Origin of the universe

I'd demand my money back.
You don't get Beef with Word Salad.

We are trying to see how Everything came from Nothing without a chef in the kitchen. Beggars can't be choosers, especially when the plate is empty.

Start with an empty plate, put images of the meal on it, spin the plate and the things will flick off to the side, catch them and enjoy your whole-some salad.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

An the singularity is what's left in the trash compactor after pulling the crank.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Oops.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Sorry, I misread your comment as "zero volume".

It was worthless, meaningless nonsense.

So you didn't bother to read the link provided in post #89?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Interesting article: Newsflash: Time May Not Exist

http://discovermagazine.com/2007/jun/in-no-time/article_view?b_start:int=1&-C=

 

It was designed for weight watchers.
And no I had not read that article but will now.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Newsflash?
Er, that dates from 2007...
And Julian Barbour also proposed a similar thing in 1999.
But he wasn't the first either.

 

Stenger's version is a probability theory, it's not a proposal of how it happens. It's fairly useless in this thread. he also cheats quite a lot, with negative time, and such. It's a pretty bad piece of work. He also fails to realise what symmetry is although he uses symmetry, and so he is mostly working with effects, rather than causes. It's the sort of stuff that sounds clever, but only if you are yourself quite dim.

1 + -1 = 0 blows it away, because you then have to be clever enough to know why.

 

Is that like saying it's ill wind that blows nobody good?

 

Mass is the tendency for a particle to resist changes in motion.

Density is how many of something you can fit into a given volume.

Not the same things.

 

1 + -1 = 0 . . . . so does t + -t (assign any value) . . . . so does . . . etc. . . . etc

 

AI, you've said this before.

This wasn't an explosion. What there was, was not violently thrust 'outward'. There was no 'outward'. What there was expanded. There was more of what there was.

 

AlexG . . . to use your favorite term . . . ."word salad!

 

I was only borrowing the term used here and elsewhere.

Yes there was an expansion. Of what, from what? And how does expansion occur without space? So expansion means the creation of spacetime, among other things.

"Before" the BBS expands - what then? I am supposing that the singularity is suspended in a timeless state, therefore eternal, and co"existing" with the temporal disintegrating products of the initial inflation/expansion.

 

That's multiplied or you could say increased, whereas "expanded" means the same stuff but taking up a larger volume of space.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

According to the laws of quantum mechanics, random virtual energy fluctuations may occur constantly. As long as the net energy is zero, there are no conservation laws violated.

Let us abandon the relativistic concept of the zero size, infinitely dense singularity. This is what we seem to get get when we apply the laws of relativity to the quantum realm, where they do not apply.

If instead we consider something the size of a proton, with the mass of a tennis ball, and apply Guth's Inflationary theory, then we have the universe we observe today.

 

What about :word pavlova", fluffed up and delicious.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pavlova_(food)

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I'm sorry wl, if you couldn't understand it. I made it as simple as I could. I guess it just wasn't simple enough for you.

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alan_Guth#Inflationary_theory

 

. . . . Oh yes . . . I understood it . . . . still "word salad"!

 

Of course you did. :bugeye: