The True Origin of The Universe?

Oh, but it is. What you're hiding under guise of "over-loading" is nothing else but classical pressure, i.e. temperature, i.e. kinetic energy. Define "over loading".

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

That's what I'm saying about space and time. But not matter, I think we still don't know enough about matter to conclude that with enough certainty, however if I had to decide, than I'll surely agree with you.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

What does conservation of matter and energy have to do with universe freezing down to absolute zero? At absolute zero nothing moves, electrons do not orbit protons anymore, you know?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Oy, no:
1. In an a-bomb, it isn't the pressure it is the density that enables the fission.
2. Again, there are virtually no fissable materials in a normal star; they are created when it goes supernova.

No and no.
[edit] This is completely different from your previous line of reasoning about fission happening in stars. Now you are talking about fission happening in the left-over matter that is ejected from a supernova. This line of reasoning is slightly less wrong. Obviously, such clumps of matter where fission can happen exist: you are describing Earth. But Earth is very small and fission still doesn't create hydrogen atoms.

No.

I think you're doing it too -- essentially everything you are saying is wrong here. I think you're just making wrong statement after wrong statement to see how long you can keep people responding. I've had enough.

 

See, you are trolling. You've dropped the last gibberish and have started a new gibberish to make us answer. Not happening.

 

What the...?! Do you understand increased density is the same thing as increased pressure?

Do you understand as the mass of a planet grows the density/pressure in the core increases?

Again, I am not talking about normal stars but "Heat Death" period. Try to remember.

No, what? Before "heat-death" could actually happen all the heavy elements will accumulate and accumulate until some of them reach the point of critical mass where atoms in the core are under enough pressure to cause chain nuclear fission reaction, and that's how new hydrogen atoms are born.

No, what? Don't you see, the Big Bang is just an explosion, a chain nuclear fission reaction caused by the Big Crunch. BB is not the universe, it's just one of many little such explosions in eternal and infinite master universe.

 

No, again, the BB was not an explosion...nothing to do with fission, and no evidence of any big crunch. You can claim that along with the rest of your gobblydook till the cows come home. It's all fairy tales.
It won't make a scrap of difference to what is held among the top scientific theories of all time. That is the BB/Inflationary model.
But you have fun dreaming.

 

If I were you, I would make an effort to learn some physics.

 

The BB does not exclude an Infinite Universe, and it is in fact just as conducive with an infinite Universe as it is with a finite Universe.

 

Yes, yes very much. Before "heat-death" could actually happen all the heavy elements will accumulate and accumulate until some of them reach the point of critical mass where atoms in the core are under enough pressure to cause chain nuclear fission reaction, and that's how new hydrogen atoms are born.

Your emotionally unstable confusion about me is irrelevant. Educate yourself:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fission_bomb#Fission_weapons

 

Humbleteleskop, the things you are saying aren't just wrong, they are stupid. I'm not going to engage your idle speculation further: it will just motivate you to keep doing it and it is the wrong way to learn and a waste of everyone's time. What you need to do is start learning the right way: go read the wiki articles on fission, fusion, nucleosynthesis and the big bang -- and pressure and density as well.

 

What you said was stupid and I explained why. On the other hand you're incapable to articulate any reason or explanation for your denial. Tuck your tail and run, shoo-shooo!

 

I don't see that is different to what I've said. If new mass keeps getting added to a planetary body, it's only a matter of time the planet's core gets under enough pressure, i.e. gets compressed to sufficient density, to cause increased steady fission or even initiate chain fission reaction. I'm pretty sure I've seen articles or papers about fission in neutron stars and supernovas, or black holes, or something. Is there any reason to believe otherwise?

 

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

What are you talking about?
Heat death is a term applied to a possible future Universe.
Stars are fusion reactors.....as supported by Russ and Trippy.

Oh, and by the way, I'm not really the emotional type...at least not the type of emotion as displayed by your own replies in post 510 and 512. :shrug:

 

I'm not talking about stars made of hydrogen. I'm talking about the time when the last reserves of hydrogen are being used, as you suggested. The time when most of the atoms have already been converted to heavy elements. I'm not talking about suns, these things are massive planets made out of heavy elements, I supposed they could be mistaken for 'black holes'.

 

Lol, you've seen articles about fission happening in places where atoms don't even exist?!? :bawl::bawl:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Whatever. :bugeye:

 

It's really about nucleus and neutrons, rather than atoms. Anyway, why are you making your petty arguments before simple five minutes googling effort? Ignorant, AND lazy, what a terrible combination. -- Is there any reason for you to believe that if any heavy element is compressed sufficiently it will not undergo fission? Stop trolling and say something of substance already.

 

Oh, please keep going: I want to hear more about Humbleteleskop's Theory of Fission of Atomless Elements!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!