Beam me to Planet Gore !
Posted on 04/27/2010 9:09:27 AM PDT by TFI
Superstition has exerted a powerful force on human psyche and history. Strengthened with a few facts, a superstition becomes accepted reality until new perceptions can reopen debate. That is an exciting possibility in today’s Nouveau Renaissance. Humanity’s new course needs a road sign: “Caution, Falling False Paradigms Ahead”.
Climategate has shown that even the most well funded science can be wrong. All objective, science trained minds have left the Global Warming station. Well meaning scientists are already doing damage assessments and future hazard avoidance studies. It is now a perfect time to reassess another possibly defective theory on the origin of the universe.
(Excerpt) Read more at freemeninstitute.com ...
A better theory? No. Just a screwy article.
Intersting read...I was watching something the other day, and they were talking about how the speed of light being the fastest thing in the universe was one of those steadfast rules that can’t be broken, and then turned around to say that for the big bang to work, everything had to fly out of the bang at a speed much greater than the speed of light.
Bunk! They have to do much better than that to convince me.
I know the author is “dumbing” this down for those without a strong science background. That said, he hurts his credibility with some real goofs. For example:
“Since noting behaved according to the predicted mass calculations, then there must also be anti-matter and dark matter.”
The existence of anti-matter has nothing to do with the alleged missing mass issue or dark matter. Anti-matter is real. We can and have made it in labs. Tiny amounts at incredible expense, but it’s been done, and the anti-matter behaves exactly as theorized.
There are a few other goofs, some more subtle.
That said, the overall point is interesting to consider.
The work-around on that is that space itself expanded faster than the speed of light. Thus, nothing within that space had to move faster than c while at the same time the distance between things grew faster than they could move away from each other at speed c.
He also hurts his crebility by writing in a very caustic, polemical style. He would have done better better to lose the snarkiness and just make his points, which were admittedly interesting.
Yeah, maybe someone can answer this too...
If, as they say, the universe is expanding at the speed of light, how does the light from other bodies catch up to us???
And I'm not saying we've got the universe all figured out; I've never been convinced by string theory, for example.
They knew the earth was a sphere. The flat earth myth was a 19th century creation.
“They knew the earth was a sphere. The flat earth myth was a 19th century creation. “
—Yes, the author is confusing the idea of a flat Earth with geocentricity.
If the universe is allegedy 13.7 billion years old, and started as a singularity, then an object would have had to travel 13.7 billion years to get to that point, and an equal amount of time for light from that object to travel back to the observer. (27.4 billion years, minimum?)
I thought as an object approached the speed of light its mass would increase towards infinity. What woudl hapen to an object that exceeded the speed of light with regards to infinity?
Last point: theorists state the expansion of the universe is increasing in speed. How, if objects were taveling faster than the speed of light, can you now rationalize that explanation?
A very confused article. The author is apparently unaware Einstein did not believe in the Big Bang theory (an expanding universe). He does not mention the father of the theory: Monsignor Georges Lemaître. Einstein attacked Lemaître, calling his math adequate but his grasp of physics abysmal. The first critiques of the theory were based on
Lemaître’s faith. Of course he believes in a moment of creation, other scientists said, he’s a priest—he’s letting his religious beliefs influence his science.
No to mention what would those big bang speeds [faster than the speed of light] do to the earth/universe age-dating clocks?
Saw this on on FR years ago - worth pondering.
Creation week
Day 1 = 8 billion years apparent elapsed time
Day 2 = 4 billion
Day 3 = 2
Day 4 = 1
Day 5 = 1/2
Day 6 = 1/4
Totaling 15 3/4 billion years apparent age of the universe.
Things that make you go hmmm....
If the universe was expanding at the speed of light, then we would never see newly emitted light from any star.
However, the universe is not expanding at the speed of light. As far as I’m aware, there’s no real measurement of exactly how fast the universe is currently expanding, only that it is.
What people seem to be reffering to is inflantionary cosmology, where the universe expanded by dozens of orders of magnitudes over fractions of a second. This is very different than the exapnsion occuring right now, due to dark energy.
Hope that helps!
Isaac Asimov did a good essay on this.
We were wrong when we thought the earth was flat and it later turned out to be a sphere.
We were “wrong” again when we learned that the earth is actually an oblate spheroid and not a perfect spehere.
We were “wrong” both times, but that doesn’t mean we’re not getting a better understanding of the world, nor does it mean we’ll discover we acutally live on some sort of cube any time soon...
That wasn't science at all, that was politics using science as a foil.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.