Can critical thinking explain why we are here?

[KrazyHorse]

On the other hand, if the universe goes thru cyclical bangs and crunches then variations in the background radiation could be caused by a new universe expanding into (and over) the still in-falling material of the prior universe.

What the hell makes you think that any of this makes any sense whatsoever?

First, I said "might".

The "might" was applied to your hypothesis, not to the need for a hypothesis

Second, the only other explanation I've heard is that the "singularity" or whatever you wanna call that point before the bang was not uniform, or that uniformity did not exist as the universe began expanding. What caused that?

Quantum mechanics, of course.

Why didn't you just ask the question first instead of engaging in wild-ass speculation with somebody else who has absolutely no actual knowledge or understanding of cosmology?

[Berzerker]

What the hell makes you think that any of this makes any sense whatsoever?

Makes sense to me... If we had a flame thrower uniformly shooting fire outward (our expanding universe) with matchbooks placed at varying distances (in-falling mat'l from the prior universe) we would see variations in the amount of heat being released.

The "might" was applied to your hypothesis, not to the need for a hypothesis

"Might" does not exclude other possible explanations

Quantum mechanics, of course.

Why didn't you just ask the question first instead of engaging in wild-ass speculation with somebody else who has absolutely no actual knowledge or understanding of cosmology?

I already knew about that possible explanation.

[KrazyHorse]

Makes sense to me... If we had a flame thrower uniformly shooting fire outward (our expanding universe) with matchbooks placed at varying distances (in-falling mat'l from the prior universe) we would see variations in the amount of heat being released.

a) There's no such thing as "outwards". The universe expands space. It does not expand IN space

b) You can't have two "universes" overlapping

[KrazyHorse]

"Might" does not exclude other possible explanations

There's no "might" here. Pixie dust "might" explain lightning.

I already knew about that possible explanation.

Then why are you making up nonsense when a perfectly reasonable explanation exists and is generally accepted? That quantum fields lead to density perturbations is an observed FACT.

[KrazyHorse]

I like listening to people who, in all likelihood, couldn't analytically think their way through a sliding block problem bloviate on cosmology.

[DaShi]

I believe that the universe is funnel-shaped like a giant megaphone. On the tapered end is God shouting orders at the top of his lungs. On the other end is a single tree not listening. Deep!

[Berzerker]

Makes sense to me... If we had a flame thrower uniformly shooting fire outward (our expanding universe) with matchbooks placed at varying distances (in-falling mat'l from the prior universe) we would see variations in the amount of heat being released.

a) There's no such thing as "outwards". The universe expands space/energy. It does not expand IN space

b) You can't have two "universes" overlapping

a) it was a metaphor Einstein, "outward" is merely the expanding universe after the big bang. How did you miss the reference in ()?

b) why not? And the new universe would be absorbing the old one, like the mat'l that hadn't reached the point of the big bang.

"Might" does not exclude other possible explanations

There's no "might" here. Pixie dust "might" explain lightning.

And you can prove quantum mechanics caused variations in the background radiation? Go right ahead...

I already knew about that possible explanation.

Then why are you making up nonsense when a perfectly reasonable explanation exists and is generally accepted? That quantum fields lead to density perturbations is an observed FACT.

It aint an observed FACT before or shortly after the big bang.

I like listening to people who, in all likelihood, couldn't analytically think their way through a sliding block problem bloviate on cosmology.

Your analytical thinking accused rape victims of intruding upon their attackers by resisting. I guess I cant let that go, every time you spout off about how brilliant you are and how dumb we are, I'll be there with that gem of wisdom straight from your fingertips. That was one of the dumbest things I've ever read at Poly and it came from you.

here ya go

http://scienceline.org/2008/07/09/physics-heger-bigbang/

This is kinda what I had in mind even though he doesn't get into the variations in background radiation.

[Dinner]

"Might" does not exclude other possible explanations

There's no "might" here. Pixie dust "might" explain lightning.

I personally prefer fairie dust to pixie dust.

[KrazyHorse]

There's no such thing as "outwards". The universe expands space/energy. It does not expand IN space

You "edited" my quote. I said that the universe expanded space. I said nothing about energy. Please refrain from taking things I say which are correct and changing them so that they are nonsense

it was a metaphor Einstein, "outward" is merely the expanding universe after the big bang. How did you miss the reference in ()?

A metaphor? Your "metaphor" DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING BECAUSE IT MAKES NO SENSE TO ANYBODY WHO ACTUALLY KNOWS GENERAL RELATIVITY. You can't discuss cosmology in "metaphors", you imbecile.

why not? And the new universe would be absorbing the old one, like the mat'l that hadn't reached the point of the big bang.

BECAUSE THERE IS ONLY ONE METRIC AT EVERY POINT IN SPACETIME.

It aint an observed FACT before or shortly after the big bang.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.

Your analytical thinking accused rape victims of intruding upon their attackers by resisting. I guess I cant let that go, every time you spout off about how brilliant you are and how dumb we are, I'll be there with that gem of wisdom straight from your fingertips. That was one of the dumbest things I've ever read at Poly and it came from you.

It wasn't "intrude" it was "imposing their will". Dumbass. And it's still true.

here ya go

http://scienceline.org/2008/07/09/ph...heger-bigbang/

This is kinda what I had in mind even though he doesn't get into the variations in background radiation.

I have no idea what you think this has to do with what you were saying.

[KrazyHorse]

Oh, and I usually don't describe myself as brilliant. Most of the time I insult the intelligence of others instead of talking up my own.

Let me break it to you: you are literally so stupid that it hurts my mind to think about it. I don't think this makes me smart.

Universes "running into each other" during an expansion/contraction "outward"/"inward"

[KrazyHorse]

You're just like every other 1 sigma reject who's mildly smarter than the mongoloids he has to work with every day, and who thus develops an overinflated sense of his own capabilities. You have neither the knowledge, the intelligence or the discipline of thought to understand IN ANY WAY modern cosmology. You've already managed to make a fool of yourself many times over in this discussion.

I'm glad you're around, though. It provides a little comic relief while I work.

[Berzerker]

There's no such thing as "outwards". The universe expands space/energy. It does not expand IN space

You "edited" my quote. I said that the universe expanded space. I said nothing about energy. Please refrain from taking things I say which are correct and changing them so that they are nonsense

sorry, did energy expand with it?

it was a metaphor Einstein, "outward" is merely the expanding universe after the big bang. How did you miss the reference in ()?

A metaphor? Your "metaphor" DOESN'T MEAN ANYTHING BECAUSE IT MAKES NO SENSE TO ANYBODY WHO ACTUALLY KNOWS GENERAL RELATIVITY. You can't discuss cosmology in "metaphors", you imbecile.

You didn't answer the question. And it makes perfect sense to me.

why not? And the new universe would be absorbing the old one, like the mat'l that hadn't reached the point of the big bang.

BECAUSE THERE IS ONLY ONE METRIC AT EVERY POINT IN SPACETIME.

In layman's terms?

It aint an observed FACT before or shortly after the big bang.

I have no idea what this is supposed to mean.

It means we cannot observe quantum mechanics before the big bang

Your analytical thinking accused rape victims of intruding upon their attackers by resisting. I guess I cant let that go, every time you spout off about how brilliant you are and how dumb we are, I'll be there with that gem of wisdom straight from your fingertips. That was one of the dumbest things I've ever read at Poly and it came from you.

It wasn't "intrude" it was "imposing their will". Dumbass. And it's still true.

The word impose means to intrude...

a. to thrust oneself offensively upon others; intrude.

see?

here ya go

http://scienceline.org/2008/07/09/ph...heger-bigbang/

This is kinda what I had in mind even though he doesn't get into the variations in background radiation.

I have no idea what you think this has to do with what you were saying.

Its a theory that says our universe was preceded by another universe that collapsed to form our big bang (bounce). My spin on it is the bounce began before all the mat'l from the prior universe had joined the "singularity".

Oh, and I usually don't describe myself as brilliant. Most of the time I insult the intelligence of others instead of talking up my own.

Thats nice, but we know you dont behave like that in person

Let me break it to you: you are literally so stupid that it hurts my mind to think about it. I don't think this makes me smart.

Universes "running into each other" during an expansion/contraction "outward"/"inward"

or you'd end up with a broken body... The stench of hypocrisy coming from you would repel starving vultures.

[MattBowron]

actually berserker the Big Bounce theory, says that when universes collapse in upon itself (Big Crunch) the energy becomes infinite, to the breaking point that it simply bounces back from itself and becomes a Big Bang (inflating universe). A similar example would be how when a cooling star collapses upon itself the resulting supernova is created from material bouncing off the internal exploding core.

One theory which has multiple Big Bangs happening and overlapping is in Superstring Theory, also known as String Theory. In Brian Greene's hypothesis, Big Bang's happen when two universes collide against one another, stimulating the energy inside.

[KrazyHorse]

You didn't answer the question. And it makes perfect sense to me.

a) I have no urge to attempt to educate you. It would be an exercise in futility.

b) It only makes sense to you because you don't actually know anything.

In layman's terms?

General relativity in layman's terms?

The word impose means to intrude...

a. to thrust oneself offensively upon others; intrude.

see?

See what, you maroon?

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/impose

The discussion where this was brought up was one where you claimed that your particular brand of lolbertarianism came about from some simple, self-evident principles. Particularly, that nobody was to be allowed to impose his will on others. If you're going to take the sense of "impose" which carries moral connotations then you've just managed to create a tautology. The fact that I have to explain this in detail demonstrates what a ridiculous person you are.

More after the jump...

[Berzerker]

actually berserker the Big Bounce theory, says that when universes collapse in upon itself (Big Crunch) the energy becomes infinite, to the breaking point that it simply bounces back from itself and becomes a Big Bang (inflating universe).

From my link

“The repulsive forces would stop the complete collapse and also turn it around into an expansion,” Bojowald said, effectively preventing temperature and density from approaching infinity."

Course thats just one theory, there appear to be a few related to the idea.

A similar example would be how when a cooling star collapses upon itself the resulting supernova is created from material bouncing off the internal exploding core.

and the mat'l nearby would be consumed while leaving behind variations in the radiation?

One theory which has multiple Big Bangs happening and overlapping is in Superstring Theory, also known as String Theory. In Brian Greene's hypothesis, Big Bang's happen when two universes collide against one another, stimulating the energy inside.

I'll check it out