DarkColoredLight Posted July 14, 2006 Report Share Posted July 14, 2006 Billions of years ago, the universe was cleanly divided into two states, vinegar and bleach. Then one day, they merged and boom. Big bang. Seriously, it's known as the Heinz Chlorox conjecture. :lol: Baking soda and vinegar would, to me, be funnier. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted July 14, 2006 Report Share Posted July 14, 2006 Baking soda and vinegar would, to me, be funnier.Clearly I'm no chemist. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercedes Benzene Posted July 14, 2006 Report Share Posted July 14, 2006 Or bleach and ammonia... ...or one of millions of other chemical curiosities! :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
DarkColoredLight Posted July 14, 2006 Report Share Posted July 14, 2006 Clearly I'm no chemist. :) I was just stating that, in the begining we learn to make volcanoes from baking soda and vinegar. Right? So there MUST be a connection. :lol: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaelangelica Posted July 14, 2006 Report Share Posted July 14, 2006 Billions of years ago, the universe was cleanly divided into two states, vinegar and bleach. Then one day, they merged and boom. Big bang. Seriously, it's known as the Heinz Chlorox conjecture. :hihi:LOL Sounds perfectly reasonable to me (I've just been reading a book on Quantum) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infamous Posted July 15, 2006 Report Share Posted July 15, 2006 Billions of years ago, the universe was cleanly divided into two states, vinegar and bleach. Then one day, they merged and boom. Big bang. Seriously, it's known as the Heinz Chlorox conjecture. :)Actually, the big bang is a result of a gastro intestinal disorder.....................Maybe we should have referred to it as: The Big Poop...................:doh: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
anglepose Posted July 15, 2006 Report Share Posted July 15, 2006 loli figured perhaps if a peice of matter of any size came from another universe with perhaps diffrent laws of relativitythen when it crossed, the change of laws from that universe to this universe was diffrent eought that kepowweee the big bang happens or perhaps a lot of coke and a lot of mentos got put togetheroh and also its come up with a quick link on my pc on " intestinal disorder " wich takes me to a site where you can buy constapation pills lol lol lol Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Michaelangelica Posted July 16, 2006 Report Share Posted July 16, 2006 loli figured perhaps if a peice of matter of any size came from another universe with perhaps diffrent laws of relativitythen when it crossed, the change of laws from that universe to this universe was diffrent eought that kepowweee the big bang happens Thats not all that far from some Quantam hypothesis. Some say new little universes are starting all the time!Trouble is you can't lol at these guys their serious! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Harry Costas Posted July 16, 2006 Report Share Posted July 16, 2006 Hello All It seems that many have accepted the Big Bang Theory as law. The Big Bang Theory has no foundations, only that it has been backed by fantasy and make believe ideas. Scientists took the theory and tried to make it fit to a model that had no foundations. Read the links: http://www.bigbangneverhappened.org/ http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/bang.html http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/BIGBANG/Bigbang.html http://www.rense.com/general53/bbng.htm http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/UNIVERSE/Universe.html http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/dp5/explode.htm http://www.newscientist.com/channel/fundamentals/quantum-world/mg18825305.800 http://metaresearch.org/cosmology/BB-top-30.asp#_edn16 There are now hundreds of scientists out there who have moved away from the BBT. Just read more and you will find out. Read this link and you will understand the Hog Wash with some scientistshttp://www.smh.com.au/news/science/big-bang-nasa-gets-to-the-heart-of-all-matter/2006/03/17/1142582522240.html Light from the big bang's afterglow shows that the universe grew from the size of a marble to an astronomical size in just a trillionth of a second after its birth 13.7 billion years ago, researchers from Johns Hopkins and Princeton universities say. Readings from a NASA probe also show that the earliest stars formed about 400 million years after the big bang - and not 200 million years later, as the research team once thought. "With this new data, theories about the early universe have just taken their first exam, and they passed with flying colours," said David Spergel, a Princeton astrophysicist and co-author of the findings, published on Thursday. The results are based on readings from the Wilkinson Microwave Anisotropy Probe, a robotic instrument with two telescopes that sweeps the sky every six months in an orbit 1.6 million kilometres from the Earth. Light from the probe has also confirmed a theory that the universe is made up mostly of dark energy, a mysterious force that continues to cause the universe's expansion, said a Johns Hopkins astrophysicist, Charles Bennett, the probe's principle investigator This is the type of logic that is holding up the BIG Bang Theory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
InfiniteNow Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Hello All It seems that many have accepted the Big Bang Theory as law. The Big Bang Theory has no foundations, only that it has been backed by fantasy and make believe ideas. Scientists took the theory and tried to make it fit to a model that had no foundations.Whoa! All of them?? :) Tell me more! :lol: Are you, perchance, a librarian? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheFaithfulStone Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Talking about what "caused" the Big Bang is kinda weird. Before the Big Bang, space (and thus time) didn't really exist as we think of it. Therefore, I don't think it's unreasonable to postulate that without the "arrow" of time, causality didn't really exist either. What "caused" the Big Bang? Nothing, because the idea of a "cause" without time is meaningless. TFS Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercedes Benzene Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 What "caused" the Big Bang? Nothing, because the idea of a "cause" without time is meaningless. I suppose you could look at it this way. :) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IDMclean Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 How about true constants? What if all things are in motion, and remain in motion. What if the only moment, the only time is now? What if the universe as we know it has no cause, because itself is the cause. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
infamous Posted July 17, 2006 Report Share Posted July 17, 2006 Seriously, my own personal point of view is this; The Universe has no beginning and therefore no end. The cosmic background radiation that theorists assume is the remnant of the energy released by the big bang is only the result of numerous local events. Spread out over eternity past, the accumulation of radiation would have become homogeneous over the vast amount of time, leaving mankind with the false impression that it came from a single event. If I'm not mistaken, astronomers have found irregularities in the background radiation which would not be consistent with the big bang theory anyway. As for the observed expansion; The contant release of universal energy could, at least in my opinion, be responsible for this phenomenon. Some would ask; Where does this constant source of energy come from. My answer would only be speculative but in any case here it is: My suspicion is that black holes have a critical mass where upon they return their mass energy back into the surrounding space. This is only speculation because the math and physics needed to understand black holes is quite limited. Needless to say, information gathering from a black hole is, at this point in history, beyond our capability. The bare fact is, it may always be slightly out of our reach.........................................Infy Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dagaz Posted July 18, 2006 Author Report Share Posted July 18, 2006 The cosmic background radiation that theorists assume is the remnant of the energy released by the big bang is only the result of numerous local events. Spread out over eternity past, the accumulation of radiation would have become homogeneous over the vast amount of time, leaving mankind with the false impression that it came from a single event.That's one of the things that actually blows me away about the Big Bang Theory (because in essence it seems so implausible and actually creationistic (?)) is that theorists were able to predict in great detail the cosmic microwave background radiation prior to its discovery. As far as I was aware every study since (with increasingly sensitive apparatus such as the Microwave Anisotropy Probe) have continued to support the original supposition which proposed the CMB in the first place. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest jamongo Posted July 18, 2006 Report Share Posted July 18, 2006 I once read that the universe can be compared to the earth, in a manner of speaking. If one were to attempt to reach the "end of the universe" he could never do so, because he would end up back at the point where he started. (Bill Bryson - "A Short History Of Nearly Everything"). Similar to a flatliner coming to earth and attempting to walk to the end. He would find himself back where he started and would be amazed that this happened.Now if this were the case, then wouldn't all the galaxies that we see speeding away from us all eventually end up at one common point? And wouldn't this explain why the galaxies are indeed increasing in speed as they move out?Then with all of these galaxies coming together at a given point, would they not combine possibly to the point of singularity and eventually do the same "big bang" all over again?:confused: Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mercedes Benzene Posted July 18, 2006 Report Share Posted July 18, 2006 If one were to attempt to reach the "end of the universe" he could never do so, because he would end up back at the point where he started. I do not believe that is the way things are at all. I think that the "big bang" created an infinite amount of space.(I'm not really sure how "infinite space" can be created), but that is my personal belief.I suppose science will never be able reveal the true nature of the universe. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.