Strange

Which god? Mine loves killing people. Why didn’t he stop them? I thought your god was supposed to be powerful. I guess he is not as clever as he claims.

So you agree. It is not absolute. Stop preaching

It depends what you mean by possible. A gyroscope that large would, of course, work like a gyroscope. But you couldn’t build one because there isn’t a material strong enough to stop it collapsing under its own weight.

The same is true of infinite sets. You must spend a lot of time coming up with such twisted “logic” to try and defend your beliefs. It is a bit sad to watch.

Analogue signals like that are converted to digital values by an analog to digital converter (ADC). This converts the varying input to a series of digital values representing the voltage at each instant.

We DONT KNOW it was created. Why do you keep saying that? We don’t know how it came to be in that state. But we have a lot of evidence it was. Maybe one day we will know. No. You are refusing to listen.

Who said it was. Oh. Popular. So ... widely used?

No. We continue to study and try and understand. We don’t just give up because we don’t know, that would be ridiculous. I have told you multiply le times. Why do you not learn? You obsessively cling to your deluded opinions even when it is explained that they are wrong. The theory says that the universe is expanding from an early hot dense state. (Of course there is a lot more detail to it because it can make highly detailed predictions that can be tested - as in, you know: science)

Don’t be ridiculous. You are dangerously ignorant about computer programming Of course it isn’t. There are lots of reasons not to use C. Poorly defined semantics. No data structures. Complex tool chains. Pointers. Etc Nonsense. And even if it were true it is irrelevant to learning.

Really? http://www.vogella.com/tutorials/JavaWebTerminology/article.html

We are listening. You aren’t saying anything. The Big Bang model is constantly changing as we learn more. We might get do if you ever get round to giving us one. There is no evidence the universe was created in a big bang. That is not what the theory says so why do you keep saying it?

I’m not doing any such thing. I’m just giving you my opinion on your posturing. And I don’t know why you keep going on about “moderators” answering you. Swansont is answering you as a physicist and member of the forum, not as a moderator.

The French tried this after the Revolution. They introduced a new decimal calendar. It never caught on and they soon abandoned it. And, as always, xkcd is ahead of you:

There is no evidence for that. Correct. But it isn't an opinion: it is a fact that we don't know everything. No you don't. Or you would have done so. We know, with a high degree of certainty, that the universe expanding and cooling (ie the Big Bang model). It is true there is a lot we don't know, but that does not undermine what we do know. I don't care whether you accept it or not. As long as you realise that rejecting the Big Bang model is counter to all the evidence (what you call "facts") and is therefore an irrational opinion. And I don't believe you do know what the theory says or you wouldn't keep saying "the universe came from nothing" because that is just an opinion, not based on evidence.

And, because I don't want to discourage PrimalMinister, it may be worth pointing out that dividing space into cells is commonly used in many types of simulations. Most relevantly for this thread, when modelling GR as in black hole mergers and so on.

Oh, OK. I have never come across that definition. More here for others unfamiliar with this: http://www.apa.org/monitor/nov05/cycle.aspx

Well, it works for cows! But, in general, surely thinking about things is good?

We don't know. We don't even know that it did. There is no evidence for that. Attempts to combine quantum theory and GR suggest it could be infinitely old. But we don't know. We need more evidence. You need to accept that "don't know" is sometimes the best scientific answer we have. How can we talk about it if you don't tell us what it is. So it might be best to wait until you are ready to present it. I hope that includes the maths, the quantitative predictions and a comparison of those with the observational evidence ... Pretty much the same reason as I contribute to any threads. I am interested to know what your theory is. I would like to help you learn. I will correct your errors.

Then why did you ask for more information? There are many more variations than that. The universe could have emerged from a previous universe. It could be one of many. It may be unique. It may be infinitely old. It could have been created from a false vacuum. It could have been created by a black hole in another universe. It could end in a heat death. Or restart. Or ... What do you want to know?

You were very keen to discuss this earlier. Do you have any response to the comments so far?

Sigh. Is it worth it. I have provided references to some of these before. I don't think you ever read any of the information provided. You just spend your time thinking of different ways of asking the same question. OK. Stephen Wolfram wrote an entire book on the subject, initially claiming that this would be the theory of everything (sound familiar). I think he has moved away from that position a bit and now just claiming that it could be a new way to look at things. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stephen_Wolfram#A_New_Kind_of_Science Then there are many attempts to combine GR and quantum theory, which often involve splitting space into individual "cells". For example: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causal_dynamical_triangulation Experiments have been done to try and detect any "grannies" of space and so far it appears to be continuous.

You can say that. But as this is a science forum, you will need to provide some evidence for it. Can you do that? No, it is the testimony of the truth of Islam. Or is it evidence for the truth of Hinduism? Or Shinto? I forget which. They can't all be right, can they. Reported for preaching.

It is an old idea. Many people have (and are) trying to build models based on this sort of thing. None have worked yet. (And you are unable to build a model, so you might be better reading up on some of the science that has been done, instead of making things up.) The universe has cooled from a hot dense state over 14 billion years. How can that be compressed to a billionth of a second? (Note that asking the same question in different threads will not get you different answers. And doesn't give you an excuse to avoid answering questions.)

1. That is mythology so no reason to think it happened. 2. The fact that one person did not want to sacrifice their son does not prove that nobody ever did. (You might want to look at Central American cultures.)

This is the No True Scotsman fallacy.