Science Admits They Made Up Everything About the Big Bang

[runlvlzero]

Originally Posted by kylok [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Bold is what I have been taught, I challenged my physics professor on this point and he concisely corrected me. I agree the hypothesis is plausible, but I'm hesitant to take anything purely based in math as empirical evidence. Yes it's logical, yes it makes sense, but we don't *currently have a way of verifying it. It's sort of like talking about the possibility of deities existing, we can talk about it for years on end and never reach a conclusion because both sides of that argument can be argued equally well. I choose to take the QM approach, until the results are observed all answers are true - and even then observing them changes them. Part of the problem with attempting to determine where the boundary of the universe is that you have to pick a point that is the middle, and *currently we have no means of doing this besides arbitrarily using our planet.

I concur, but it was interesting to think about =) and has some relevant impact on how we perceive our reality from a philosophical standpoint [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Orruar]

Originally Posted by Shannacore [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Literally had to tell him I wasn't going to argue semantics with him in another thread. LOL.

You literally had to tell me? As opposed to figuratively telling me?

And as I recall, you were the one to start arguing semantics in that other thread... You women and your poor grasp of logic. So cute when you try to participate in a meaningful conversation.

[kylok]

Originally Posted by runlvlzero [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I concur, but it was interesting to think about =) and has some relevant impact on how we perceive our reality from a philosophical standpoint [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Absolutely.

Another point that was made in regards to determining the size of the universe was that after the big bang for a time all the forces were unified, if they were unified then there was no light as it was bound up in this unified force. All the while the universe was expanding, then at some later point the forces "untangled" and light was born. Following this logic it would be impossible to observe the "edge of the universe" without physically going there. Also, to reach the edge of the universe I *think* and correct me if I'm wrong, you would have to exceed the speed of light as the universe is expanding faster than light can travel. Again I'm no physicist, I'ma wannabe chemist.

Perception of reality is a hugely ignored topic in the academic realm (in my opinion) which is why I've chosen to pursue pharmacology with the intention of shedding some light on this subject. Would be a lot easier if humans didn't differ so much on an individual basis =/.

[Langrisserx]

It's like seeing a monkey on rollerskates. It means nothing to them, but it's so adorable for us.

[Shannacore]

Originally Posted by Orruar [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You literally had to tell me? As opposed to figuratively telling me?

And as I recall, you were the one to start arguing semantics in that other thread... You women and your poor grasp of logic. So cute when you try to participate in a meaningful conversation.

Quite literally.

[Clark]

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[kylok]

I blame not having labs near the end of the semester, too much free time. When I'm done with classes at 11 I invariably start drinking and cruising RnF at noon.