Big Bang Wasn't the Beginning

New Member
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
Mar 25, 2002
Messages
1,578
Best answers
0
Well if you add glasses, dorky smile and big ears, they do look alike XD

 
King of the Hello Kitty Fanclub
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
Sep 6, 2004
Messages
1,675
Best answers
0
There's no real way to say if he's either right or wrong, unless any person can say they were around when the universe began (or ended as the case may be). Scientists should theorize useful things rather than stuff they'll never really be able to prove.
 
Lost in space
Banned
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
Jun 24, 2004
Messages
2,497
Best answers
0
There's no real way to say if he's either right or wrong, unless any person can say they were around when the universe began (or ended as the case may be). Scientists should theorize useful things rather than stuff they'll never really be able to prove.
scientists create these theories in the hopes that technology will eventually advance enough in some way to prove it or that someone has a sudden spark and builds off of them. how do you think we got E=MC2? and, uh, theres not much that we can actually theorize on and be able to turn into law later.
 
New Member
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 24, 2001
Messages
9,707
Best answers
0
By understanding where the universe came from and where its going you can gain a lot of valuable equations and knowledge about how the world works. From there you can make all kinds of awesome stuff like faster then light travel and stuff. But if you don't know the fundamental basics of the universe you can't have your cool technology.

People said for the longest time that black holes don't exist and you can never prove that they do since they suck everything in. But then someone thought outside the box and proved that they do exist and now we are taking pictures of them.

If no one ever thought about stuff like this we would still be smashing fruit open on rocks in our caves. Off the wall theories that you can't prove yet is just the way science works.



As for the before the big bang thing, it really isn't such a new concept. Pretty much any physicist or theoretical physicists can tell you that it had to happen somehow, be it from chaos theory or string theory or god or whatever you want to say. But it's pretty clear that universes don't just sudden appear from pure nothingness. What Turok is trying to prove is exactly what caused it. I think he is probably on the right track with the dimensional implosion thing, it makes more sense then some of the other theories like the 2 infinite mass specks.
 
New Member
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
2,417
Best answers
0
i'm pretty sure you cant travel faster than the speed of light.

as you approach the speed of light energy gets converted into mass or something, and you expand.

my physics is half assed, I blame my student teacher.
 

Eon

TeeHee
Banned
Joined
Dec 20, 2002
Messages
5,341
Best answers
0
i'm pretty sure you cant travel faster than the speed of light.

as you approach the speed of light energy gets converted into mass or something, and you expand.

my physics is half assed, I blame my student teacher.
That's where star trek comes in, warp theory!

The ship itself doesn't move at faster than light speeds, it makes a warp field and moves that small area of space that fast.


hey it can happen, right?

Stephen Hawking, hurry up your research and make me a warp core!
 
New Member
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 24, 2001
Messages
9,707
Best answers
0
i'm pretty sure you cant travel faster than the speed of light.

as you approach the speed of light energy gets converted into mass or something, and you expand.

my physics is half assed, I blame my student teacher.
Correct you cannot simply accelerate past light speed. Once you hit lightspeed it is impossible to move faster.

However faster then light means a lot of different things. Not just star trek style pure acceleration. Wormholes, spacial folding, and a few others are closer to real life FTL methods.
 
New Member
βœ”οΈ HL Verified
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
May 28, 2006
Messages
1,094
Best answers
0
How is this a new theory? I could have thought of that...
 
ESF Head Team Mapper
πŸ‘‘ Administrator
🌠 Staff
βœ”οΈ HL Verified
πŸš‚ Steam Linked
πŸ‚ Regular
Joined
Dec 25, 2001
Messages
3,619
Best answers
0
Actually he is not the first one to come up with that theory.
1. I thought about something like that (just the idea .. I don't really understand the math behind it at all) years ago when I was doing some research on string theory (I'm not kidding :p)
and 2. About a year ago or probably even longer I've seen a documentary which suggested the exact same thing.
 
New Member
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 25, 2001
Messages
1,331
Best answers
0
Correct you cannot simply accelerate past light speed. Once you hit lightspeed it is impossible to move faster.

However faster then light means a lot of different things. Not just star trek style pure acceleration. Wormholes, spacial folding, and a few others are closer to real life FTL methods.
Yup. That is totally "Outside-the-box" right there.


Can't go faster... go Around.
 
New Member
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
Dec 21, 2004
Messages
2,417
Best answers
0
I was watching something on the history channel that said once you approach the speed of light you cant actually get to the speed of light because as you approach it energy turns into mass, you can get close to it but you cant catch light.
 
New Member
βœ”οΈ HL Verified
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
Mar 29, 2003
Messages
4,765
Best answers
0
But you didn't.
Nice.

Anyway, according to the string theory. Faster than light movement (and in this case, I do not mean the usage of space folding, warp bubbles and other stuff) is possible, but only for a tiny particle that has yet to be proven that it it exists; the tachyon.

Problem is with some scientists is that we haven't seen anything move faster than light, so it cannot exist. Just because we haven't seen it, doesn't mean it is impossible. Now you might say that you can calculate that nothing is faster than light for large, heavy objects using the Relativity theory. Or for small particles, using Quantum mechanics. But what about that black hole? Being small and incredibly heavy at the same time. Relativity and Quantum mechanics don't apply there anymore, you need something different; the String theory. But seeing as how the String theory is just that, a theory, it has not yet been proven if anything would be possible to move faster than light. (And in this case, anything would be the black hole)
 
New Member
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 24, 2001
Messages
9,707
Best answers
0
People seem to be under the wrong impression on what a scientific theory is.

A scientific theory is not just some random "Oh hey guys what if like the big bang was caused by imploding dimensions." A scientific theory has to be backed up by facts and observations.
 
New Member
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
Oct 4, 2004
Messages
1,572
Best answers
0
Technically, science doesn't try to find an absolute truth, rather find the absolute untruths.
 
New Member
βœ”οΈ HL Verified
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 14, 2003
Messages
3,974
Best answers
0
Science, is simply: the persuit of knowledge.

i maintain the belief that despite what we do know to be true, we are still woefully ignorant of the universe or how it works.

i believe that there are laws, and formulae to explain everything, even things we call "miracles" or "impossibilities" when based on our current laws of physics, are only labeled as such because we simply lack the knowledge to explain them, not because there isn't an explaination at all.
 
New Member
πŸ’» Oldtimer
Joined
Nov 24, 2001
Messages
9,707
Best answers
0
Any real scientist will tell you that we are absolutely clueless as to how the universe works. We have some ideas based on what we are aware of but every couple of years someone finds something new and turns the entire table upside down and forces everyone to sit down and rethink it out.
 
Member
βœ”οΈ HL Verified
πŸš‚ Steam Linked
Discord Member
Joined
Jan 7, 2003
Messages
345
Best answers
0
Well there used to be a theory that, the Galaxy's etc were all expanding out from a center point after the big bang.
Then the Galaxy's will reach a certain point (They are slowing down)
Where the "Rubber band" effect will come into play, thus the Galaxy's heading outwards, will suddenly reach a point, stop, and start converging on the center once again! And thus the cycle continues.
But seriously, If a Black hole can compress the amount of crap it swallows into a single Atom, Then why can't the reverse happen?
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top