No Big Bang

[Ned]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


This is a gross oversimplification, Neddie.

OK, then what is the difference between moving from more dense to less dense space in a short time, and moving from more dense to less dense over billions of years?

[Ned]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse


Because you're an ignoramus who believes that physics can be simplified down to a few nonmathematical statements.

If you ever want to make money as an expert witness at a trial, you had better get off your high horse and start making the complex simple. It really can't be that hard. It might actually take some intelligence to do so.

[KrazyHorse]

If you ever want to make money as an expert witness at a trial

Why would I want to do that, you buffoon?

"Normal" people cannot understand this stuff at any but the simplest level. They have neither the intelligence nor the knowledge base to understand modern physics in any meaningful way. Simplification down to the level at which they can understand renders it meaningless. The drivel you've been spouting is adequate demonstration of that.

Physics is not philosophy. You can only argue it in words if you already have a good grounding in the mathematics behind it. If, instead, you take the words "redshift occurs when light moves from more curved space to less curved space" as an adequate representation of a complex idea you can be led to all sorts of erroneous conclusions.

The general public does not and will never have an understanding of modern physical theories in any sense but the most general. You are not qualified to argue cosmology. You are not even qualified to learn cosmology. In order to become qualified you would be required to learn the following things (in order):

a) Differential and integral calculus
b) Linear algebra
c) Differential equations
d) Classical mechanics
e) Statistical mechanics and thermal physics
f) Special relativity
g) Electromagnetic theory
h) Differential geometry
i) General relativity

[Ned]

Next, I suspect, you would have me learn these topics from professors that are at least as smart as yourself.

[KrazyHorse]

I don't particularly care how you learn them. But if you don't know them then explaining these concepts to you is like trying to explain Shakespeare's plays to somebody with no language.

[KrazyHorse]

Knowledge is a staircase. You can't start halfway up.

[Jon Miller]

Originally posted by KrazyHorse

"Normal" people cannot understand this stuff at any but the simplest level. They have neither the intelligence nor the knowledge base to understand modern physics in any meaningful way. Simplification down to the level at which they can understand renders it meaningless. The drivel you've been spouting is adequate demonstration of that.

This is something which I strongly agree with.

JM

[Ned]

I'd like to see this said at the next hearing for NASA science funding. It will really impress Congress and the American people.

[Jon Miller]

Doesn't make it any less true.

JM

[notyoueither]

Empty your PMs, Jon Miller.

[Jon Miller]

Done.

JM

[Ned]

Well, Jon, the next time I hear any request for funding of a science project, I know where my vote will lie. Your and KN attitudues about non physicists is nothing less than appalling.

[Jon Miller]

I don't feel that physicists are better than non physicists... just that you can't understand physics (the hard stuff). I mean, there is a reason why we study for decades... and we are smarter than average.

JM

[Ned]

Bull. It is your attitude about non physicists and explaining things that is way over the top and beyond the pale.

I can tell you that you have created an enemy.

[KrazyHorse]

Originally posted by Ned
I'd like to see this said at the next hearing for NASA science funding. It will really impress Congress and the American people.

What's your point? I'm not a salesman.