rigney

Gotcha! But I can lift a small piece of paper with a comb that I've run through my hair a few times, but the comb won't stick to the car either. Never tried it with a small feather?

Could it be that gravity is only magnetism in disguise? We know that planets, moons, asteroids, our sun and literally everything else existing throughout the universe is said to possess what we consider to be gravity. Yet, while science has found that every atom has magnetic properties, there is no evidence they posesse gravity; other than a beautifully constructed formula by Sir Isaac Newton, which I'm not going to equivocate simply because it works. But for instance, when earth began forming; were those first bits of (dust) matter, coalescing with other dust particles because of magnetism or gravity? When earth was basketball size, had gravity gained the upper hand, or was magnetism somehow still a part of the mix. Even when this planet was the size of our moon, was the controlling factor gravity or magnetism? Please, don't beat me up; just give me some feedback.

Thanks Jackson. A lot of good reading material there. Just hope I can absorb some of it.

I sure hope the ambiguities of ignorance never get totally in the way of science. I can't do much to prevent it, but somewhere; someone out there has the answers as to why it all began and why it continues.

Wish I could be as informative and intuitive as some of you guys are Jackson, unfortunately I'm not. And yes, I believe there is much inconclusive evidence as to why we and this universe exists, which has nothing to do with religion. If God is somewhere out there, I believe he will give us credit for our ignorance. Otherwise, let's keep on truckin' My questions are strictly from the hip and in most cases only ?? You know what I mean? Somewhere back, perhaps 60 years or so, I somehow heard of the BB and seemed to grasp its meaning. Why? I have no idea, or to whom the phrase might be connected. It made sense that a big firecracker went off and, "Pfft", we were here. Since physics and math are not among my strong suites, I just let it go until I joined your forum about 3 months back and started reading. Keep it coming, and I'll keep asking the questions.

Appreciate your answer, but my statement was not to assume that our universe came from nothing. The fact we and "it" exist, attest to confirm cause and effect. My thought was, why would it have happened only this one time? Was this binary bit the 1 or the 0? I just don't know.

Extarpolating time as such to determins the BB is beyond my ability. But is it possible that initial tick of time as we know it, was only a continuance of something already cyclic and eternal?

Edtharan, you and Mr Skeptic have both given me views to look at and to think about. But since numbers aren't something I'm very good at, even in keeping up with my checkbook; the question I would like to ask is: What if this universe (ours) is the only one that exists, with nothing else out there? Right or wrong, I can grasp such a thought. Mr Skeptic put it in prospective when he wrote the following possibilities--- 1)* Omnipotent beings, aliens, etc. 2) Collision of multidimensional branes 3) A quantum fluctuation in a different spacetime, with gravitational potential energy as negative energy that balances the mass-energy of our universe so the universe actually has zero energy. 4) A cyclic (eternal) universe 5) others... *Option 1 isn't really science though. #4. The "cyclical and eternal universe" thing made the most sense to me. And when guys like you and Mr S finally do figure out what the connection between matter and antimatter is, I believe this riddle might be solved. Being totally ignorant of dis-similarities between the two, I asked Mr S, yesterday; if matter is moving away from a source directionally and spreading out, is antimatter doing the same thing, or is it going in a different direction? At this point, I realize it isn't a fair question to ask, but perhaps one or both of you have some idea?

Things we should all remember from time to time. https://news.simpletruths.com/servlet/cc6?kpuitLQSTCAQTVIuHjkSRAxILttkhmloQgLlVaVR Are these not jewels of wisdom?

Ass kicking Guy! The video? Total chutzpah. I'm just not smart enough to take it all in. Life may have began here thru many different venues, but somehow got started. Our problem? How to keep it going to advance mankinds goals without killing us off?

Y'u know whatta I mean!. Is there any credible evidence to support the idea that other universes "might even" exist? We seem to know so little about the one we live in, it's hard to imagine folks out looking for new ones. Clue me in.

C'mon, give me your best shot, but tell me when to "duck"! Seriously, my thought process doesn't allow me to wander too far from the present universe that I presume we live in. Is it possible that our universal space/time is somehow connected with other space times of which you speak? Has this been proven to any degree, or is it part of another hypothesis? Me, I wouldn't know how to tell the difference regardless of which way it went.

No, I don't think that me trying to explain farther would satisfy your inquisitiveness as to how I answered your questions to start with. As I said, I'm no scientist and would think that you could see that from the get-go. When you pose questions as such, I try going immediately to google for an answer, since I generally don't have a clue. What answers I gave were short excerpts from research that has already been done. Someone very intelligent came up with this rudimentary plan of progression for both plants and animals. Have I read it all? No! Only a little. Life on Earth view • discuss • edit -4500 —–-4000 —–-3500 —–-3000 —–-2500 —–-2000 —–-1500 —–-1000 —–-500 —–0 —Life?Photosynthesis?Eukaryotes, Complex multicellular life, Animals, Land plants "Dinosaurs" Mammals, Flowers ←Formation of earth- Meteorite bombardment←Atmospheric oxygen←Ediacara biota←Cambrian explosion←Modern-looking humans Axis scale: millions of years ago.The basic timeline is a 4.5 billion year old Earth, with (very approximate) dates: 3.8 billion years of simple cells (prokaryotes), 3 billion years of photosynthesis, 2 billion years of complex cells (eukaryotes), 1 billion years of multicellular life, 600 million years of simple animals, 570 million years of arthropods (ancestors of insects, arachnids and crustaceans), 550 million years of complex animals, 500 million years of fish and proto-amphibians, 475 million years of land plants, 400 million years of insects and seeds, 360 million years of amphibians, 300 million years of reptiles, 200 million years of mammals, 150 million years of birds, 130 million years of flowers, 65 million years since the non-avian dinosaurs died out, 2.5 million years since the appearance of the genus Homo, 200,000 years since humans started looking like they do today, 25,000 years since Neanderthals died out.

My question was of three parts and made no mention of the BB. Nothing I said was clear cut, or in stone; and the BB was somehow an assumption on your part, which I don't mind. As much as I read, my head is still filled with cobwebs when trying to understand science. Especially the universe and how it was created. The common sense thing was in your referencing a multiverse spitting our universe out accidently. Now, that's wild! And you're right, speculation can lead anywhere. My thought is that one of you will spit something out that may be prospective and someone might run with, even me. Oh yea! Since nothing from nothing leaves nothing, "Nothing" is somehow classified as a noun, among other things. Mr. S, Is there anything to validate even one of these theories, other than faith or more theory? Only #4 makes any sense to me at all. And as hard as I try to understand what I read, I can't really find anything substantive in these claims. Help me out. This is exactly the kind of answers I was hoping to question without seeming totally ignorant. So when I ask a question(s), it isn't that I'm trying to outsmart you, 'cause I'm really not in a position to do so. But, if in fact substance of the B.B. was there before time and space began, how could it have possibly been so without space of some sort surrounding it? I know it has something to do with Einsteins theory of relativity, but I just don't know how to connect the two. Tried looking at both brane and string theories. The mathematical conundrums of either scared the bejabbers out of me. I wouldn't know how to even approach a question on the subject.

Appreciate your input. Sometimes it's hard making a statement designed as a commitment, since most folks fail to understand your reasoning. There is no mystique in my questions, only that I was hoping for input to which I might establish some value. In believing the universe is continuous, it is at best humorous to religious factions as well as the scientific mind. This, regardless of how it came into being, which to me somehow means, infinite. Get back! While I do appreciate your humor, I see more than the frivolity of your statement. Since there is method to your madness, share it. What I would like is some common sense that I can understand, rather than a "cut in stone" rational.

Thank goodness Hydrogen is far more prevelent in earths confines than Helium. Otherwise the world as we know it might only last another two or three hundred years at best. "Capricious" is the only word to describe how wasteful we are in protecting our resources. While we don't need Helium to support life as such, it is a necessity in some modern day mechanichms, helping us to do so. Helium, is becoming rare. How rare? Only time, conservation and "greed" will tell.

While not having a Scientific mind by any stretch of the imagination, or overly endowed with brain power; my question is: Did the universe spring from nothing? Something so small as a singularity? Or was it aleady in a condition to be built upon? In either of the cases, why? If not, how was this feat accomplished? I've read so much on the subjest as to become saturated, yet able to rationalize very little. What amazes me is that many people seem to have answers to most of these questions. How, I don't know? So, since I have so little to offer other than questions, it would be nice receiving conjecture that I can relate to, even if only in generalities. And that, regardless of how impractical it might be. In the meantime, I'll I'll keep up with the post and continue reading.

I hope you didn't think that. Yet I thought it rather excoriating for you to say: "but through your imprecise use of language and your vague claims and statements"! / "Only then can we know if we have something to discuss". Were those statements meant to be conjunctive? And your stand on heterotrophs as opposed to autotrophs being first life, you may be right. However as I read it, heterotrophs depend on other living organisms to survive, even their own kind; while autotrophs consume their natural elemental surroundings. Then I read that heterotrophs may have originally started this way. I'm no scientist and have been on this forum about three months or so now and have few answers, many questions and some arguement. Finding Moons theory on abiogenesis interesting, thought perhaps I might inject something making sense, even though conjectural. Sorry to have given you the wrong impression.

Swear to gosh!, Every time I jump in the creek with any of you guys, I'm the only damn one who don't know how the hell to swim.

Well, I'm gonna keep the phone lines open just in case. I'm glad I don't have such a substantial faith in nothingness as you do. Be a real bust to run afoul of something I know absolutely nothing about, especially if it somehow actually exists. 'cource I have the same trouble with science.

Evidently, but the kids keep me on my toes and are likely the reason I remain an Agnostic. Oldest daughter sent this today. I'd rather spend a lifetime believing in GOD, and an eternity finding out he isn't there. Than believing he doesn't exist, only to have it revealed after my death, that he does? Kids can make you wonder?

Ophiolite, good, bad or indifferent; I answered your questions, and have been on vacation for over a week. Yet, you have made no response. Are we going to let Moon's thoughts of Abiogenesis die because of my ignorance, or your reluctance to continue on the subject?

Might this not also be considered, Postulation? Or does "think", absolve you of that premise? Is the below not also postulation, or have I missed something? quote name='Moontanman' date='21 August 2010 - 05:32 PM' timestamp='1282429925' post='561097'] Thor! No way, only a Goddess can give birth to the Universe, the very idea of a male supreme being is blasphemy!

Isn't that what arbitrary means, to have a thought process different to another persons? Pardon my intrusion, but there was a slight misqote of his statement. He said: God is the un-created source of all creation. God doesn't have a creator. This is why He is God.