Big bang - put bigger thing into smaller container?

you talk so much rubbish?
science is about evidence and facts.

I give you a rock bigger than a truck size,
can you put it into a cup?
Do it for me, please.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

so, where is the observation of big bang?

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If singularity is true, then please create a singularity in lab to verify it, can you?
Science is talking about experiment, please...........
Maybe the big-bang scientists can turn their breakfast's bread into a singularity?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

I am not sure to whom this is directed.

Easy.

A truck weighs approx 40 tons.
A teacup is approx 200mL.
So, the density of the semi truck in a teacup is about 200kg per cubic cm.

A typical white dwarf star has a density of about 1000 kg per cubic cm, about five times the density of the teacup-bound semi-truck.

Sirius B is a nearby white dwarf. We know its diameter and we know its mass. So calculating its density is trivial.

 

Do you know what a singularity is?

It's important that you do. Because it bears on whether your question makes any sense.

 

Your inattention is your own problem. :shrug:
As is your mistaken view on the reality of the singularity.
Agan, let me repeat, not sure what he has in mind and not really that interested, but most now accept that the singularity is simply a breakdown of GR and its equations, and should disappear with the advent of a QGT.
The same applies to BH singularities of course.
In essence. all a singularity is, is an indication of the limits of our knowledge.

 

Neutron stars can do it. We don't have the equipment to do it on Earth.

 

More confusion or misconstruing by you. Nowhere did I imply let alone state a belief in 'singularity'. I don't. Period. The particular issue I red highlighted in #4 re your #3 :

It was NEVER about what I believed but about the wrong assertion of Wiseman that ONLY lay people believe it. Wrong. There are numerous and still extant examples of cosmologists speaking of the BB originating in a spacetime singularity. Get your facts right on this one too.

 

It's actually a factual assertion. Most lay people accept the BH singularity...now admittedly that maybe the fault of the physicists and cosmologists in using the term itself mainly for simplicity, and avoiding going into details in explaining it to the general lay person.

 

This is the science section and not for anti science nonsense, which at least to me, now seems your obvious intent.
reported.

 

What is factual is that lay people got there beliefs from the mostly science popularizer writings and 'PBS specials' etc. of actual cosmologists and theoretical physicists. Hence the idiocy of Wiseman's claim that much more acute.

 

Yes, didn't I just say that? But for simplistic purposes essentially, and of course it does not really take away from the great job most popularisers are doing anyway. The idea is to explain the basics in as accessible way as possible.

Not idiocy at all.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Lay people generally see a singularity as real.

 

I did not see the tornado that swept through Barrie yesterday, but I can examine the residue left behind, and I can determine quite a bit about what happened yesterday.

We see a vast amount of residue left over from an event that occurred many, many yesterdays ago, and we can determine what must have happened (because: physics).

 

Simply put - we CAN put bigger things into a smaller container.

Have you ever seen a memory foam mattress being delivered? They can vacuum seal a king size mattress down to something a single person can maneuver contained within a box however long the mattress is but only a foot or so wide. You put it on the bed frame, unroll it, and cut open the packaging. Within an hour or two, it will go from a couple inches thick to a full-thickness, plush mattress.

Likewise, at the atomic level, there is a LOT of space between sub-atomic particles:

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

It stands to reason that, with enough force (pressure), you can squeeze the matter in tightly and remove that empty space.

 

Bingo! and nice representation!
A similar analogy was given at post 3 to no avail, which leads one to ask, is this a genuine question to which he/she wants an answer, or just another anti science rant?

 

The cosmologists also propose a so called Big Crunch.
The universe expansion may reverse direction and back to its initial state - singularity.
Why talk only, go to the lab and do something to prove it.

 

If your theory is valid,
any experiment had been done to validate it?

 

Wrong: the Big Crunch was once a possible alternative. It now has been discarded due to DE.

Why? You are not listening anyway.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

You are not interested in any answer, that pushes whatever you imagine into oblivion.
We observe Neutron stars...we have confirmed BH's...Do you know what these are? Do you know what a singularity is yet?

 

And of course besides the fact that atoms are more than 99% space, and besides the fact that we observe dense White Dwarfs held up against further gravitational collapse by EDP [Electron Degeneracy Pressure] and even more dense Neutron stars held up against further collapse by NDP [Neutron Degeneracy Pressure] and despite the fact that even the NDP can be overcome to form BH's, it is also factual that the BB was not a process that suddenly evolved all the matter we see today, it was an evolution of just space time and energy....Matter, stars, planets, galaxies came later and evolved from that energy.