Message From Big Bang Revealed Tomorrow?

[♦ ficino ♦]

This article says that scientists are set to announce discovery of "primordial gravitational waves" that go back to the Big Bang.  Seems really hard to imagine how Young Earth/Universe types can deny the age of the universe, except perhaps by saying it has "built-in age."  Wm. Lane Craig, on the other hand, will be dancing for joy, bloviating about "the singularity."

 

Link:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2581441/Have-message-dawn-time-major-discovery-reveal-scientists-got-glimpse-universe-born.html

[Guest ninurta]

Intriguing. Though I still don't understand how people still push for YEC/ID that are old enough to know better.

[bornagainathiest]

This article says that scientists are set to announce discovery of "primordial gravitational waves" that go back to the Big Bang.  Seems really hard to imagine how Young Earth/Universe types can deny the age of the universe, except perhaps by saying it has "built-in age."  Wm. Lane Craig, on the other hand, will be dancing for joy, bloviating about "the singularity."

 

Link:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2581441/Have-message-dawn-time-major-discovery-reveal-scientists-got-glimpse-universe-born.html

 

Then WLC should get his house in order.

 

This will be confirmation of Inflationary theory, which does NOT say that the initial singularity caused only our universe.  Once begun, Inflation causes a never-ending series of pocket universes to form - each one experiencing it's own Big Bang and each one showing evidence of primordial gravity waves.  Where our particular pocket universe exists, in relation to the initial singularity (if such a thing ever existed) is impossible to say.  WLC knows this, but won't play by the rules.

 

These primordial gravity waves are an entriely LOCAL phenomenon - local to only our pocket universe.  Inflation however, is an over-arching theory that incorporates every pocket universe and every Big Bang that causes every pocket universe. 

 

Thanks,

 

BAA

[bornagainathiest]

Here's the deal, from B.I.C.E.P.'s homepage.

 

http://bicep.caltech.edu/public/

 

"Recent CMB observations have hinted strongly at an inflationary epoch in which the size of the universe undergoes rapid exponential expansion during the first 10^-38 second, producing the near isotropy of the horizon, the flat geometry of the universe, and the pattern of peaks and valleys in the CMB power spectrum that we observe today. Although these recent observations are consistent with the inflationary model, they are not sufficient to rule out other models of the early universe. The critical remaining test is to detect the gravity-wave background (GWB), which is only predicted by inflation, and the most promising means of accomplishing that is to look for the GWB's imprint on the polarization of the CMB."

 

That's the kicker!  There in bolded RED!

If this pans out and BICEP has found primordial gravity waves, then it's a slam-dunk for Inflation and Alan Guth and/or Andrei Linde gets a Nobel prize!

 

Thanks,

 

BAA

[♦ ficino ♦]

 

This article says that scientists are set to announce discovery of "primordial gravitational waves" that go back to the Big Bang.  Seems really hard to imagine how Young Earth/Universe types can deny the age of the universe, except perhaps by saying it has "built-in age."  Wm. Lane Craig, on the other hand, will be dancing for joy, bloviating about "the singularity."

 

Link:

 

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sciencetech/article-2581441/Have-message-dawn-time-major-discovery-reveal-scientists-got-glimpse-universe-born.html

 

Then WLC should get his house in order.

 

[snip]  Where our particular pocket universe exists, in relation to the initial singularity (if such a thing ever existed) is impossible to say.  WLC knows this, but won't play by the rules.

 

 

 

Yes, from you (and others!) I've learned how WLC equivocates on "singularity."  Tx!

 

Way exciting if experiment shows how theory stands up to testing, and how theory predicts results!!!

[♦ ficino ♦]

Here's the deal, from B.I.C.E.P.'s homepage.

 

http://bicep.caltech.edu/public/

 

"Recent CMB observations have hinted strongly at an inflationary epoch in which the size of the universe undergoes rapid exponential expansion during the first 10^-38 second, producing the near isotropy of the horizon, the flat geometry of the universe, and the pattern of peaks and valleys in the CMB power spectrum that we observe today. Although these recent observations are consistent with the inflationary model, they are not sufficient to rule out other models of the early universe. The critical remaining test is to detect the gravity-wave background (GWB), which is only predicted by inflation, and the most promising means of accomplishing that is to look for the GWB's imprint on the polarization of the CMB."

 

That's the kicker!  There in bolded RED!

If this pans out and BICEP has found primordial gravity waves, then it's a slam-dunk for Inflation and Alan Guth and/or Andrei Linde gets a Nobel prize!

 

Thanks,

 

BAA

Re part I highlighted in green:

 

the flat geometry! OMG that's THE FIRMAMENT!! Genesis 1 is right after all!!!

 

[pantheory]

This article says that scientists are set to announce discovery of "primordial gravitational waves" that go back to the Big Bang.  Seems really hard to imagine how Young Earth/Universe types can deny the age of the universe, except perhaps by saying it has "built-in age."  Wm. Lane Craig, on the other hand, will be dancing for joy, bloviating about "the singularity."..............................................................

 

It might be realized by some that this is only theory. They have found waves of some kind and believe they are primeval gravity waves related to the Inflation epoch. The only fact, however, is that they can maybe prove that they have found waves of some kind that they believe have been produced by strong gravitational influences.

 

Such conclusions are far better than the BS conclusions of religion, of course, but still are only theoretical concerning their basis.  Any kind of gravity waves may be  evidence for General Relativity or other gravity theory. They are also a prediction of some Inflation cosmologies, but even if these waves could be proven to be caused by gravity (which I expect they cannot),  to draw conclusions based upon this discovery alone is highly speculative.

 

I would not be surprised that within 20 years this along with every other observation now attributed to Big Bang cosmology will then be otherwise explained by a better cosmology.

[Margee]

Do me a favor BAA, if this is announced, please send us the link to where we can read. I want to send this all around Facebook......

 

If they can prove this, it will be the happiest day of my life because then I will know for 100% sure, that I wasn't wrong about religions.......

 

Thanks hon.

 

*hug*

[Margee]

I just thought of something. Would this not be classified as 'world news'? Shouldn't something like this hit all the front pages of the newspapers and TV? Will they let the whole world know?

[bornagainathiest]

Pantheory,

 

Please note that many members of this forum suffer excruciating levels of mental anguish, depression, OCD, nightmares, panic attacks and other forms of mental and emotional disturbance - all of it down to their abiding fear of eternal hellfire.  While they were Christians they were indoctrinated with this harmful and lingering idea and for many it's been a long, hard road for them to leave these terrors behind.

 

Science news like the discovery of primordial gravity waves offers them hope and solace.

If they can be reassured that the Bible is just a collection of ancients myths and that the universe wasn't created by God, this gives them peace of mind and the chance to leave Christianity in their past.

 

I know why you're pouring cold water on this gravity wave story.

It's all about personal gain, isn't it?  You've invested a lot of time and effort into your rival theory of cosmology - Pantheory.  The more evidence for Inflationary cosmology, the less likely your personal theory looks, right?  So, you're casting doubt on anything that looks good for Inflation.  Not because you're interested in what's true, but because you stand to lose out if Inflation is further verified by hard evidence.

.

.

.

HOW CAN YOU LIVE WITH YOURSELF...?

.

.

.

Have you no conscience, sir?  No moral compass at all?

You'd rather look after your own interests in this forum, rather than hold your counsel for the sake of those who've suffered and who are suffering?  They NEED to see that Christianity isn't true and isn't supported by the evidence... far, far more than you need to reap any kind of kudos or monetary reward you might gain from your so-called theory.

 

I rue the day BlackCat invited you here! 

 

If you have any decency at all, I appeal to you to refrain from undermining the significance of the news about this gravitational wave discovery.  If you don't understand why I'm asking you this (that is, why those injured by Christianity need peace of mind), then I'll gladly explain further. 

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[bornagainathiest]

Margee,

 

Imho, this will be BIG news.  Like the Higgs boson, or bigger. 

 

I subscribe to Sky & Telescope and here's a link to their site.

http://www.SkyandTelescope.com

 

Please maintain a holding pattern.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

*guh*  (That's a hug, returned to you, btw. ) 

[MerryG]

Pantheory,

 

Please note that many members of this forum suffer excruciating levels of mental anguish, depression, OCD, nightmares, panic attacks and other forms of mental and emotional disturbance - all of it down to their abiding fear of eternal hellfire.  While they were Christians they were indoctrinated with this harmful and lingering idea and for many it's been a long, hard road for them to leave these terrors behind.

 

Science news like the discovery of primordial gravity waves offers them hope and solace.

If they can be reassured that the Bible is just a collection of ancients myths and that the universe wasn't created by God, this gives them peace of mind and the chance to leave Christianity in their past.

 

...

 

If you have any decency at all, I appeal to you to refrain from undermining the significance of the news about this gravitational wave discovery.  If you don't understand why I'm asking you this (that is, why those injured by Christianity need peace of mind), then I'll gladly explain further. 

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

Huh? I admit I'm one to whom many new scientific theories are utter mysteries. So I have no dog in this hunt and no personal means of verifying what the discovery of any new waves (assuming that's what the upcoming announcement is about) might imply.

 

But BAA, I hope I'm wildly misunderstanding something here. Shouldn't ALL scientific claims ALWAYS be up for questioning? Isn't that the very foundation of science? Surely a scientific theory should only "give solace" if it's true? Saying, "Stop questioning because it might hurt some people's feelings" sounds ... religious.

 

I respect you and I know you don't speak lightly. So I assume I'm misunderstanding you. Maybe you're being sarcastic and my sarcasm meter isn't working today. I hope that's the case. But ... maybe you could give a little explanation for those of us on the outside?

 

Thanks!

[bornagainathiest]

Not a problem, Merry.

 

Please go back to page # 10 of the Science vs. Religion area of Ex-C and look for the thread started by Pantheory, "Opinions concerning problems in modern big bang cosmology".

 

and here...

 

http://www.pantheory.org

 

Please also check out Thought2Much's links to the Cosmoquest forum (see post # 20 of the "Opinions" thread)

 

The bottom line is this.

Anyone at all, with sufficient funds can set up a convincing website that seems to scientifically sound. Anyone like the Forrest (Pantheory) Noble. But a smart-looking website isn't the same as published and peer-reviewed scientific papers.  They are the true gold-standard of science and scientific achievement.

 

Q.

Where are Forrest's peer-reviewed papers?

 

A.

They never make it past peer-review and are always rejected.

 

The next logical question to ask is... why?

Is because there's some kind of global scientific cabal that's illegally suppressing Forrest's ground-breaking theory?  Or is there another reason?

 

Please draw your own conclusions.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA

[bornagainathiest]

Merry,

 

Please also read the thread, "The Big Bang Never Happened?", also on page # 10 of the Science vs Religion section.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA

[MerryG]

Thank you very much, BAA. I'll read those threads and follow those links as soon as I get a break from my work this morning.

[TrueFreedom]

Gravity Waves from Big Bang Detected

http://www.scientificamerican.com/article/gravity-waves-cmb-b-mode-polarization/

[♦ ficino ♦]

Thanks for the Scientific American link!  So exciting, the first sentence:  "Physicists have found a long-predicted twist in light from the Big Bang that represents the first image of ripples in the universe called gravitational waves ..."

 

So exciting because of the experimental confirmation of what theory had predicted.  Seeing a scientific theory "prove its mettle" is exhilarating even for this old text geek.

[mymistake]

Pffft . . . gravity is just a theory.  I don't care how many "gravity waves" scientists think they see in light.  It doesn't disprove the alternative scientific theory of Intelligent Downward Pushing.

[bornagainathiest]

http://www.caltech.edu/content/first-direct-evidence-inflation-and-primordial-gravitational-waves

 

According to Caltech, gravitational waves have been detected and they are the first direct evidence of Inflation.

 

http://arstechnica.com/science/2014/03/big-rumors-circulating-about-detection-of-primordial-gravity-waves/

 

According to the Arstechnica site, it's premature to say that the BICEP2 team has provided the first direct evidence of Inflation, as the press release declared. 

 

http://www.skyandtelescope.com/news/home/Proof-of-Inflationary-Universe-To-Be-Announced-Monday-250522521.html

 

And the comments between Robert l. Oldershaw and Frank Reed at the bottom of this page serve to illustrate a relevant point about this thread.  Whenever some BIG news is announced in scientific circles, the nay-sayers just pop right out of the woodwork and chant their usual mantras...

 

"Everyone else is wrong and I'm right!"

 

"It's only a theory!"

 

"Wait for another (enter value here) years and this will all change."

 

 

 

[disillusioned]

http://www.answersingenesis.org/articles/2014/03/17/has-cosmic-inflation-been-proved

 

 

[RogueScholar]

"Biblical creationists know from Scripture that the universe did not begin in a big bang billions of years ago."

 

Therein lies the problem, no matter how much evidence is presented, these people cannot and will not separate reality from their biblical faerie tales.

[Thought2Much]

"A first-rate theory predicts, a second-rate theory forbids; and a third-rate theory explains after the event."

 

—Alexander Issokovitch Kitaigorodski

 

What we're seeing here with the discovery of these gravity waves caused by inflation is the confirmation of a first-rate theory. And that's freaking awesome.

[Vigile]

[bornagainathiest]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=vAgLO5GFLQU

 

Inflation requires a beginning?

So, anyone want to read what Alan Guth says about this 'beginning'...?  

.

.

.

 

The Inflationary Universe, p 249. (Alan Guth, 1998)

"At the beginning of 1994, Arvind Borde of the Brookhaven National Laboratory and Alexander Vilenkin proved that if a certain set of technical hypotheses is accepted, then the universe cannot avoid having a beginning, even if the universe is eternal into the future."

 

Please note that Craig conflates this 'beginning' of Inflation with the 'beginning' of our universe.  These two events might be the same thing, but all good theorists and cosmologists simply apply the Copernican principle, never directly claiming that our Big Bang is also the origin of the entire Inflationary process.  It seems that Craig doesn't wish to bind himself to this axiom. 

 

Nor does he ever mention the set of technical hypotheses that Guth speaks of. 

The hypotheses invoked by Borde and Vilenkin to make their proof work. The hypotheses that should be adequately explained by anyone utilizing Borde and Vilenkin's hypothesis-dependent proof. 

 

Guth continues...

"The set of hypotheses includes the assumption that the universe is open, so if the universe is closed then the question... [i.e., the proof that Inflation requires a beginning] ...remains unresolved.  The other hypotheses of the theorem are plausible, but not beyond dispute."

 

"Since the universes under discussion... [in Borde and Vilenkin's work, not in Craig's traditional Big Bang singularity Friedmann universe] ...are highly irregular on the largest scales, the terms 'open' and 'closed' do not have the same meaning that they had for Friedmann universes.  The precise definition is very technical  (as is typical for proofs in general relativity), but roughly speaking Borde and Vilenkin call a universe closed if it contains at least one spatial region with finite volume and no boundary; otherwise it is open."

.

.

.

Summing up.

 

1.

Craig always avoids mentioning the set of technical hypotheses that Borde and Vilenkin use to make their proof work.  He simply cites the proof, as is, without qualifying it properly.

 

2.

Craig conflates Borde and Vilenkin's beginning of Inflation with the beginning of our universe.  The two beginnings might be one and the the same, but then again, they might not.  Craig never puts this important qualification on his claim that the two are, in fact, one.

 

3.

Craig never applies the Copernican Principle, which is used in cosmology to prevent anyone claiming that our universe is somehow special or favored.  By linking Borde and Vilenkin's beginning of Inflation to the beginning of our universe, he deliberately violates the Copernican Principle, raising the status of our universe from simply being one of many to that of... First. 

 

4.

Craig never mentions the OTHER hypotheses that Borde and Vilenkin employ in their work, thus deliberately keeping his target audience in the dark about this important information.

 

5.

Craig's traditional (i.e. pre-Inflation) Big Bang singularity scenario employs pre-Inflation Friedmann cosmology.  But Borde and Vilenkin's work employs post-Friedmann Inflationary cosmology.   Pre and post-Inflationary models cannot be made to work together.

 

As this page shows... http://phys-astro.sonoma.edu/people/faculty/tenn/FriedmannModels.html ...

Friedmann universes are incompatible with Inflationary cosmology.  The WMAP data confirms Inflation and rules out all three Friedmann universe models.

.

.

.

 

Please consider these five examples of Craig's honesty and transparency and draw your own conclusions.

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

[pantheory]

Pantheory,

 

Please note that many members of this forum suffer excruciating levels of mental anguish, depression, OCD, nightmares, panic attacks and other forms of mental and emotional disturbance - all of it down to their abiding fear of eternal hellfire.  While they were Christians they were indoctrinated with this harmful and lingering idea and for many it's been a long, hard road for them to leave these terrors behind.

 

Science news like the discovery of primordial gravity waves offers them hope and solace.

If they can be reassured that the Bible is just a collection of ancients myths and that the universe wasn't created by God, this gives them peace of mind and the chance to leave Christianity in their past.

 

I know why you're pouring cold water on this gravity wave story.

It's all about personal gain, isn't it?  You've invested a lot of time and effort into your rival theory of cosmology - Pantheory.  The more evidence for Inflationary cosmology, the less likely your personal theory looks, right?  So, you're casting doubt on anything that looks good for Inflation.  Not because you're interested in what's true, but because you stand to lose out if Inflation is further verified by hard evidence.

.

.

.

HOW CAN YOU LIVE WITH YOURSELF...?

.

.

.

Have you no conscience, sir?  No moral compass at all?

You'd rather look after your own interests in this forum, rather than hold your counsel for the sake of those who've suffered and who are suffering?  They NEED to see that Christianity isn't true and isn't supported by the evidence... far, far more than you need to reap any kind of kudos or monetary reward you might gain from your so-called theory.

 

I rue the day BlackCat invited you here! 

 

If you have any decency at all, I appeal to you to refrain from undermining the significance of the news about this gravitational wave discovery.  If you don't understand why I'm asking you this (that is, why those injured by Christianity need peace of mind), then I'll gladly explain further. 

 

Thanks,

 

BAA.

 

Sorry BAA that your opinion of me is so low, and of my morals so cynical. Yes I do not like the Big Bang model and some other theories in modern physics. I believe they are wrong theories because of the evidence, an opinion which I share with a minority of theorists and others. For more obvious reasons, I believe that all religions in general are wrong. But like you, and I expect all others here, I am only interested in "the truth" concerning reality. Concerning morals, philosophy, psychology, sociology, etc. I have also written another book, hopefully published next year in mid to late 2015, called "Living in Symbiosis."  The theme of the book is living in harmony, first with yourself, then with others, with animals, plants, and then with your environment in general. Concerning morals, I am a vegetarian and don't eat animals, poultry, fish, etc. I am a board member for a children's charity and manage my own science related charity. So I believe I am not the person which you described above, but instead a moral, empathetic person.

 

I still go to church from time to time because I believe there are many good, interesting, and intelligent people there that I can associate with -- and I like singing the songs It is true that since the age 14-15 (I am 70 now) I have been an adamant atheist but do not criticize those who happily follow religious beliefs that do not hurt anyone.

 

But I also think modern physics (the last 100 years of so) has made some serious wrong turns. I certainly would like to see religion replaced by science in general, but with a type of science that would have a warning sign something like: "Scientific observations are not always interpreted correctly so major incorrect theories can result."  So that in the future when incorrect or wrong theories are replaced by better ones,  it should not be disappointing for those who have followed these theories (especially in Physics) with at least some skepticism, and without blind confidence. I would advise not to follow mainstream theory as being the only possible source of what might be right or wrong concerning reality. Instead decide for yourself based upon the evidence and what makes sense to you, the best that you can. I believe one should not be afraid to have a minority opinion, to speak up or defend it when asked, or be afraid of criticism for one's opinions.  

 

best regards, Forrest Noble