Strange

And perfectly possible to simulate either. Sounds like typical creationist lies.

Humans did not evolve from monkeys but from a common ancestor. Some of the other species between that common ancestor still exist, others have evolved into new species and others have become extinct.

Well, bless his heart.

Close. The balloon analogy is intended to show that a 2D surface does not have an edge or a center, but can still expand. Unfortunately, we see the balloon expanding in 3D space. There isn't any equivalent for the way the universe expands. However, someone has suggested that you can view the radius of the balloon (the fourth dimension) as time and so you see the surface expanding as it moves through time. That is close the the way the universe is described in general relativity.

Just found this excellent summary of the CMB: http://www.cv.nrao.edu/course/astr534/CMB.html

As you have been told before, any such change will not be measurable in our lifetime. Science never proves anything fully correct. (As I am sure you have been told before.) You can wonder all sorts of things. But without evidence it is just science fiction.

You have had an entire thread about this. Have you forgotten already? The temperature of the universe (as reflected by the CMB) decreases (roughly) linearly with time.

Whether it changes or not is not the point. Its existence is evidence for the cooling universe and against the steady state model. But you have had this explained to you very many times. Please stop pretending that you don't know this.

This sounds like a version of Hoyle's quasi-steady state theory. It doesn't fit the evidence (of an early hot universe). And there is no evidence that mass is, or can be, created at the required rate.

As no (as far as I can see) has attacked the poster for any of those things, that would appear to be a "dishonest" straw man tactic.

It is basic thermodynamics. As the pressure drops, so does the temperature. Did you miss this at school?

Not necessarily. Only if the universe is finite in size. Otherwise it was infinite. Nonsense. The gas in the oven will get cooler. Have you noticed that when you let the gas out of an aerosol can it gets cold? Same thing. Which is why you should rely on physics, rather than beliefs. Of course not. Remember, when you say "do you agree" it really means "I made this up because I don't understand science".

Some are and some aren't. Death and taxes are the same. Getting a reliable wi-fi connection is not something that troubled the Romans.

I took a couple of the sample tests linked from the High IQ website. I got 150 for one and 100 for the other (with some rather condescending comments that, maybe if I worked hard I might be able to make something of my life ...) The one I scored badly on had questions about the meanings of words (and, therefore, nothing to do with intelligence as I understand it) one of which was just plain wrong (I guessed and got it right anyway). And golf. The other one was clearly highly accurate at assessing how brilliant people are.

This page has a very detailed analysis of relativistic acceleration and the fuel needed: http://math.ucr.edu/home/baez/physics/Relativity/SR/Rocket/rocket.html

Why is mass given to 7 decimal places, but the others aren't? You need to be specific about the speed. There is huge difference between 99.99% and 99.999% of the speed of light. For example, at 1g it would take 5 years to reach 99.993% c. But another three years to reach 99.99998% c. And "up to a year" doesn't really mean anything. 1 nanosecnd or 11 months and 30 days both fit that definition.

That is still not what "dimension" means ...

You would need to know the mass, the speed and the time to get to that speed. From those it would be possible to calculate it.

What rules would it break?

https://what-if.xkcd.com/46/ OK. Slightly off topic. But worth it, if only for the line, "Fortunately for us, there are people who digitally scan bowling ball surfaces".

There is if the universe is infinite.

I think you are confusing acceleration and velocity. Rapid acceleration produces pressure (as when you put your foot down in the car or take off in a rocket). This is equivalent to the "g force" of gravity. However, if you accelerate at 1g, say, then you can get up to very high speed. If you accelerated at this (comfortable) rate for 2 years you would be going at 97% of the speed of light.

Because that is what the evidence shows. How is it relevant if the universe being inifinite or not? Yes. We don't. If it is infinite now, it was infinite then. If you are wondering how something that is infinite can expand, then Hilbert's Grand Hotel might give you some insight. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hilbert's_paradox_of_the_Grand_Hotel

Ah, I see. The High IQ Society is a thing, not a particular country or something. http://www.highiqsociety.org/ (Took me a while to get that. Maybe it says something about my IQ ...) I have heard of Mensa and always thought it was club for like-minded idiots.

That is a completely different question. We need the big bang theory to describe the evolution of the universe from an early, hot dense state, as indicated by the evidence.