• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Pre-Big Bang

Moot said:
That's funny, because you sound just like a science denier. But that's your problem, not mine.
Click to expand...

Science deniers adamantly support using peer reviewed articles and research papers rather than click bait journalism?
 
Questerr said:
I’m not a physicist. And again, I’d love to see some actual peer reviewed research on the topic. No one has presented any as of yet.
Click to expand...

I'm not a physicist either. That's why I trust the physicists to make valid theories and not chatters in a forum room.
 
watsup said:
I'm not a physicist either. That's why I trust the physicists to make valid theories and not chatters in a forum room.
Click to expand...

Indeed. And it would be great to hear from those physicists and not journalists trying to drive ad revenue.
 
Questerr said:
The “radius of the singularity” only makes sense in a universe of at least two dimensions. Without laws of physics as we know them, what evidence do we have that the pre-big bang universe had at least two dimensions? It didn’t have space or time based on current scientific models.
Click to expand...

The spherical model is a simplification, it is probably much more fantastic like a bunch of intersecting curves visualized by this post:

grip said:
Black Hole Cores May Not Be Infinitely Dense | Inside Science

Researchers suggest the centers of black holes may not hold singularities after all.

These new findings are based on loop quantum gravity, one of the leading theories seeking to unite quantum mechanics and general relativity into a single theory that can explain all the forces of the universe. In loop quantum gravity, the four dimensions of spacetime are composed of networks of intersecting loops - ripples of the gravitational field.

The researchers applied loop quantum gravity theory to the simplest model of black hole - a spherical, uncharged, non-rotating body known as a Schwarzschild black hole.

Instead of a singularity, they found the center of this black hole only held a region of highly curved spacetime.

Theoretical physicists had previously shown that with loop quantum gravity, they could eliminate the singularity that past research suggested existed at the Big Bang. Instead of emerging from a point of infinite density, their work proposed the cosmos was born from a "Big Bounce," expanding outward after a prior universe collapsed.
Click to expand...

Black substance has three parameters; mass, charge and spin.

The laws of physics doesn't change, the Universe expands again and again exactly the same way.

Over time the universe mutates through the second world.

The Universe is constantly expanding to this point and others through various pasts.

Not only is there the basic material fractal pattern, but its expansion yielding the dimensional worlds.
 
watsup said:
In another thread, Sherlock states that “I'm quite convinced though that a scientific explanation for the presence of the universe is a logical impossibility, science, mathematical laws, matter, energy can't really take part in an explanation for themselves, this is blindingly obvious - to me.”

Except that what is blindingly obvious to Sherlock is not so to physicists who study and research the matter. As such, here are various readings that give some SCIENTIFIC theories as to the pre-Bang state at that time.

What happened before the Big Bang: What Happened Before the Big Bang? | Live Science

What happened before the Big Bang? | Space

What Came Before the Big Bang? | Discover Magazine

https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/what-came-before-the-big-bang/

What happened before the Big Bang? | Space | EarthSky


Yes, a LOT of scientists disagree with Sherlock.
Click to expand...

What science can never explain is if the world isn't God's creation where did it come from. The idea that life was created from nothing never explains how life emerges. RNA World has been the prevailing theory for the origin of life since the 1980s. The emergence of a self-replicating catalytic molecule accounts for signature capabilities of living systems, but it doesn't explain how the protobiological molecule itself arose. Still no explanation of the origin, so maybe God did it.
 
Integrityrespec said:
What science can never explain is if the world isn't God's creation where did it come from. The idea that life was created from nothing never explains how life emerges. RNA World has been the prevailing theory for the origin of life since the 1980s. The emergence of a self-replicating catalytic molecule accounts for signature capabilities of living systems, but it doesn't explain how the protobiological molecule itself arose. Still no explanation of the origin, so maybe God did it.
Click to expand...

The only honest answer is “we don’t currently know”.

Goddidit is not a rational answer.
 
Integrityrespec said:
What science can never explain is if the world isn't God's creation where did it come from. The idea that life was created from nothing never explains how life emerges. RNA World has been the prevailing theory for the origin of life since the 1980s. The emergence of a self-replicating catalytic molecule accounts for signature capabilities of living systems, but it doesn't explain how the protobiological molecule itself arose. Still no explanation of the origin, so maybe God did it.
Click to expand...

The question is, "Where did God come from?"
 
Questerr said:
Science deniers adamantly support using peer reviewed articles and research papers rather than click bait journalism?
Click to expand...

No, they don't...science deniers support junk pseudoscience and are notorious for using unsupported blanket denials to dismiss or ignore the evidence. In fact, they've practically turned science denial into a religion based solely on faith...just like you.
 
Moot said:
No, they don't...science deniers support junk pseudoscience and are notorious for using unsupported blanket denials to dismiss or ignore the evidence. In fact, they've practically turned science denial into a religion based solely on faith...just like you.
Click to expand...

What science have I denied? No one has presented any. They’ve presented summaries written by non-scientist journalists trying to drive as revenue.
 
Questerr said:
No it doesn't because the laws of physics break down the closer one approaches to origin of the Big Bang. Without knowing what physical laws applied to the Singularity, if any did, then no nothing stands to reason regarding it.
Click to expand...

No, the math from general and special relativity could not handle the conditions . THat is different than 'th4e laws of physics' breaking down. HOWEVER No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning
 
tosca1 said:
:lol:

You can't say 100% accurate that something existed before the Big Bang!

Absence of evidence MAY NOT BE evidence of absence!
It is also possible that there is no evidence because nothing existed prior to the Big Bang!




:roll:

Those are simply speculations right now.



WMAP Site FAQs



That's the simplest answer right now. No one knows.




What Happened Before the Big Bang? | Live Science



Read posts #9 and 10.



It is also possible that those theories are all wrong!






It's saying that you're "100% accurate" - that's what I'm reacting to.


You can't say that. :lol:



Unless science confirms that there was something before the Big Bang - you can't say you're 100% accurate that there was
something before the Big Bang.
Click to expand...


Your ridiculous assertions on post 9 and 10 0f the Common Descent thread have been repeatedly answered in a thoughtful manner. Hopefully that's not the best you can do.
 
Integrityrespec said:
What science can never explain is if the world isn't God's creation where did it come from. The idea that life was created from nothing never explains how life emerges. RNA World has been the prevailing theory for the origin of life since the 1980s. The emergence of a self-replicating catalytic molecule accounts for signature capabilities of living systems, but it doesn't explain how the protobiological molecule itself arose. Still no explanation of the origin, so maybe God did it.
Click to expand...

It always was. There never was a time without the universe/. No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning
 
Exquisitor said:
The spherical model is a simplification, it is probably much more fantastic like a bunch of intersecting curves visualized by this post:



Black substance has three parameters; mass, charge and spin.

The laws of physics doesn't change, the Universe expands again and again exactly the same way.

Over time the universe mutates through the second world.

The Universe is constantly expanding to this point and others through various pasts.

Not only is there the basic material fractal pattern, but its expansion yielding the dimensional worlds.
Click to expand...

That would explain deja vu. Remarkable theory and possibly quite correct since time is kind of an illusion of the human mind to explain cause & effect.
 
grip said:
That would explain deja vu. Remarkable theory and possibly quite correct since time is kind of an illusion of the human mind to explain cause & effect.
Click to expand...

Now that is sarcasm! Second world? Basic material fractal patterns? What a load of codswallop! :lamo:lamo
 
Moot said:
Ooo...did I hit a nerve? LOL
Click to expand...


No. You hit a snag! :lol:





Yes, I believe I can say with 100% certainty that science theorizes that something existed before the big bang as evidenced by all the ongoing scientific experiments and research to prove it.
Click to expand...
:roll:


Now.....that's quite different from what you said before. Can't you tell the difference?


Refer to post #256.


Originally Posted by Moot View Post

Of course, just as it's 100% accurate to state that something existed before the big bang.
Click to expand...





science believes something existed before the big bang - Google Search
Click to expand...

....and he gives the google search page! Hahahahaha




Look - if you can't even tell the difference from what you said in post #256 (which I was particularly reacting to), and what you're saying now about science THEORIZING about pre-Big Bang......why should your opinion be credible at all?

You're showing not only can you not understand what you're reading...........heck, you don't even understand what you write! :lamo





This is a phenomenon with some of you atheists here......having this incredible ability to do a posturing mock-debate without
understanding what is being said! :mrgreen:
Like you're all cloned from the same stuff! Or.....you guys all came from the same LUCA!
 
Last edited:
Last edited:
soylentgreen said:
Unfortunately that fact seems to fly over the heads of most theists when asked where did god come from.
Click to expand...

Once again in your haste to disagree, you err, but such is the way of the atheist.
 
soylentgreen said:
Not at all. I see the penny has still failed to drop on that blunder of a remark you made.
Click to expand...

I'm afraid you are in error, because I never claimed I could prove that God has existed forever (this is revealed by God and taken on faith).
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom