| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/1/2009 5:27:53 PM | //Iheardyouontheradio://
"So tell me, what exact effect does this being called "god" have on this universe? Its been a long time since somebody defied reality by calling a colum of fire from the sky, was born of a virgin(at least she stuck to her story), knocked down a wall by blowing horns, made the sun stand still, raised from the dead, ect. Why would such a powerful and wise being be so active way back in the past, then suddenly vanish?"
Because Jesus told us He wouldnt come again! The next time is the end. Have you read the Bible, or do you just call it nonsense cause someone told you it was stupid.
And that whole Mary lying about being a virgin. Ive heard that regergetated since I was 3. Yeah so she said she was a virgin and that her baby was sent from God. Then it just so happened that the baby turned out to be a miracle worker that has been debated for 2000 yrs. That hundreds of eyewitness accounts say He rose after death. Can it ever be enough? If some chick came out today and said she was a virgin and her baby was sent from God, and the baby didnt turn out like Jesus, you would never hear of him. Put 2 and 2 together. The Old testament said He was coming the way He did, Mary claimed she was a virgin, then that baby defied what we hold as reality. What a coincidence!! | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/1/2009 6:05:12 PM | Of course jesus isn't comming again, jesus died. If jesus was even jesus and not confused or compiled from other people. There's not much info on the matter outside the bible. According to the bible, when jesus died the whole earth shook and a booming voice from heaven declared "It is finished". Funny how no one else on the planet noticed it, or wrote about it. As for the hundreds of eyewitness accounts that jesus rose from the dead, it just says that in the bible, but where are they? There are thousands of eyewitness accounts of elvis and UFOs, did elvis rise from the grave too?
There are also hundreds of eyewitness accounts that claim mohammed the prophet rose up to heaven from the temple mount(or something like that..), so why aren't you a muslim?
The old testament also claims that the entire earth was flooded, where's the evidence for that? Even if noah could fit every single land-dwelling animal on the ark (which he couldn't) they would not have a viable population afterwards to continue life. Not to mention, if the whole earth was flooded, it would kill all planet life on the surface of the planet. Also, it would take much longer than a few hundred days for that water to recede, if ever. Not to mention, even if the polar ice capes where to melt completely, it would only raise the sea level 61 meters and vice-versa. So where did all this extra water come from?
I'll tell you, a common ancient belief at the time was that the earth was separated from "heaven" by a bronze or iron dome. The "fermament" that genesis talks about coinsides with this belief because the ancients thought that space was filled with liquid water(as well as under the earth).
As for the old testament prophecies that jesus would come... its not that hard to alter events of the present to fit the past, all it takes is a little bit.
This is all besides the point of the thread. The queston was "start of the universe via white hole.". "Who" is not relevent to the question, its the "How". If you want to learn how to build pianos, studying bach probably won't help you out so much. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/1/2009 6:11:06 PM | I think it has more to do with us not being qualified to make such a decision. Anyone here an astrophysist?
Its still fun to talk about, though.
I have taken several particle physics and theoretical astrophysics classes. More importantly, had numerous conversations with various physicists. You do not need a job title to be knowledgeable on a subject and intelligent. I don't believe in the theory of the big bang as a white hole for the same fundamental reason I do not believe there is an intelligent designer. It essentially means there is no beginning, because a white hole theory means that our universe came from another universe (into infinity) - an ID theory means that the designer must have a designer (and into infinity.) These, for me, are not plausible explanations because they serve no purpose. If we only discover that our universe was the result of something else that we cannot explore and/or explain, then we have arrived at a dead end, not an answer. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/1/2009 6:14:47 PM |
Because Jesus told us He wouldnt come again! The next time is the end. Have you read the Bible, or do you just call it nonsense cause someone told you it was stupid.
Actually he said he would come again before his apostles died... Guess his plan kind of fell through. And the reason I think the bible is nonsense is because it is. Do you see anyone besides Kris Angel being able to walk on water? Do you see miracles happening? You could always try to pray to get rid of cancer instead of kemo...
Yeah so she said she was a virgin and that her baby was sent from God.
If she didn't, she would of been stoned.
Then it just so happened that the baby turned out to be a miracle worker that has been debated for 2000 yrs.
And all of his miracles also came from 'other' deities as well. Such as Horus and Dionysus. Why do you discount all those other deities for your Jesus fellow?
That hundreds of eyewitness accounts say He rose after death.
Hundred of eye witness accounts say they have seen UFO's.. what's your point? Plus, just because the book claims there were hundreds of eye witness accounts doesn't mean there were.
Can it ever be enough?
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. Do you have evidence for your baseless accusations?
The Old testament said He was coming the way He did, Mary claimed she was a virgin, then that baby defied what we hold as reality. What a coincidence!!
How do you know that no one added to the Old Testament? How do you know that Mary was a virgin and not a horny teenager? | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/1/2009 6:51:38 PM |
You do not need a job title to be knowledgeable on a subject and intelligent. Yes, but it helps to a certain degree to be taught by someone who has more understanding on the matter. Being self taught does have some advantage, however, it can also be a double edged sword. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/1/2009 7:44:38 PM |
Yes, but it helps to a certain degree to be taught by someone who has more understanding on the matter. Being self taught does have some advantage, however, it can also be a double edged sword.
A science degree only accounts for the degree you applied for and is offered at your institution. I am a biomedical research scientist, and I have several colleagues. Most of us have a biology degree of some sort, but one has an astronomy degree, four have chemistry degrees, two have physics degrees and one has a mathematics degree. I have a Biology degree, but I've taken more astronomy, physics and chemistry classes than I have in Biology. Not having a degree does not mean you are self-taught, often times it's a combination of one's own exploratory need for discovery and understanding and gaining insight from those more knowledgeable on the subject. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/1/2009 9:23:06 PM | i didn't mean "degree" as a science degree, I meant it as a percent. When I asked for an astrophysist, I didn't mean Neil Degrasse Tyson, but that would have been sweet. What I meant was someone who has actually studied the subject and learned the matter from a credible source other than "some person". Which is exactly what you said in your last sentence. I think we are arguing the same point.
and gaining insight from those more knowledgeable on the subject.
Yes, but it helps to a certain degree to be taught by someone who has more understanding on the matter. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/1/2009 9:37:47 PM | ^^^ lol
I read "to have a certain degree."
Skimming is bad!!
Then my point was that there are people here who fit into that qualification, and I am one of them. It's offensive that you would discount what I say because you assume I don't know enough to discuss it. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/1/2009 10:40:09 PM |
It's offensive that you would discount what I say because you assume I don't know enough to discuss it.
I was actually generalising it, I wasn't refering to you specifically(though now re-reading it, it does come off that way, sorry). Earlier you had made the comment that this topic had already been discussed and that such matters aren't quite in our grasp yet. Then i made the comment about people not being qualified, actually as more of a joke, and added that its still fun to talk about( to imply that knowledge on the matter is irrelevent for it to be fun). My sense of humour is not everyone's cup of tea. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/1/2009 10:48:36 PM | I think you misunderstood what I said.
I did say we had discussed this already, but when I said, "it seems too much based on our thinking backwards and using what we already can explain to explain what is as of yet unexplained..." I meant that we are looking at what is observable as the opposite of the birth of a universe and reversing it as an explanation, which would be using what we can explain to explain what we have yet to explain. There have to be unknown variables at this time, otherwise we would have figured it out by now. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/1/2009 11:13:54 PM | over the past year or so, the big bang theory has been substantially modified...i suggest everyone read Briane Green. It is no longer uniformally believed that the universe started at an almost infinately dense point carrying all the mass we currently see. A very good theory (which has been tested and confirmed) posits that we may have started as a very small dot, only weighing around 20 pounds. Then, through a very neat process regarding Higg's fields, it was forced to briefly inflate, then to decelerate its increase, and finally, to accelerate its growth. I've read ALOT of "origin of the universe" theories....and as far as i can see, this is the front-runner. Its the only one that can be tested.
Read Greene. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/1/2009 11:38:28 PM |
There have to be unknown variables at this time, otherwise we would have figured it out by now.
=?
that such matters aren't quite in our grasp yet.
Maybe it was a bit over simplifed....
Read Greene.
Greene has to wait in line for the moment, my list of books is getting backed up.
Is there any ref. sites with the tests conducted and results with a quick summery? | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/1/2009 11:40:20 PM |
Is there any ref. sites with the tests conducted and results with a quick summery?
i dont know....tests and results are listed in his book The Fabric of the Cosmos.....and i promise, if you bump this book to the top of your list, you wont regret it. It will help you understand other books. | |
|
| |
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/2/2009 4:20:47 PM | Maybe it was a bit over simplifed....
If you take half of your sentence out of context, sure it can mean what I said.
Earlier you had made the comment that this topic had already been discussed and that such matters aren't quite in our grasp yet.
Unless there is a missing second subject here, this would be saying that I said that the white hole theory of the big bang is not within our grasp. I said the opposite. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/2/2009 6:37:46 PM | Now, when i mean "such matters aren't quite in our grasp yet", I didn't mean: " the white hole theory of the big bang is not within our grasp". Keys words are "aren't quite" and "yet."
"not within our grasp" implies that we will never figure it out, which, yes, is the opposite of what you said, but not what I said.
"aren't quite in our grasp yet" implies proximity to completion once certain objectives have been met(ie, gaining an increased perspective on the universe, perhapes finding those unknowns....)
but I think we've reduced to arguing symmantics. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/2/2009 6:52:23 PM | We are arguing semantics because I'm still not clear on what you meant to say is not within our grasp yet. Your sentence has one subject, "this || [big bang via white hole]."
I wasn't talking about that not being within our grasp yet. It is. It's the mathematical reverse of an observed phenomenon. When I say there must be unknown variables, I'm talking about relationships between observed particles and physical laws that we have yet to realize. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/2/2009 8:04:32 PM |
I wasn't talking about that not being within our grasp yet. It is. It's the mathematical reverse of an observed phenomenon. Yes, I know. I made mention to that also.
What I meant by "such matters" was this:
"it seems too much based on our thinking backwards and using what we already can explain to explain what is as of yet unexplained...
Also note that in the context that it is in, i wasn't arguing for or against you, I was using it as a placeholder to describe a series of posts to clear up the first issue we had. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/16/2009 1:09:23 AM |
A White hole is supposed to be the theoretical mathmatical reversal of a black hole. You can look it up on wiki to find out more.
I can google it?! Wow, thx for the info!
I'm asking for the opinion of people posting here of their definition of the subject of the OP. I gave my understanding, and now ask for others'. | |
|
| Start of the Universe via white hole?
Posted: 9/16/2009 1:45:30 AM | Black holes, white holes, big bang theories...
...if that's the case WHERE DID THE BLACK HOLES COME FROM? Or where did the BIG BANG COME FROM. Out of nowhere it just happened?!! And how did this "out of nowhere" come from or how did IT happen to BE?!!
I believe in God or maybe I'm confused...
I even feel like I'm not supposed to ask questions like...
WHERE DID GOD COME FROM? WHO CREATED GOD? And if it's another God who created this God, again...where did that God come from. These questions just do not have answers...*long sigh*. | |
|
Home
login 
