Home Forums Classifieds Blogs Today's Posts Search Social Groups



  
SIGN-UP
Notices

Glock Talk
Welcome To The Glock Talk Forums.

 
  
Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 09-14-2012, 07:34   #41
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 15,116


The Wiki article to boil it down into a more digestible form (emphasis mine).

Ekpyrotic universe

Quote:
The ekpyrotic universe, or ekpyrotic scenario, is a cosmological model of the origin and shape of the universe. The name comes from a Stoic term ekpyrosis (Ancient Greek ἐκπύρωσις ekpurōsis) meaning conflagration or in Stoic usage "conversion into fire". The ekpyrotic model of the universe is an alternative to the standard cosmic inflation model for the very early universe; both models accommodate the standard big bang Lambda-CDM model of our universe. The ekpyrotic model is a precursor to, and part of some cyclic models.

The ekpyrotic model came out of work by Neil Turok and Paul Steinhardt and maintains that the universe did not start in a singularity, but came about from the collision of two branes. This collision avoids the primordial singularity and superluminal expansion while preserving nearly scale-free density fluctuations and other features of the observed universe. The ekpyrotic model is cyclic, though collisions between branes are rare on the time scale of the expansion of the universe to a nearly featureless flat expanse. Observations that may distinguish between the ekpyrotic and inflationary models include polarization of the cosmic microwave background radiation and frequency distribution of the gravitational wave spectrum.
__________________
Peace is our profession, war is just a hobby...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Geko45; 09-14-2012 at 07:41..
Geko45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 08:23   #42
Bren
NRA Life Member
 
Bren's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Kentucky
Posts: 36,969
Quote:
Originally Posted by X-ray 4N6 View Post
Where did this "brane" come from?
That's the problem with both the religious and the scientific approach. Whether it is a deity, a brane, a cosmic soup, a wind-up universe generator or naughty pixies, the problem is the same: can't get something out of nothing.
The difference is, the scientific answer is "we don't know" but the religious answer is "we'll make something up."

"We don't know" isn't a problem, just something to work on.

"We'll make something up" is a problem, because it stops us from trying to find real answers.

Can't get something from nothing? Then something has to have always been...but everything had to start, what came before the start? Did that come from nothing? And on and on.
__________________
Quote:
This is the internet - you will never learn to shoot here.
- Me, 2014.
Bren is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 10:37   #43
Roering
Sorting nuts
 
Roering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
Don't worry. There was no accusatory tone meant in my post. I may have towards King, but I only resort to that when confronted with willful ignorance and/or intellectual dishonesty.

The equipment necessary to test it is far from common (a microwave observatory) so I don't know for sure if it has been yet or not. They've laid out a method to do so and published it, so if it has not been, it will be soon.

My point in posting this is to show that progress is continually being made and that it is unfair to simply point at an area of study that is still developing and say that since we don't yet know we never can know.

The god of the gaps is constantly being pushed back. In this case, "he" was right behind the Big Bang, but now we are unraveling that mystery and "he" is receding further. I take this pattern to indicate that "he" is not needed to explain anything at all. If only we are patient and keep struggling to learn then we can discover how just about everything came to be.
I get the whole Tower of Babel concept. I was just wondering if preparations were underway to test this theory.

And on a more practical matter, where will the $$$ come from.
__________________
------------------------------------------------------
Warranty voiding

Never buy vegan tacos from a chick with longer armpit hair than yourself. - Woofie
Roering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 10:54   #44
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 15,116


Quote:
Originally Posted by Roering View Post
I get the whole Tower of Babel concept.
The inference being we are foolish to attempt to learn what only god should know? If that's not what you mean then please elaborate as that is kinda the usual takeaway from that particular myth.

Quote:
I was just wondering if preparations were underway to test this theory.

And on a more practical matter, where will the $$$ come from.
There is a reason why we launch observatories like Hubble and Chandra and Fermi into space. It's not just for the pretty pictures, it's to test stuff like this.

The Planck microwave observatory was launched in 2009 by the ESA (European Space Agency). It was built to test inflationary models of the universe (similar to this but different) and to better measure the Hubble constant. I don't know if it is properly equipped to test this particular theory or not.

Planck Observatory
__________________
Peace is our profession, war is just a hobby...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Geko45; 09-14-2012 at 10:59..
Geko45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 11:07   #45
Roering
Sorting nuts
 
Roering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Vic777 View Post
The Big Bang Theory is bull****.
You're kidding right? Have you tested it?
__________________
------------------------------------------------------
Warranty voiding

Never buy vegan tacos from a chick with longer armpit hair than yourself. - Woofie
Roering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 11:19   #46
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 15,116


Quote:
Originally Posted by Roering View Post
You're kidding right? Have you tested it?
The Planck Observatory did.
__________________
Peace is our profession, war is just a hobby...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Geko45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 11:23   #47
Roering
Sorting nuts
 
Roering's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Posts: 4,727
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
The inference being we are foolish to attempt to learn what only god should know? If that's not what you mean then please elaborate as that is kinda the usual takeaway from that particular myth.
It's not foolish to learn what only God should know.

First off I don't see why anyone would get the notion that only God should know it. At least i don't see it that way. He gave us the ability to reason, think, and hands in which to build things. We may very well have been led to discover such things.

What I do see as a sense of foolishness that many times stems from pride is the notion that attaining knowledge or power would "narrow the gap" as you put it between us and God. An attempt at that is a fools quest because it assumes that the main difference between us and God is either knowledge or power or both.
__________________
------------------------------------------------------
Warranty voiding

Never buy vegan tacos from a chick with longer armpit hair than yourself. - Woofie
Roering is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 11:33   #48
Glock36shooter
Senior Member
 
Glock36shooter's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 3,159
Quote:
Originally Posted by Roering View Post
It's not foolish to learn what only God should know.

First off I don't see why anyone would get the notion that only God should know it. At least i don't see it that way. He gave us the ability to reason, think, and hands in which to build things. We may very well have been led to discover such things.

What I do see as a sense of foolishness that many times stems from pride is the notion that attaining knowledge or power would "narrow the gap" as you put it between us and God. An attempt at that is a fools quest because it assumes that the main difference between us and God is either knowledge or power or both.
But it seems that all the things God has "led" us to discover point to there not really being a God. God has to continually take a step back once we realize that our world and cosmos work very naturally and very unsupernaturally. You can accept certain findings that we know to be factual at this point. But 500 years ago what we now know as fact would have been heresy and gotten someone burned at the stake. The gaps that God hides in are getting smaller and fewer and far between. Eventually there just isn't going to be anywhere left for him to hide except in ancient archaic scrolls and scribblings of unsophisticated bronze aged wizards.
Glock36shooter is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 11:43   #49
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 15,116


Quote:
Originally Posted by Roering View Post
First off I don't see why anyone would get the notion that only God should know it. At least i don't see it that way. He gave us the ability to reason, think, and hands in which to build things. We may very well have been led to discover such things.
Ok, good. I can accept this.

Quote:
What I do see as a sense of foolishness that many times stems from pride is the notion that attaining knowledge or power would "narrow the gap" as you put it between us and God. An attempt at that is a fools quest because it assumes that the main difference between us and God is either knowledge or power or both.
Meh, you kinda manipulated what I said there a bit. I don't see it as narrowing the gap between us and god as I don't believe there is a god at all. Thus, no gap to be narrowed between him and us.

What I said is that god is often used to explain what we don't yet know how to explain (ie "god of the gaps"), but this theory (and many others like it) keep expanding the envelope of human knowledge such that there is less and less undefined area in which to invoke god as an explanation.

Or, to say it differently, to narrow the gaps in knowledge such that there is no real reason to invoke god as explanation anymore. There isn't really a reason now as I'm perfectly ok with "I don't know" as an answer, but many people seem to need to have some sort of explanation (no matter how absurd) for what they don't yet know.

See, same words used, but a very different meaning.
__________________
Peace is our profession, war is just a hobby...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Geko45; 09-14-2012 at 11:43..
Geko45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 16:02   #50
Kingarthurhk
Isaiah 53:4-9
 
Kingarthurhk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
They start with the claim that you are saying that something came from nothing. Then, when you show them the something that the previous thing came from, they immediately push the horizon back with "where did that come from, nothing?" This holds true even when you manage to push the horizon back before the advent of spacetime itself (as demonstrated here). And then, when you dare ask them where god came from, suddenly he should be readily accepted as eternal without question.

It is intellectual dishonesty in its purest form.
The BBT really is. Layer upon layer of the more absurd is added to attempt to defend the undefendable. Okham's Razor becomes a butter knife. BBT gets challenged, then it is asserted that it is an infinitely dense singularity so dense that it exceeds time and space and always was. When that is shown to be absurd, a multiverse is suggested as infinite and we just inhabit one where this one contradiction is possible. When that is absurd, we are told branes did it. So, as far as I can tell there are three levels of nonsense to try to explain a singularity that somehow existed on its own accord. Again, declaring we should accept cause without effect.

Yes, BBT is inetellectual dishonesty in a desperate attempt to defend the undefensible to try to eliminate the concept of an Intelligent Designer.

I wonder what layer four will be?
__________________
Glock 17, 19, 20SF, 21C, 22, 26, 27, Glock E-Tool, Glock knife
Quod ego haereticus appellari sequere Jesum.
Kingarthurhk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 16:09   #51
Schabesbert
Senior Member
 
Schabesbert's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Buffalo, NY, USA
Posts: 10,616


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk View Post
declaring we should accept cause without effect.
I think you mean "accept effect without cause."
__________________
He is no fool who exchanges that which he cannot keep for that which he can never lose.

Ho kurios mou, kai ho theos mou
Schabesbert is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 16:10   #52
Kingarthurhk
Isaiah 53:4-9
 
Kingarthurhk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Schabesbert View Post
I think you mean "accept effect without cause."
You are correct. I wrote it bassackwards.
__________________
Glock 17, 19, 20SF, 21C, 22, 26, 27, Glock E-Tool, Glock knife
Quod ego haereticus appellari sequere Jesum.
Kingarthurhk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 16:27   #53
X-ray 4N6
Senior Member
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: London (ex SA)
Posts: 421
Quote:
That's just it, that is no longer a valid statement. The whole point of this thread is that there are now scientific theories that push past the very start of spacetime itself.

It was one thing when science couldn't even begin to describe what came before. Anyone's guess was equally valid, but that is no longer the case. Now we have well developed, sound and testable mathematical theories that fully explain the cause of the Big Bang and the beginning of spacetime.
Can you tell me what that is then, in simple terms that I can understand. How was there no matter and no time and then there was matter and time?
X-ray 4N6 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 16:56   #54
Harper
Senior Member
 
Harper's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Posts: 2,598
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk View Post
The BBT really is. Layer upon layer of the more absurd is added to attempt to defend the undefendable. Okham's Razor becomes a butter knife. BBT gets challenged, then it is asserted that it is an infinitely dense singularity so dense that it exceeds time and space and always was. When that is shown to be absurd, a multiverse is suggested as infinite and we just inhabit one where this one contradiction is possible. When that is absurd, we are told branes did it. So, as far as I can tell there are three levels of nonsense to try to explain a singularity that somehow existed on its own accord. Again, declaring we should accept cause without effect.
You've got that backwards, the big bang would be the effect and the singularity the cause. We can certainly accept effect without cause. Your post isn't very coherent.

Quote:
So, as far as I can tell there are three levels of nonsense to try to explain a singularity that somehow existed on its own accord.
They're trying to find how the singularity occurred but also stating it existed on its own accord? That makes no sense.

Last edited by Harper; 09-14-2012 at 18:09..
Harper is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 17:14   #55
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 15,116


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk View Post
The BBT really is. Layer upon layer of the more absurd is added to attempt to defend the undefendable. Okham's Razor becomes a butter knife. BBT gets challenged, then it is asserted that it is an infinitely dense singularity so dense that it exceeds time and space and always was. When that is shown to be absurd, a multiverse is suggested as infinite and we just inhabit one where this one contradiction is possible. When that is absurd, we are told branes did it. So, as far as I can tell there are three levels of nonsense to try to explain a singularity that somehow existed on its own accord. Again, declaring we should accept cause without effect.
Wow, you really have no idea what we are even talking about here. My apologies, this is just simply beyond your capabilities. If belief in an intelligent designer brings you comfort then please go in peace. This is not for you.
__________________
Peace is our profession, war is just a hobby...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Geko45; 09-14-2012 at 19:18..
Geko45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 19:10   #56
Kingarthurhk
Isaiah 53:4-9
 
Kingarthurhk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Harper View Post
You've got that backwards, the big bang would be the effect and the singularity the cause. We can certainly accept effect without cause. Your post isn't very coherent.
If you read the post from Bert, my faux pas has already been noted. Sometimes, that happens when I am multitasking. For instance, I have music playing, am simultaneously writing a sermon and talking to my wife and children. Sometimes it taxes the mental CPU.

Quote:
They're trying to find how the singularity occurred but also stating it existed on its own accord? That makes no sense.
That is precisely my point.
__________________
Glock 17, 19, 20SF, 21C, 22, 26, 27, Glock E-Tool, Glock knife
Quod ego haereticus appellari sequere Jesum.
Kingarthurhk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 19:13   #57
Kingarthurhk
Isaiah 53:4-9
 
Kingarthurhk's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2010
Location: Texas
Posts: 7,575
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
Wow, you really have no idea what we are even talking about here. My apoligies, this is just simply beyond your capabilities. If belief in an intelligenter designer brings you comfort then please go in peace. This is not for you.
Thank you. I think that is one of the kindest things you have said in this type of a format. Here, and you thought that old spark of Christian love had been extringuished. And no, I am not being sarcastic, in the event you are wondering.

From my end of the metaphysical pond, I say God Bless you, sir.
__________________
Glock 17, 19, 20SF, 21C, 22, 26, 27, Glock E-Tool, Glock knife
Quod ego haereticus appellari sequere Jesum.
Kingarthurhk is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 19:21   #58
Geko45
CLM Number 135
Smartass Pilot
 
Geko45's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Short final
Posts: 15,116


Quote:
Originally Posted by Kingarthurhk View Post
From my end of the metaphysical pond, I say God Bless you, sir.
Just to be certain, there was no sarcasm on my part either. I fully understand that the path I walk is not for everyone. Be well.
__________________
Peace is our profession, war is just a hobby...


To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.

Last edited by Geko45; 09-14-2012 at 19:21..
Geko45 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 19:53   #59
Green_Manelishi
Knicker Knotter
 
Green_Manelishi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: On the edge but not quite over ...
Posts: 6,824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
... Like I said, the theory provides testable predictions. If the math is right then it predicts observable consequences for the universe today. ...
Here's a prediction: "science" will sooner than later pull another theory out of their atheist arses when this latest "we don't need no stinking God" intellectual cramp is found to be lacking.

"Branes"? Cripes, that's almost as funny as the dingbat Dick Dawkins claim a marble statue could, under the right circumstances, wave its hands.

From where did the branes arise?
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Green_Manelishi is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 09-14-2012, 19:53   #60
Green_Manelishi
Knicker Knotter
 
Green_Manelishi's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: On the edge but not quite over ...
Posts: 6,824
Quote:
Originally Posted by Geko45 View Post
Just to be certain, there was no sarcasm on my part either. I fully understand that the path I walk is not for everyone. Be well.
You have plenty of company on that wide path.
__________________

To view links or images in signatures your post count must be 10 or greater. You currently have 0 signatures.
Green_Manelishi is offline   Reply With Quote

 
  
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is On

Forum Jump




All times are GMT -6. The time now is 12:46.




Homepage
FAQ
Forums
Calendar
Advertise
Gallery
GT Wiki
GT Blogs
Social Groups
Classifieds


Users Currently Online: 924
268 Members
656 Guests

Most users ever online: 2,672
Aug 11, 2014 at 2:31