Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: New Physics Theory Questions The Big Bang: How Did Our Universe Really Begin?

  1. #1
    Veteran Member wvwvw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Last Online
    03-02-2024 @ 11:38 PM
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Homo neogrecous
    Ethnicity
    Yes
    Country
    Japan
    Region
    Acadia
    mtDNA
    H
    Politics
    oh look. the curve is flattening.
    Age
    36
    Gender
    Posts
    31,839
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 2,431
    Given: 241

    1 Not allowed!

    Default New Physics Theory Questions The Big Bang: How Did Our Universe Really Begin?

    New Physics Theory Questions The Big Bang: How Did Our Universe Really Begin?
    August 9, 2018
    Collective Evolution



    Popular writer and scholar Graham Hancock once said that we’re like a species with amnesia, and it’s true, the origins of the human race, and the universe is supposedly unknown to us. But it’s human nature to question things, and as a result, we’ve developed a few theories that despite being pushed as fact within the mainstream educational realm, they’re not scientifically sound in several ways and actually appear to be very weak. The theory of evolution is one great example, and the big bang is another.

    The big bang theory suggests that everything in existence results from one event that sparked the creation of physical matter and that everything in our entire universe, and in existence as we know it, was part of a single, infinitely dense point, also known as the “singularity.” Scientists estimate that it occurred approximately 13 billions of years ago, which created ‘cosmic inflation’ milliseconds afterwards.

    The theory has come under a tremendous amount of scrutiny over the years, almost to the point where it should be deemed false, or at the very least, admit that our universe, other universes and also dimensions, have resulted from something far greater and perhaps more complex than our ‘intelligent’ explanation.

    There are numerous examples that span scientific literature for several years. For example, the cover story of the April 2011 edition of Scientific American included the article, “Quantum Gaps in Big Bang Theory: Why Our Best Explanation of How the Universe Evolved Must Be Fixed – or Replaced.”

    As Jim Mars points out, in his, “Our Occulted History.”

    “In the article, Paul J. Steinhardt, director of Princeton University’s Center for Theoretical Science, pointed out that astrophysicists have left a number of problems with the theory unresolved, stating that “the case against the Big Bang theory challenges the logical foundations of the theory. Does the theory really work as advertised? Are the predictions made in the early 1980’s still the predictions of the inflationary model as we understand it today? There is an argument to be made that the answer to both questions is no.”

    Numerous discoveries have come to light when it comes to examining the nature of our reality, and we now know, through quantum physics, that consciousness has a direct relationship with what we regard as physical material matter. We also have evidence which suggests that consciousness might not be a product of our brain, and can exist without the physical body. On the other hand, we have no evidence that shows consciousness is a direct byproduct of the brain.

    Research in quantum physics and parapsychology has also seen quantum phenomenon occur at classical physical scales, which is also very interesting. One example in itself would be how consciousness can influence physical material reality, but also real world, documented examples of people with special abilities who are about to influence matter with their mind.

    This also brings up huge questions with regards to consciousness, does it come before matter, or after matter? Is consciousness required for the creation of matter, and, if it is, what does that say about the big bang theory? The fact that the origins of our universe might have a non-physical, non-material origin, which is being shown by science, is simply hard for many to accept.

    I regard consciousness as fundamental. I regard matter as derivative from consciousness. We cannot get behind consciousness. Everything that we talk about, everything that we regard as existing, postulates consciousness.” – Max Planck, the originator of quantum theory (source)

    It’s not only the connection between quantum physics and our physical material world but what we once thought was nothing, is actually something.

    No point is more central than this, that space is not empty, it is the seat of the most violent physics – John Wheeler

    The fact of the matter is, space is not empty, and it’s full of energy. What we once thought was nothing, is not, and this is no longer trivial in the world of physics. How much energy? According to Nassim Haramein, “there’s a lot of it and we can actually calculate how much energy there is in that space and that reality might actually come out of it. Everything we see is actually emerging from that space.

    Now we know that there is the possibility that matter is formed from this void, from this ’empty space,’ it’s one of many examples where ancient knowledge is coming together with modern-day science. We see this with quantum physics, neuroscience, Buddhism and other sects of ancient eastern philosophy.

    Idham thadhakshare parame vyoman

    This is from ancient Vedic scripture, and it means “the aakaash is not destructible, it is the primordial absolute substratum that creates cosmic matter and hence it is:

    The Aakash is not destructible, it is the primordial absolute substratum that creates cosmic matter and hence it is:

    Parame vyoman

    “The aakaash is the eternally existent, superfluid reality, for which creation and destruction and inapplicable.”

    This “aakaash” has been written about since the beginning of time, which again, is super interesting given the fact that in this day in age, we can actually detect it!

    We’ll get to that later…

    Mainstream science and education, or those who create it, continue to hide this from our textbooks, in the same way, they don’t teach students about Nikola Tesla…

    All perceptible matter comes from a primary substance, or tenuity beyond conception, filling all space, the akasha or luminiferous ether, which is acted upon by the life-giving Prana or creative force, calling into existence, in never-ending cycles all things and phenomena – Nikola Tesla, Man’s Greatest Achievement, 1907.

    This is one of my favourite examples from antiquity, although there are several:

    And they allowed Apollonius to ask questions; and he asked them of what they thought the cosmos was composed; but they replied; “Of elements.” “Are there then four?” he asked. “Not four,” said Larchas, “but five.” “And how can there be a fifth,” said Apollonius, “alongside of water and air and earth and fire?” “There is the ether,” replied the other, “which we must regard as the stuff of which gods are made; for just as all mortal creatures inhale the wire, so do immortal and divine natures inhale the ether.” “Am I,” said Appollonius, “to regard the universe as a living creature?” “Yes,” said the other. – The Life of Apollonius of Tyana, Philostratus, 220AD (source)

    Related CE Article: How Vedic Philosophy Influenced Nikola Tesla’s Idea of “Free Energy.”

    The most recent discovery in this field comes from the late Paramahamsa Tewari, the former Project Director of the Kaiga Atomic Power Project, and retired Executive Nuclear Director, Nuclear Power Corporation, in the Department of Atomic Energy in India. He recently published a paper in Physics Essays titled “structural relation between the Vacuum Space and The Electron. You can access the full study here.

    The study discusses how this non-material superfluid, also discussed by the ancients, is the makeup of space, also known as the vacuum. It’s incompressible, non-material, massless and not perceivable to the human senses, and it can pose a steady flow varying from zero to light velocity.

    This paper presents a formulation of Absolute principles for vacuum-space that enable revealing the process of creation of a stable electron and its known properties of mass and charge. Fundamental questions on the electron’s charge and mass are derived from first principles from the vacuum vortex of the electron’s structure. Also, generation of electrostatic, electromagnetic, and gravitational fields are shown to arise from the vacuum vortex structure of the electron. The electron and positron have been pinpointed to be the fundamental particles of matter.

    So basically, the matter is created within these pockets of “empty space” which exists from space.

    What’s even more shocking is that Tewari has developed an electrical generator that proves the theory, and it’s over-unity (free energy). A prototype of the machine was built and tested by Kirloskar Electric, a manufacturer of electrical generators in India. There, it exhibited 165 % efficiency (over-unity).

    Below is a picture with, from right, Paramahamsa Tewari, Executive Director Nuclear Power Corporation, Ret., Murlidhar Rao, Technical Director, Karnataka Power Corporation, Ret., Chief Engineer, electrical engineer, a mechanical engineer. From Left, Vice President of Kirloskar Rotating Machines Group, General Manager Hubli facility.

    Below is a Discussion of test results during the filming of AUS DEM NICHTS (Out of the Void), with the device in the Kirloskar facility.





    The information listed above is a tidbit of information on why the Big Bang theory isn’t really a sufficient explanation for the creation of matter. This ‘void’ seems to be, and we actually have the ancient knowledge and theoretical physics by real-life experimental demonstrations, like the machine above. These are concepts that are being published in physics journals all over the world.

    One study even suggests that the universe has no beginning, which again, correlates to the information above, stating that this ether or ‘Akash’ do not fit in the same category of creation or destruction, meaning that creation and destruction are inapplicable to the Akash, which is definitely hard to wrap your head around.

    The theory also suggested as Tewari has for years, that there are no singularities or dark matter, and that the universe is filled with a “quantum fluid,” which is itself filled with gravitons, According to Phys.org:

    The scientists propose that this fluid might be composed of gravitons—hypothetical massless particles that mediate the force of gravity. If they exist, gravitons are thought to play a key role in a theory of quantum gravity.

    “A century from now, it will be well-known that: the vacuum of space which fills the universe is itself the real substratum of the universe; vacuum in a circulating state becomes matter; the electron is the fundamental particle of matter and is a vortex of vacuum with a vacuum-less void at the center and it is dynamically stable; the speed of light relative to vacuum is the maximum speed that nature has provided and is an inherent property of the vacuum; vacuum is a subtle fluid unknown in material media; vacuum is mass-less, continuous, non viscous, and incompressible and is responsible for all the properties of matter; and that vacuum has always existed and will exist forever….Then, scientists, engineers and philosophers will bend their heads in shame knowing that modern science ignored the vacuum in our chase to discover reality for more than a century.” – Tewari

    If all this IS, then how can the big bang theory hold true? Perhaps there is a lot we are missing…

    Huge Implications

    “Ether has got to be, once again, established, then there will be the meaningful understanding of physics, meaningful understanding of metaphysics, and meaningful understanding of spiritual processes”
    – Tewari (source)

    Just like anything else, this information has indeed been suppressed, in various forms, but it’s slowly creeping into the mainstream, and the acknowledgment of these machines, and this science in general, which goes way beyond just energy generating devices…

    As you can see above, science is now confirming the spiritual realms…

    According to Sir James Jeans: “the stream of knowledge is heading towards a non-mechanical reality; the Universe begins to look more like a great thought than like a great machine. Mind no longer appears to be an accidental intruder into the realm of matter… we ought rather hail it as the creator and governor of the realm of matter.”…The Universe is immaterial — mental and spiritual/” Richard Conn Henry, Professor in Department of Physics and Astronomy, The Johns Hopkins University (source)

    Once the world accepts this, and if it does, it means a complete paradigm shift with regards to the perception of reality. This has happened multiple times, our laws of science were made to be broken, Einstein’s paper on special relativity is one example, the Earth not being flat anymore, is another…

    Non-material science, in general, has huge implications, we are at the beginning of the next scientific revolution.

    Today, this work is breaking long-held science beliefs that have now turned into dogma, but what we think we know is always changing. Take Lord Kelvin, for example, who stated in 1900 that there is nothing new to be discovered in physics and that all which remains is more and more precise measurement. This assertion was shattered only five years later when Einstein published his paper on special relativity.

  2. #2
    Banned
    Join Date
    Apr 2013
    Last Online
    @
    Location
    Seville
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Celtiberian
    Ethnicity
    Andalusian from Seville
    Country
    Spain
    Taxonomy
    Grazilmediterranid
    Politics
    Autocratic
    Hero
    René Descartes
    Religion
    Cartesian
    Relationship Status
    Single
    Age
    38
    Gender
    Posts
    8,845
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 6,241
    Given: 7,078

    1 Not allowed!

    Default

    In formulating a theory of the universe the prominent scientists usually mix quantum physics with philosophy/buddhism/hinduism/consciousness/and science-of-mind into the equation.

    It's Idealism vs Materialism. Materialists believe that an actually material world out there exists outside of our perceptions, while Idealists tend to believe that Mind creates Matter (Berkeley/Descartes/&Solipsism). Quantum Physics proves that an external world outside one's senses only exists when a mind is there to perceive it. Then what is the purpose of life?--They say it's akin to an HD video game, a game for pure entertainment in other words; Imagine you are "IT"...'God' who's gotten bored with his omnipotent powers, so he channeled into a finite human being on this earth with limited power to crucially let himself play an active part in the game, cuz being able to do whatever you want with your infinite unlimited powers can get mighty boring indeed perhaps. It's the best theory the most prominent minds of humanity can conjure, and I think it's an awesome theory.




    Last edited by Iloko; 08-09-2018 at 07:18 PM.

  3. #3
    Resident Gadfly
    Apricity Funding Member
    "Friend of Apricity"

    sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Canadian
    Country
    Canada
    Gender
    Posts
    3,674
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 7,096
    Given: 24,273

    2 Not allowed!

    Default

    The Big Bang is literally Edwin Hubble's explanation for the apparent centrality of the earth within the cosmos because the truth was "unthinkable". And now the theory has been thrown into question after scientists discovered a star which appears to be older than the universe itself.

    The whole theory is built on faulty assumptions. There are many observations which contradict these assumptions, yet this establishment of "academically important" people suppress those who speak up about it. Halton Arp being the prime example.

    Many physicists believe that our universe is actually infinite in size, but the truth of the matter depends on the overall shape of spacetime. We are seriously hindered by the laws of physics, as far as how much we can see of the universe is concerned.

    There are still too many outstanding problems in the Standard Model, and history as shown that outstanding problems usually don't just get bandaids, they pull the rug out from the whole theory. Like classical mechanics worked for 99.99% of everything people knew except a few exceptions. Those couple of exceptions turned out to lead to quantum mechanics and general relativity, which give completely different descriptions of the universe than classical mechanics. And a complete description of quantum gravity or the answer to matter/antimatter asymmetry is probably once again going to be a theory that tells us everything we thought we knew is retarded.

    According to Electric Universe theory (which is basically pseudoscience), the universe has always existed and the stars are constantly feeling on each other with their electric fields. It also goes further to explain why galaxies don't fly apart when gravity is too weak to hold everything together. No dark matter, no dark energy, just a lot of electromagnetism holding everything in place.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dorian View Post
    We GrecoRomansIberians once did the mistake of civilizing these cave-dwellers ,I suggest we make an alliance with muslims to accelerate their takeover
    Quote Originally Posted by renaissance12 View Post
    Scandinavia is not Europe
    Quote Originally Posted by Mortimer View Post
    It's OK to date girls 16+ they are not children remember the old song 'sweet sixteen'
    Quote Originally Posted by Tooting Carmen View Post
    Whites are often jealous of Blacks for their athleticism, creative talent and sexual prowess.

  4. #4
    Insufferable by many Apricity Funding Member
    "Friend of Apricity"


    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    -
    Country
    Antarctica
    Politics
    Bros over hoes
    Gender
    Posts
    18,407
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 11,167
    Given: 13,531

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sean View Post
    The Big Bang is literally Edwin Hubble's explanation for the apparent centrality of the earth within the cosmos because the truth was "unthinkable". And now the theory has been thrown into question after scientists discovered a star which appears to be older than the universe itself.

    The whole theory is built on faulty assumptions. There are many observations which contradict these assumptions, yet this establishment of "academically important" people suppress those who speak up about it. Halton Arp being the prime example.

    Many physicists believe that our universe is actually infinite in size, but the truth of the matter depends on the overall shape of spacetime. We are seriously hindered by the laws of physics, as far as how much we can see of the universe is concerned.

    There are still too many outstanding problems in the Standard Model, and history as shown that outstanding problems usually don't just get bandaids, they pull the rug out from the whole theory. Like classical mechanics worked for 99.99% of everything people knew except a few exceptions. Those couple of exceptions turned out to lead to quantum mechanics and general relativity, which give completely different descriptions of the universe than classical mechanics. And a complete description of quantum gravity or the answer to matter/antimatter asymmetry is probably once again going to be a theory that tells us everything we thought we knew is retarded.

    According to Electric Universe theory (which is basically pseudoscience), the universe has always existed and the stars are constantly feeling on each other with their electric fields. It also goes further to explain why galaxies don't fly apart when gravity is too weak to hold everything together. No dark matter, no dark energy, just a lot of electromagnetism holding everything in place.
    The Big Bang model nowadays goes much much deeper than Hubble's observations.

    There is some discrepancy between stellar astrophysics (which is also complemented by the Big Bang theory) and cosmology. And to go even further there are discrepancies within those very fields of science themselves. Even before analysis of that star there were stars that appeared older than the age of the Universe according to cosmological models. With the discovery of dark energy (accelerated expansion) model was tweaked and the age of the Universe according to cosmology was pushed to 13.8 billion years. The problem with the cosmological model is that not much is known about dark matter (does it exist or not), dark energy etc. There is almost no scientist today who is against the Big Bang Theory, but many do believe that the correct underlying physical model is needed than some radically different theory itself. There are just too many observations that support it. Nobody expects that it will explain everything just like the quantum theory you mentioned didn't immediately explain everything, but was worked on for decades and just like nobody stopped using classic physics there is no reason to think that the Big Bang theory is wrong.

    You think that the Universe is eternal? Or that it is much older or much younger?
    Last edited by Insuperable; 01-01-2021 at 05:45 PM.

  5. #5
    Resident Gadfly
    Apricity Funding Member
    "Friend of Apricity"

    sean's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2019
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    Anglo-Canadian
    Country
    Canada
    Gender
    Posts
    3,674
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 7,096
    Given: 24,273

    1 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Insuperable View Post
    The Big Bang model nowadays goes much much deeper than Hubble's observations. There is some discrepancy between stellar astrophysics (which is also complemented by the Big Bang theory) and cosmology. And to go even further there are discrepancies within those very fields of science themselves. Even before analysis of that star there were stars that appeared older than the age of the Universe according to cosmological models. With the discovery of dark energy (accelerated expansion) model was tweaked and the age of the Universe according to cosmology was pushed to 13.8 billion years. The problem with the cosmological model is that not much is known about dark matter (does it exist or not), dark energy etc.
    Yes, we don't know for sure what came prior to the universe' "focus point" 13.8-ish billion years ago. There are many theories, but until there is better evidence we can only make suggestions based on the standard model of physics.

    Physicists believe that at least 70 percent of the universe's energy is in the form of dark energy, because it is supported by many different observations of the universe, but it's still deeply mysterious. Only around 5 percent of the universe consists of the matter that we can see. We know that it permeates through everything, and huge swathes of the universe are made up of it, though that’s about it.

    Or maybe the dark matter and dark energy explanations are incorrect, and an entirely new theory is needed. But it would have to explain everything we see better than the current theory before physicists will adopt it. Even so, it’s incredible to think that we may know very little about 95 percent of the universe.

    The "Big Bang" theory is based on the concept that the universe is only everything that we can see. But we know that it is most likely that the vast majority of the universe exists beyond our ability to see it, which would mean our model of understanding the universe is flawed and that the Big Bang theory is incorrect.

    Quote Originally Posted by Insuperable View Post
    There is almost no scientist today who is against the Big Bang Theory, but many do believe that the correct underlying physical model is needed than some radically different theory itself. There are just too many observations that support it. Nobody expects that it will explain everything just like the quantum theory you mentioned didn't immediately explain everything, but was worked on for decades and just like nobody stopped using classic physics there is no reason to think that the Big Bang theory is wrong.
    But the two theories are incompatible. We can’t explain gravity in a way that makes sense with quantum mechanics, and general relativity does not include the effects of quantum mechanics. As far as we can tell, both theories are correct. But they do not seem to work together.

    The Big Bang is just an attempt to understand the Universe from a limited data base and is only valid from the perspective of the observable facts available. Having said that observations from that perspective show we are simply viewing the Universe incompletely. Imagine that which is only one slice of the essence.

    Much in the way that when say an orange is viewed from the perspective of one slice. This partially explains why folks who come back from the other side of a black hole come back as a slice of the whole that is different from the one they left. Basically shit just gets mixed up. There is not yet a complete physics either physical or metaphysical to describe the essence. As of today approximately 14 slices of the orange has been examined, partially.

    Quote Originally Posted by Insuperable View Post
    You think that the Universe is eternal? Or that it is much older or much younger?
    I think our universe exists inside a higher dimensional space, with more dimensions than our universe has, and in this higher dimensional space what we call 'time' flows in both directions, backward and forward, the past effecting the future and the future effecting the past.

    People thought the universe was static and eternal, they were wrong. People thought the Big Bang expansion would slow, reverse, repeat and they were wrong. People thought the universe was really a multiverse that was past eternal, they were wrong. Now people think the parent universe is an eternal donut that produces non-eternal universes, it can't be proven right or wrong.
    Quote Originally Posted by Dorian View Post
    We GrecoRomansIberians once did the mistake of civilizing these cave-dwellers ,I suggest we make an alliance with muslims to accelerate their takeover
    Quote Originally Posted by renaissance12 View Post
    Scandinavia is not Europe
    Quote Originally Posted by Mortimer View Post
    It's OK to date girls 16+ they are not children remember the old song 'sweet sixteen'
    Quote Originally Posted by Tooting Carmen View Post
    Whites are often jealous of Blacks for their athleticism, creative talent and sexual prowess.

  6. #6
    High on life and drunk on knowledge
    Apricity Funding Member
    "Friend of Apricity"

    PaleoEuropean's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2019
    Last Online
    05-02-2022 @ 05:30 PM
    Location
    A trailer
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Ascended Nubian Pharaoh
    Ethnicity
    Canned Fried Chicken
    Ancestry
    Black and Bold
    Country
    United States
    Region
    Aboriginal
    Y-DNA
    E1b1N1GA
    mtDNA
    Nubian
    Taxonomy
    Black Israelite
    Politics
    Ham Sandwich
    Hero
    Elvis
    Religion
    Ham Sandwich Gang
    Relationship Status
    Married to Cousin
    Age
    69
    Gender
    Posts
    17,325
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 21,067
    Given: 39,632

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    This is my own theory: The universe was created over trillions of years from a series of little bangs. Matter would have most likely built up in the form of crystalized carbon (diamond, graphite etc) creating micro electrical fields until it grew and grew creating larger and more extreme reactions until there was enough matter, time and conditions to create life bearing masses.
    Those who want to live, let them fight, and those who do not want to fight in this world of eternal struggle do not deserve to live.

    Even if this were hard--that is how it is ! Assuredly, however, by far the harder fate is that which strikes the man who thinks he can overcome Nature, but in the last analysis only mocks her. Distress, misfortune, and diseases are her answer.

    Kekgenes K13

    1 Swahili+ Jew + Kekistani + Trailerparkistan @ 6.9420

    M.T.A
    Celt + Frank (4.869)
    Viking Icelandic + Frank (5.463)
    Viking Icelandic + Celt (5.545)
    Celt + Saxon (5.789)
    Viking Danish + Celt (6.283)
    Celt (6.539)
    Frank (10.13)
    Viking Icelandic (10.34)
    Viking Danish (10.4)
    Saxon (10.79)

    kit 2
    Celt + Belgae (4.016)
    Viking Danish + Belgae (5.555)
    Belgae + Frank (5.797)
    Celt + Frank (6.031)
    Celt (6.297)
    Viking Danish + Celt (6.441)
    Belgae (8.662)
    Viking Danish (8.925)
    Frank (9.409)
    Saxon (10.83)

  7. #7
    Insufferable by many Apricity Funding Member
    "Friend of Apricity"


    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Last Online
    @
    Ethnicity
    -
    Country
    Antarctica
    Politics
    Bros over hoes
    Gender
    Posts
    18,407
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 11,167
    Given: 13,531

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by sean View Post
    Yes, we don't know for sure what came prior to the universe' "focus point" 13.8-ish billion years ago. There are many theories, but until there is better evidence we can only make suggestions based on the standard model of physics

    Or maybe the dark matter and dark energy explanations are incorrect, and an entirely new theory is needed. But it would have to explain everything we see better than the current theory before physicists will adopt it. Even so, it’s incredible to think that we may know very little about 95 percent of the universe.
    The existence or dark matter and dark energy doesn't validate or invalidate the Big Bang hypothesis.

    The "Big Bang" theory is based on the concept that the universe is only everything that we can see. But we know that it is most likely that the vast majority of the universe exists beyond our ability to see it, which would mean our model of understanding the universe is flawed and that the Big Bang theory is incorrect.
    The Big Bang theory is based on many concepts and what you wrote has little to do about it. Indeed, nobody disputes that it is very much likely that the vast majority of the Universe exists beyond our ability to see it because of the cosmic visibility limit, and there shouldn't be a reason for it to make the Big Bang theory incorrect. Even some data (nothing definitely conclusive) indicates that the Universe may be infinite beyond the observable Universe.

    But the two theories are incompatible. We can’t explain gravity in a way that makes sense with quantum mechanics, and general relativity does not include the effects of quantum mechanics. As far as we can tell, both theories are correct. But they do not seem to work together.
    They are not incompatible, they are just currently incompatible. Special relativity is already merged with the quantum mechanics and general theory doesn't make any attempt to merge with quantum theory. It is up to quantum theorists to do that. Anyway, I wasn't talking specifically about quantum theory and general relativity, but about quantum physics in general and there is no reason to bring thar up just because it is still worked on.

    To repeat, my point was that nobody threw classical physics out of window when quantum theory was developed. It has its uses and some of it is ingrained within quantum theory. The current standard model of cosmology (not physics in general) has to be upgraded and not thrown out of window in order to pursue some radically different theory when there is no reason to do that.

    The age of star you mentioned is calculated using stellar astrophysical models and not using cosmological models. Usually the former is seen as less accurate not that the latter is considered much more accurate.
    The current standard model of cosmology is the lambda-CDM model and nobody thinks it is not subject to change or upgrade.

    Hubble constant is usually measured to be from 67 to 734 km/s/Mpar. The measurements of Hubble constant are either independent of models mentioned above or done in accordance with them. And in either way there is some disparity even within all of them (for example two different type measurements of the thing not related to any model) because of which this is in part a focus of modern astronomy and astrophysics.
    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...lambda.html#c1

    The Hubble constant is taken to be 71 km/s/Mpar which leads to 13.8 billion years of age.
    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...ro/hubble.html

    As you can see, one team, as it is written in the last link, measured the Hubble constant to be 67.66 km/s/Mpar as part of lambda-CDM model which would imply the Universe to be older than 13.8 billion years. Plus the age of star that was measured using stellar astrophysics is 14.5 billion years +/- 0.8 billion years which makes it still fall within the accepted age. It is surprising how two different models come to relatively close conclusions.

    Lambda-CDM equation for the Hubble constant is actually an equation containing measured parameters for dark matter, dark energy and other factors which if I am not mistaken somewhat vary from experiment to experiment like is cases above. Even if dark matter doesn't exist its parameter may be replaced with some parameter from modified gravities and going even further, the very model and equation with it should be revisited, as is the opinion of leading scientists.

    Now people think the parent universe is an eternal donut that produces non-eternal universes, it can't be proven right or wrong
    What specifically are you talking about? Eternal torus shaped Universe that produced non-eternal universes? First time hear about it.

  8. #8
    Senior Member
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Last Online
    Today @ 05:52 PM
    Meta-Ethnicity
    Celtic
    Ethnicity
    Paddy
    Gender
    Posts
    364
    Thumbs Up
    Received: 129
    Given: 518

    0 Not allowed!

    Default

    Look up the thunderbolts project on youtube. They proclaim the universe to be electric in nature and have over 700 videos. Very interesting stuff and they give evidence such as dinosaurs not being able to live on today's earth and why it's not because of less oxygen as some people say but because gravity that has changed.

Thread Information

Users Browsing this Thread

There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)

Similar Threads

  1. Replies: 2
    Last Post: 12-29-2017, 06:49 PM
  2. The Big Bang Theory! Do you believe it? Poll!
    By Petros Agapetos in forum Science
    Replies: 15
    Last Post: 01-16-2017, 04:06 AM
  3. Big Bang Theory
    By CelticViking in forum Film, TV and Music
    Replies: 9
    Last Post: 03-12-2012, 07:58 PM
  4. The Universe - Beyond the Big Bang
    By The Lawspeaker in forum Astronomy
    Replies: 0
    Last Post: 11-01-2011, 10:25 PM
  5. Replies: 4
    Last Post: 05-20-2010, 05:17 PM

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •