Arising_uk wrote:Godfree wrote:...
so Einstein says thou shalt not go faster than the speed of light ,
you guys fudge around this , your precious Einstein is wrong,
or the bbt is , you can't have it both ways ,
So which is it Arising ,, was Einstein wrong ,,?? or is the bbt wrong,,???
You have a very strange view of what such as us can or cannot say about Physics. All I believe about such things are that physicists say such things and I believe they say them. Am I in a position to make a judgement? No I think, as I'm not conversant with their theories in the language in which they are expressed, i.e. mathematics. I'm also long-gone from the kind of metaphysics the you appear to think is philosophy as its been proved fruitless compared to what the Newtonians went and did. I think philosophy should be phenomenology rather than metaphysics.
From my point of view all you are doing is trying to 'disprove' their current theory because it offends you due to your belief that it supports the idea of a 'creator' which you find abhorrent. As such you search out those in the sciences who support your beliefs due to some apparent existential need to still have an explanation for existence. As I've said, if you are really interested in advancing the knowledge of Physics and Cosmology you should be studying the required subjects so that you can prove your ideas rather than just quoting other authorities.
Look how you speak, "thou shalt not", etc, Einstein did not just declare such things like the religious do, he observed that the idea of us speaking of events being simultaneous involves measurement and light is the thing that allows this, as such we cannot speak of simultaneous events happening faster than light. You appear to ignore that his Theory of Relativity has been confirmed by experimentation? Your GPS confirms this everyday.
It well may be that the whole of Physics will one day be turned upon its head but this is the strength of science and what makes it different from religion. Your problem appears to be that there is some kind of conspiracy keeping the BBT as the current most plausible explanation but tis not, its that it is the most current plausible explanation for the experimental data that we have and although there are a few fudges in the maths, the maths does fit the model. You still appear to think that Logic and Reason only can discover whats what with respect to the world but the Newtonians have shown that this kind of metaphysics is not the way to go. If it was then philosophy would still be the pre-eminent subject when it comes to such stuff.
Well thank you for a nice response , it's nice to see an attempt to expand our understanding of each other and the topics we post ,
Unlike Johns one liner , I will simply have to ask him to expand on that ,
Are we in a position to judge , yes of course we are ,
I took my car to the carburetor shop , was playing up ,
they guy said I don't open my tool box for less than $300 ,
I refused , left and went home to do it myself ,
it took five minutes and cost me nothing ,!!!
people like to make what they do sound special and complicated ,
but as a jack of all trades , who happily plays in the back of TV's when they are going , I can tell you , it's a lot easier than they would have you believe,
When the bbt was written , we couldn't see 13 billion light years ,
but now we can , and you double that to get to the edge ,
of what we call the known universe , cos we are sort of in the middle ,
about half way from the middle to the outer edge ,
so if the bbt theory is true , billions of galaxies of matter ,
shot out at up to 52 times the speed of light , to suddenly stop or slow down to less than 2 times the speed of light , or we wouldn't be seeing them ,
form galaxies and are now accelerating again ,
fudge like that makes creation sound believable .
I did offer you a web site that offered the science of alternative models ,
EJ Lerner wrote a book called the big bang never happened ,
he has the physics expertise to make such a call ,
he isn't the only person with a physics degree that dis-agree's with the bbt
Dr Gentry , Dr Hannes Alfven ,Prof Geoffrey Burbidge ,Dr Halton Arp ,
and of course Sir Fred Hoyle , just to name a few ,
think about it like a political party , they have the party line ,
and they expect everybody to stick to it, policies don't vary much ,
but they will tell you , their party is superior ,
science is similar , they are trying to sell you on the idea that,
their work is special , and deserves more funding ,
the more people who think the bbt is credible ,
the more likely government is to fund it , so they put spin on the politicians ,
who put spin on us , and all we get is a bunch of fluffy meaningless ,
equations and claims that only serve to confuse rather than ,
expand our knowledge,
so the government is being conned , we are being conned ,
and why , to keep the dream alive,,???
the bb dream , creation ,,???
or just to keep the funding coming,,???
