Chit Chat
There is currently 1 person viewing this thread.
OK so the big bang started it all according to the scientists,now they have mapped the observable universe even though its still expanding and hubble proved this.
My question is why can they not pin point the center of the universe,surely they can draw lines from all galaxy's moving out (that are mapped)and where the lines intersect will be the center.They know that the far off galaxy's are moving out all over the universe and if they have it mapped as they say then all they need to do is get a fecking map and a pencil and join the galaxy's south,north,east and west of hubble and where they intersect will be the area that the big bang occurred.
My question is why can they not pin point the center of the universe,surely they can draw lines from all galaxy's moving out (that are mapped)and where the lines intersect will be the center.They know that the far off galaxy's are moving out all over the universe and if they have it mapped as they say then all they need to do is get a fecking map and a pencil and join the galaxy's south,north,east and west of hubble and where they intersect will be the area that the big bang occurred.
sort by:
Show
per page
Replies: 51
|
By:
they tell us that the galaxy's in the far off distance are 13.5 billion years old and they know this by red shift or doplar effect so it can not be too difficult to work out their position one millisecond after the big bang ,they say they know the speeds they are traveling at they say they have being traveling for 13.5 billion years they know the direction they are moving ,if they know all this it should not be difficult to work out where they were 13.5 billion years ago when the big bang occurred.
I am beginning to think there was no big bang and they are all BS. YET THEY SAY,there is no center to the universe,there had to be a center one millisecond after the big bang if it occurred. |
|
By:
the lord stretched out the heavens - 14 times it's described in the bible.
stretched - expanded. Georges Lemaître 1927, noted an expanding universe might be traced back in time to an originating single point. in 1929 Hubble observed the universe was expanding. red shifts observation. Sir Fred Hoyle was one of Britain's best-known astronomers in 1950 with his broadcast lectures on "The Nature of the Universe." He recalled using "Big Bang" for the first time in the last of those talks, but with derision to describe a theory on the origin of the universe that he didn't accept. (LA times) They had to have a theory to replace the steady state theory. the Bible had it right from the start - stretched out. |
|
By:
by the way zorro I can give a simple explanation as to how everything in the universe came from a tiny dot.
well one that can be understood .most people say its impossible for all to come from something the size of a marble but we have an example here on earth. I could give you a tiny acorn the size of a marble and some day in the future show you a giant oak tree standing 500 feet tall and tell you it was once an acorn the size of the top of your finger,but I cant explain where the first acorn came from.but its a good explaination for our brains to understand how something so vast came from something so tiny.  |
|
By:
the Bible had it right from the start - stretched out.
utter ****, the creation as described in the bible is completely wrong. And anyone expounding a contrary theory based on science was deemed a heretic. |
|
By:
This is the biggest laugh imo
So God made the vault and separated the water under the vault from the water above it. And it was so. 8 God called the vault “sky.” The sky is made of water roflcopters |
|
By:
The thicko who wrote the bible said its blue like the sea, so it must be water,
 |
|
By:
the bible does not address the man of the 21st century solely. It uses metaphorical language?
WHY - because it addresses people of all ages. If the bible said... God utilized quantum filaments bound them within a neogamic matrix and incorporated dynamic combative particles - people would say in the first century that this means nothing. It might mean something now(not really I made that schlok up). You are critiquing a book of the bible that is 3,500 years old. That passage by the way mentions spheres. Telling you the world was spherical. The world was never believed to be flat. The greeks new that and the egyptians - only one tribe in South America had the flat earth theory - yet Atheists always point out that 'we once believed the world to be flat' LET THERE BE LIGHT. |
|
By:
Unfortunately the book is not 5,500 years old, it's a collection of stories put together 1900 odd years ago. It's a good book for history buffs with a pinch of salt.
|
|
By:
God was and always will be.And he will come again to judge the future and the past.
LET IT BE WRITTEN AS IT IS SPOKEN. |
|
By:
he must have being famous enough to have a book written about himself.
|
|
By:
 |
|
By:
Jesus may have healed the ill (didn't grow back too many limbs tho) but did you know that Mohamed Split the Moon in 2? https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Splitting_of_the_moon
Both must be true as their in religious books and on the Internet but Mohamed must have the trump card? |
|
By:
arithmetic?
3,500 years old Is what I wrote. where did you get 5,500 yrs? jesus was over 2000 years ago - genesis the book of Moses 1500 years before that. the dead sea scrolls are carbon dated? all books of the old testament. kept by jews in their temple and synagogues. yes - Christians put it alongside the new testament in 80 a.d. |
|
By:
'they're' hth
|
|
By:
I do know one thing,if man can create a mini big bang on the Hydron Collider its my guess that God would have no problem creating the real big bang ,so anyone who says it would be impossible to create a big bang may brush up on their science.
|
|
By:
just like I can create an oak tree from a little acorn
|
|
By:
I was thinking of James Usher dates which I also got wrong https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/James_Ussher
It's a load of hogwash, admit it. |
|
By:
I HAVE OTHER QUESTIONS=1 what do you say to a blind man is he asks what colour is the wind?
2=WHY" do we think its silent when we look out at snow flakes falling" |
|
By:
|
|
By:
moi - a killer - nope.
last time i hit anybody was at school after he hit me. that's thirty five years ago. never started a fight. peter - live by the sword - die by the sword. ----------- The most current theory holds that the solar system evolved from an interstellar cloud of swirling dust and gasses. However, if the sun, planets, and moon evolved from the same material, they should have many similarities, yet the composition of each planet is unique. For example, since about 98% of the sun is hydrogen or helium, Earth, Mars, Venus, and Mercury should have similar compositions. Instead, much less than 1% of these planets is hydrogen or helium. Also all planets should rotate in the same direction - they don't - there are exceptions. |
|
By:
If you could be bothered to read proper science publications you could find the answers for yourself.
Planets the size of the earth have too little gravity to hang on to the lighter elements in gaseous form at the temperature of its atmosphere. The sun, being 1.3 million times the size of the earth does have enough gravity. So does Jupiter which is mainly composed of hydrogen and helium. Study a bit of science and you will find out how we know this as well as the answers to your other questions. |
|
By:
you never answered the rotation bit? get me answers foinavon.
|
|
By:
i've been watching Horizon since 1974 and had to listen to
my astronomer school pals for years - i've absorbed it by osmosis. Also watch Carl Sagan Cosmos to fall asleep... that guy is a master hypnotist, that voice... wammo sleep. |
|
By:
that last part of my question was from a astro-physicist...
"The most current theory holds that the solar system evolved from an interstellar cloud of swirling dust and gasses. However, if the sun,planets, and moon evolved from the same material, they should have many similarities, yet the composition of each planet is unique. For example, since about 98% of the sun is hydrogen or helium, Earth, Mars, Venus, and Mercury should have similar compositions.Instead, much less than 1% of these planets is hydrogen or helium. Also all planets should rotate in the same direction - they don't - there are exceptions. - -David Stevenson, Cal Tech "The moon contains considerable quantities of U-236 and TH 230, both short-lived isotopes that would have been long since gone if the moon were billions of years old." -Dr. Kent Hovind |
|
By:
Zorro,
Virtually all the known matter in the universe is hydrogen (or plasma). Everything else was cooked up in stars as by products of nuclear reactions. When a star explodes (supernova) the material is ejected. It eventually aggregates to form new stars and planets. The smaller planets are composed mainly of the heavier stuff as they can't hold on to much of the lighter gases. The planets in our solar system may well have started spinning in the same direction but gravitational effects caused them over time to change orbits and even collide. Other lumps of passing space rock would have been captured into the sun's orbit and others fly off into space. we're talking billions of years here. What you see today doesn't resemble exactly what aggregated initially, it's a dynamic system affected by internal and external forces. We just see a snapshot in our tiny time frame. |
|
By:
please tell David Stevenson of Cal Tech - he's waiting for your expert answer.
|
|
By:
Dr Kent Hovind? Yeah right!
http://www.religionnewsblog.com/15261/kent-hovind-evangelist-arrested-on-federal-charges |
|
By:
Pluto and Venus rotate backwards
At least 6 moons in the solar system have backward orbits! Furthermore, Neptune, Jupiter, and Saturn have moons orbiting in both directions. All planets rotate horizontally, like a spinning top, except for Uranus - it rotates on its side, like a spinning ball |
|
By:
if any one of these conditions were slightly higher or lower, life on Earth would cease to exist. For example, the Earth is at a very specific distance from the sun. Malcolm Bowden says, "If it were 5% closer, then the water would boil up from the oceans and if it were just 1% farther away, then the oceans would freeze, and that gives you just some idea of the knife edge we are on." Dr. Duane Gish says, "If the Earth's diameter were 7,200 miles, instead of 8,000, then almost the whole Earth, due to a lessening of the atmospheric mantle, would be reduced to snow and ice waste."
|
|
By:
Recently physicists have counted at least 34 physical peculiarities or "universal constants" that have been precisely fine tuned and set in place in order to make life possible. These constants include such things as:
Electromagnetic and gravitational forces are finely tuned so the right kid of star can be stable. Carbon and oxygen nuclei have finely tuned energy levels. The electromagnetic coupling constant binds electrons to protons in atoms. If it were smaller, fewer electrons could be held. If it were larger, electrons would be held too tightly to bond with other atoms. The proportion of mass that is converted to energy when hydrogen is converted to helium by nuclear fusion is 0.007. If this were less, elements larger than hydrogen could not exist. If this were larger, water could not exist. |
|
By:
Dr Kent didn't pay his taxes??
Have you got an "apple" phone? let's 'GOOGLE' it and find out why he didn't pay his taxes. |
|
By:
"There's an incredible number of these parameters that have all been in some sense finely tuned, sometimes extremely precisely tuned... so when you start multiplying all the probabilities together, we find its extremely unlikely that it's by random chance. Just as it's extremely unlikely that someone would be born with my exact genes. . . And so you begin to marvel at the incredible beauty and the incredible way everything fits together so neatly... and so it's very tempting to think that somebody designed and had a plan that was really quite spectacular."
-George Smoot, Ph.D. Lawrence Berkeley Laboratory (part of NASA "Cobe" satellite team) up up and away in my beautiful, my beautiful balloon.... |
|
By:
“This is rather as if you imagine a puddle waking up one morning and thinking, 'This is an interesting world I find myself in — an interesting hole I find myself in — fits me rather neatly, doesn't it? In fact it fits me staggeringly well, must have been made to have me in it!' This is such a powerful idea that as the sun rises in the sky and the air heats up and as, gradually, the puddle gets smaller and smaller, frantically hanging on to the notion that everything's going to be alright, because this world was meant to have him in it, was built to have him in it; so the moment he disappears catches him rather by surprise. I think this may be something we need to be on the watch out for.”
― Douglas Adams, The Salmon of Doubt |
|
By:
i'm referencing scientists only?
men of letters... from fine families... James Clerk Maxwell once said... pass me the butter.... |
|
By:
let me enter the imaginarium.
leprecauns, sir do you believe in such childish things? let's not descend into imagination sir. Let us consider the science only. |
|
By:
Keep on googling Zorro, you will find more stuff than any of us here have the time to answer.
Have fun! |
|
By:
nay - depart not good stout fellow - twas but a jest
|
|
By:
"The stars of our own galaxy, the Milky Way, rotate about the galactic center with different speeds, the inner ones rotating faster than the outer ones. The observed rotation speeds are so fast that if our galaxy were more than a few hundred million years old, it would be a featureless smear of stars instead of its present spiral shape."
|
|
By:
Is it me or are there a lot... a lot of inconsistencies
among the scientific community? Is science really science (grounded in fact) it it cannot be tested. repeated? |