since neither space nor time existed, before the initial singularity, the question is meaningless.  It's like arriving at the North pole and asking, how can I go further north?  The simple answer is... you can't, so don't bother asking the question.

 

I included it in case any Christians were familiar with Hawking's words - to give them that option if they wanted to take it.

Oh, great, this is the motivation behind #1....you fucking assumed we have all read Hawking? Great job communicating there BAA. You do realize this is the Lion's Den where the sole purpose is to shred Christians, right? You want a fucking decent conversation about the other side of some fucking ridiculous word like singularity, then take it to the Coliseum dumb ass.

 

Christians aren't allowed abstract thought like God, yet if it's fucking Hawking, then oh Jesus, let's bow and pray. Good God.

 

What's your motivation behind t he rest? Captain Kangaroo or the fucking Tootsie Pop commercial?

 

What are you doing?

 

Why are you so hostile? How do you think this kind of abusive language serves your purpose or represents you or your faith well?

 

BAA started this thread to talk about science with Christians. If you don't want to do that, just leave. If you want to do that, don't be surprised when it involves, you know, science. 

 

And he didn't say you HAD to have read Hawking. He said he included an option in case someone wanted it. 

 

And you come in here blasting around like he ran over your dog because...I honestly don't know. Because you find sound science that answers the questions about the origin of things better than your mythology does offensive or threatening? Because you don't like admitting you don't understand things? 

 

I hope moderators are taking note of your behavior. I don't think the kind of posting you're doing here contributes anything of value.

[♦ ficino ♦]

Hey BAA, if this derails, don't answer. If it doesn't: can you describe whether William Lane Craig's frequent references to "the singularity" (a term also used by OrdinaryClay) are references to the singularity as understood now by Guth and others, or does WLC refer to an earlier, now inadequate understanding, perhaps one incorporated in the traditional Big Bang theory?

[mymistake]

 

Yes Ravenstar, that's right.

 

# 1 takes it's cue from the way Stephen Hawking dealt with the question, "What comes before the singularity that created space and time?"

Since neither space nor time existed, before the initial singularity, the question is meaningless.  It's like arriving at the North pole and asking, how can I go further north?  The simple answer is... you can't, so don't bother asking the question.

 

I included it in case any Christians were familiar with Hawking's words - to give them that option if they wanted to take it.

Oh, great, this is the motivation behind #1....you fucking assumed we have all read Hawking? Great job communicating there BAA. You do realize this is the Lion's Den where the sole purpose is to shred Christians, right? You want a fucking decent conversation about the other side of some fucking ridiculous word like singularity, then take it to the Coliseum dumb ass.

 

Christians aren't allowed abstract thought like God, yet if it's fucking Hawking, then oh Jesus, let's bow and pray. Good God.

 

What's your motivation behind t he rest? Captain Kangaroo or the fucking Tootsie Pop commercial?

 

 

 

Relax.  You are projecting.  Calm down.

[Guest end3]

Relax.  You are projecting.  Calm down.

Yeah, just some thoughts come immediately to mind, none of which are outside the analogous versions in the Bible.

 

Questions like what is Higgs field expanding and decaying into.....the original singularity?

 

God's mechanism to transfer Spirit to mass?

 

Great cool stuff these great minds achieve, but just leads to more questions IMO.

[Fernweh]

 

Relax.  You are projecting.  Calm down.

Yeah, just some thoughts come immediately to mind, none of which are outside the analogous versions in the Bible.

 

Questions like what is Higgs field expanding and decaying into.....the original singularity?

 

God's mechanism to transfer Spirit to mass?

 

Great cool stuff these great minds achieve, but just leads to more questions IMO.

 

 

I thought all of this was meaningless? That was your answer to the original questions.

[Guest end3]

 

 

Relax.  You are projecting.  Calm down.

Yeah, just some thoughts come immediately to mind, none of which are outside the analogous versions in the Bible.

 

Questions like what is Higgs field expanding and decaying into.....the original singularity?

 

God's mechanism to transfer Spirit to mass?

 

Great cool stuff these great minds achieve, but just leads to more questions IMO.

 

 

I thought all of this was meaningless? That was your answer to the original questions.

 

So in what way do you give it meaning Fern.....proof of God?