Mixing God with Science

[Aristarchus in Exile]

We've effectively hit a dead end there.

 

 

Yes.

 

 

Sure. Space can be measured with a ruler and time can be measured with a clock. Further in space means larger as measured by a ruler. Further in time means larger as measured by a clock.

 

 

Yes.

 

Presently, the whole universe is expanding faster than the whole universe was expanding a billion years ago. Accelerated expansion means that as time ticks on the rate of expansion increases.

 

Interesting. Thanks.

 

I fail to understand why you think we are at a dead end. Is anti-matter a component of matter or a seperate entity?

 

Interesting. Thanks.

 

I fail to understand why you think we are at a dead end. Is anti-matter a component of matter or a seperate entity? If anti-matter is a component of matter, then it may be that anti-gravity is a component of gravity. That doesn't seem likely though, as anti-matter and matter are said to destroy each other upon contact.

 

Actually, as time passes, my anti-gravity bubbles grow (unless something stops the growth) and as it is the growth of the bubbles, acting in linear concert with each other with each other, the universe would also expand faster as time passes.

 

 

[Iggy]

I fail to understand why you think we are at a dead end. Is anti-matter a component of matter or a seperate entity?

I don't understand your idea. You're talking about waves of god's voice and antigravity sprinkled throughout the cosmos. None of that means anything to me so I can't intelligently talk about it.

 

If you don't have something quantitative to compare to reality or to compare to the standard model then it's a dead end. The idea is not even wrong.

[Aristarchus in Exile]

I don't understand your idea. You're talking about waves of god's voice and antigravity sprinkled throughout the cosmos. None of that means anything to me so I can't intelligently talk about it.

 

If you don't have something quantitative to compare to reality or to compare to the standard model then it's a dead end. The idea is not even wrong.

 

Ah, so, if it's not wrong, it's right?

 

I see a problem if your entire understanding of cosmogy is based on the standard model, if you can't think outside the box. You have perhaps forgotten even the idea of discovery and curiousity. Then yes, we can't have an understandable conversation.

 

But you could perhaps answer a question like is anti-matter a component of matter?

Edited October 26, 2011 by Aristarchus in Exile

[Iggy]

Ah, so, if it's not wrong, it's right?

The link I gave explains

 

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_even_wrong

 

I see a problem if your entire understanding of cosmogy is based on the standard model, if you can't think outside the box. You have perhaps forgotten even the idea of discovery and curiousity. Then yes, we can't have an understandable conversation.

You don't know me. You have no idea what my view of alternative cosmology is. You are confusing my rejection of your idea (which doesn't even seem like a coherent idea) with my rejection of alternative cosmology.

 

But you could perhaps answer a question like is anti-matter a component of matter?

Matter is made of particles. Antimatter is made of antiparticles.

 

If you were saying that cosmic voids have antimatter in them then I would know what that means. I don't know what it means for a void to have anti-gravity I don't know what it means to have anti-gravity sprinkled throughout the cosmos.

 

Imagine if I said that I could explain the dry parts of earth's surface because those places have anti-wet. That's it. That's the end of my explanation. If someone asked what I meant I might say that God's voice sprinkled anti-wet across the earth in waves. It isn't an explanation. It's not even wrong.

[Aristarchus in Exile]

The link I gave explains

 

http://en.wikipedia..../Not_even_wrong

 

 

You don't know me. You have no idea what my view of alternative cosmology is. You are confusing my rejection of your idea (which doesn't even seem like a coherent idea) with my rejection of alternative cosmology.

 

 

Matter is made of particles. Antimatter is made of antiparticles.

 

If you were saying that cosmic voids have antimatter in them then I would know what that means. I don't know what it means for a void to have anti-gravity I don't know what it means to have anti-gravity sprinkled throughout the cosmos.

 

Imagine if I said that I could explain the dry parts of earth's surface because those places have anti-wet. That's it. That's the end of my explanation. If someone asked what I meant I might say that God's voice sprinkled anti-wet across the earth in waves. It isn't an explanation. It's not even wrong.

 

Iggy you're a nice guy to talk to, but I didn't accuse you of being closed minded. I said "If" your entire understanding is based on ... " I don't know why 'ifs' become anti-ifs so often on these kinds of forums.

 

No .. I didn't say voids have anti-matter, I said anti-gravity .. but perhaps the two go together.

 

In any case, MooeyPoo has furrowed her brows and given me a 'stern warning' in the 'can hatred cause cancer' thread, and hinted that I might not be around here much longer. So, "it's been nice talking to you" if I don't see you around.

Edited October 26, 2011 by Aristarchus in Exile