My take on th Big Bang

You don't get it.

We can detect all the stars and the approx. 100 Billion Galaxies in our Universe....then we can detect by IR-Light and other forms of Electromagnet Detection the Background Radiation....they both exist.

We can also detect Dark Matter and Dark Energy effects.

AboveAlpha

 

I love your jokes. If Dark Matter exists why isn't there any in our neighborhood?

 

Dark Matter is all around us....and the Galaxies actual exist upon massive Dark Matter Filaments throughout the Universe.

As example....there does not exist enough Matter and thus Gravitation to hold together Spiral Galaxies such as our own and all others as the amountof Mass and Gravity is too little to keep the stars orbitting the Galactic Center from spinning off into space.

Reason they don't?

Over 80% of all Gravitation and Matter in the Universe is DARK MATTER.

Possibly a bleed over from a Multiversal System.

AboveAlpha

 

In narrowing it down to “what came before…” you have largely resolved the issue. I was considering a broader scope.

“The Absolute” or “The Void” and other intermediate stages are the concerns of metaphysics, abstract knowledge, various scriptures, some cultures (e.g. Polynesian), some mystics and sages (e.g. Lao-tze). There is also a complex ancient Egyptian metaphorical formulation that is considered “subquantum kinetics.” I have no further comment on your label “vacuum of knowledge.”

I don’t have a deeply entrenched theistic mindset; in this case, I don’t see where either the usual notion of heaven or the mind of God needs to be considered. I don’t fit well in the blanket of your religious stereotyping.

My response to other issues will have to wait, if and when I can work on them.

 

No where near the thriving livelihoods of televangilism. Or just the number of churches in existence.

 

No such thing as Sub-Quantum Kinetics.

When you or I am typing the patticles of Mass....the Protons and Neutrons within the Atomic Nucleuses that make up the Atoms that make up our finger tips....NEVER TOUCH...NEVER COME IN CONTACT WITH ONE ANOTHER!!!

Why....because the Electron Orbital Fields surrounding those Atomic Nucleuses are all Negatively Charged thus they repell each other and Kinetic Transfer is caused when the Electron Orbital Fields...ie...QUANTUM PARTICLE/WAVE FORMS...IN THIS CASE ELECTRONS....repel each other and thus vibrate or move the position of the interior Atomic Nucleus.

Thus Kinetic Transfer occurs upon a QUANTUM LEVEL.

A Sub-Quantum Level...although not disproved....would be unnecessary for Kinetic Energy Transfer.

AboveAlpha

 

It won't be long before some people start claiming that all dark objects, including people and night and shadows, are dark matter.

 

It's probably just a convenient label used in the effort to interpret some unusual Egyptian myths as representations of metaphysical processes (e.g. the Brusselator). I have a book, something like Ancient Myths and the Science of Continuous Creation, which I misplaced somewhere around here, so I can't say more about what it entails.

 

None I am aware of.

AboveAlpha

- - - Updated - - -

One thing I know....Reality is PLURAL.

AboveAlpha

 

Only truly ignorant people....Do YOU know any?

 

4.352x10^14. Easily written on a single piece of paper, I could even do it in this post I just don't wish to.

 

LOL!!!

GOOD LUCK explaining what that means to some members!! LOL!!!

Clue....Multiply 4.352 times 1,000,000,000,000,000.

Wait....is that right?

Let's see.....our Universe is 13,400,379,000 Years Old......so 1 year has 315,360 seconds in it.....so that times 13,400,379,000 Years equals 422,594,352,144,000,000.

And 4.352 x 1,000,000,000,000,000 = 4,352,000,000,000,000 vs. my calculation of 422,594,352,144,000,000.

Add to my calculation the necessary additional Space-Time being created via Big Bang Expansion as well later due to Dark Energy and we are about the same plus or minus 564,000,000 Seconds.

CLOSE! LOL!!!

AboveAlpha

 

I used 13.8 billion. Close enough.

 

you miss typed. 1 year has 31,557,600 seconds

 

Here's a tangential start.

In The God Problem, Howard Bloom ponders how a godless cosmos creates to such a high degree of proliferation, complexity, and organization. He suggests it may be using a modest number of starting rules and axioms, working in Planck steps of 10^ 43 times per second, to extract what David Bohm calls implicate properties, in effect the process of corollary generation, the generation of emergent properties.

He suggests the cosmos puts old patterns together in novel ways to make a new medium, and then weaves old stitches into the new medium, generating a new big picture wherein translation is transformation in essence.

He notes that the cosmos uses repetition fanatically, iterating simple rules and mixing in various patterns to generate complex fractals. Nature’s tool box also includes recruitment strategies, differentiation and integration, and use of opposites that work as if joined at the hip.

Furthermore, he considers the cosmos to be very social, conversational, and a user of stimulus and response.

Bloom claims that the universe is running up, not down, thus countering the second law of thermodynamics, i.e. reversing entropy. His appraisal compares favorably with that of Tom Campbell, the current main advocate of cosmic digital consciousness and cosmic virtual reality, whose concept is a reduction of average entropy.

In the book’s conclusion, Bloom points out mankind’s poor recognition of the cosmos’ true capabilities. He cites mistakes such as relying entirely on material things to understand the cosmos, and failing to realize the amazing power of immaterial things such as waves, whorls, and the identity patterns of complicated beings, identities far more wondrous than cells or DNA. Thus he agrees that Hegel, who said that history is spirit becoming matter, is at least partly right. Bloom further states that immaterial identities are at work in quarks, quanta, and galaxies.

Yet he is careful to stop short of pinning the label of consciousness directly on the cosmos, instead implying the same by giving example attributes of consciousness and saying that we have unrightfully reserved them exclusively for ourselves and denied them to nature.

Since the book’s text on the jacket is not copyright protected, I can herewith quote it directly. Dudley Herschbach, winner of the 1986 Nobel Prize in chemistry, comments: “Truly awesome….Bursting with insights and ideas, delivered with delightful verve and zest…. A tantalizing, fresh new view of the cosmos for mankind.”

Among his many credentials, Howard Bloom is founder of the International Paleopsychology Project, founder of the International Space Development Steering Committee (a group that includes Buzz Aldrin and Edgar Mitchell), and a founding board member of the Epic of Evolution Society.

 

I did a smidge of research on the book and have ordered it. Thanks I look forward to reading it.

 

The tree is NOT a wave function.

Once the information inside a wave function has been collapsed, it will behave, thereafter, like all other things that are in the Real World.

In other words, the tree will make a noise, for instance.

You must get more info on tis Copenhagen Interpretation.

 

Waves of energy are what we call electromagnetism.
Electromagnetism (often called Light) is one of the seven kinds of Kinetic Energy that exist.

But, energy can also be at Rest, (Potential Energy).

A rock high up in the hill has Potential Energy stored in it.
The is no "place" necessary to hold that stored energy.

So before the electromagnetic wave functions began the transferance of Energy into cosmic Matter of our Universe, it was stored no where at all.

 

He is referring to a tree in the MACRO WORLD.




This Copenhagen Interpretation divides things into two realms:
1) the macroscopic and 2) the microscopic.(*)

The macroscopic realm is that of our everyday experience.
In this realm classical physics applies, (i.e.; the physics of Newton).

Like, in the macroscopic world, a real tree, in a real forrest, will make a sound whether one hears that sound or not.

The microscopic realm is that of small things such as atoms and sub-atomic particles, where the CI applies.

This was the early world of the Big Bang.
There, the first electromagnetic waves began changing energy into matter, once they were Observed.

 

Always found the CI to be a bit sloppy. It proposes this notion of wave function collapse, but then never bothers to explain how it works. MWI just does away with it altogether and gives us back a nice, deterministic universe. Seems a lot more sensible, if you ask me.

 

You have it backwards, though.
Experiments show that "observations" do cause changes in waves when they collapse.

The CI merely explains "why."

Acceptance of The Copenhagen Interpretation among physicists
Throughout much of the twentieth century the Copenhagen interpretation had overwhelming acceptance among physicists.
Although astrophysicist and science writer John Gribbin described it as having fallen from primacy after the 1980s, according to a poll conducted at a quantum mechanics conference in 1997, the Copenhagen interpretation remained the most widely accepted specific interpretation of quantum mechanics among physicists.

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

 

Wave functions *appear* to collapse. That doesn't mean they *actually* collapse. Apparent wave function collapse can be explained by decoherence. Since CI and MWI both predict the same observations, there's not currently any way of determining whether one is more correct than the other (though I do recall reading somewhere that there might be some experiments we can do once quantum computers are more advanced).

 

At issue here is whether science has demonstrated a Creator's existence before the Big Bang occurred.
Copenhagen Interpretation doe that nicely, by demanding an Observer be present before those first wave functions collapsed.

That was the whole point of the this discussion,... right?

And, today, in spite of the idea of Many Worlds, CI is and has been the dominant and major accepted premise in quantum Physics.


Acceptance among physicists[edit]
Throughout much of the twentieth century the Copenhagen interpretation had overwhelming acceptance among physicists.
According to a poll conducted at a quantum mechanics conference in 1997, the Copenhagen interpretation remained the most widely accepted specific interpretation of quantum mechanics among physicists. [/B]

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

 

And today, physicists are still pondering entanglement. Perhaps you've hit on a partial explanation.

 

Observation != observer. In CI, the notion of measurement isn't intrinsically tied to consciousness. Also, CI doesn't necessitate that the collapse is an objective event. Really it just sort of ignores the nature of collapse, and is content to leave at something that's mathematically useful for predicting stuff in the real world.

Science has "demonstrated" nothing if you're basing your argument on a theory that has never been proven, much less reached a level of consensus among the physics community.

Not particularly relevant since CI doesn't mean what you seem to think it means. And it's *a* major* interpretation, not *the* major one. Depending on the poll you look at, less than half of physicists subscribe to the CI.

Yeah, show me a poll that's not nearly two decades old.