Aces High Bulletin Board
General Forums => The O' Club => Topic started by: xrtoronto on June 19, 2006, 11:38:01 AM
-
OPEN LETTER TO KANSAS SCHOOL BOARD:
CC:
DOVER SCHOOL BOARD (PENNSYLVANIA)
OHIO STATE SCHOOL BOARD
RIO RANCHO SCHOOL BOARD (NEW MEXICO)
GRANTSBURG SCHOOL BOARD (WISCONSIN)
COBB COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD(GEORGIA)
SHELBY COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD(TENNESSEE)
CHARLES COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD(MARYLAND)
NAPERVILLE SCHOOL BOARD(ILLINOIS)
DARBY SCHOOL BOARD (MONTANA)
BLUFFTON-HARRISON SCHOOL BOARD (INDIANA)
TEXAS GOVERNOR RICK PERRY
KENTUCKY GOVERNOR ERNIE FLETCHER
SOUTH CAROLINA SENATOR MICHAEL L. FAIR
I am writing you with much concern after having read of your hearing to decide whether the alternative theory of Intelligent Design should be taught along with the theory of Evolution. I think we can all agree that it is important for students to hear multiple viewpoints so they can choose for themselves the theory that makes the most sense to them. I am concerned, however, that students will only hear one theory of Intelligent Design.
Let us remember that there are multiple theories of Intelligent Design. I and many others around the world are of the strong belief that the universe was created by a Flying Spaghetti Monster. It was He who created all that we see and all that we feel. We feel strongly that the overwhelming scientific evidence pointing towards evolutionary processes is nothing but a coincidence, put in place by Him.
It is for this reason that I’m writing you today, to formally request that this alternative theory be taught in your schools, along with the other two theories. In fact, I will go so far as to say, if you do not agree to do this, we will be forced to proceed with legal action. I’m sure you see where we are coming from. If the Intelligent Design theory is not based on faith, but instead another scientific theory, as is claimed, then you must also allow our theory to be taught, as it is also based on science, not on faith.
Some find that hard to believe, so it may be helpful to tell you a little more about our beliefs. We have evidence that a Flying Spaghetti Monster created the universe. None of us, of course, were around to see it, but we have written accounts of it. We have several lengthy volumes explaining all details of His power. Also, you may be surprised to hear that there are over 10 million of us, and growing. We tend to be very secretive, as many people claim our beliefs are not substantiated by observable evidence. What these people don’t understand is that He built the world to make us think the earth is older than it really is. For example, a scientist may perform a carbon-dating process on an artifact. He finds that approximately 75% of the Carbon-14 has decayed by electron emission to Nitrogen-14, and infers that this artifact is approximately 10,000 years old, as the half-life of Carbon-14 appears to be 5,730 years. But what our scientist does not realize is that every time he makes a measurement, the Flying Spaghetti Monster is there changing the results with His Noodly Appendage. We have numerous texts that describe in detail how this can be possible and the reasons why He does this. He is of course invisible and can pass through normal matter with ease.
I’m sure you now realize how important it is that your students are taught this alternate theory. It is absolutely imperative that they realize that observable evidence is at the discretion of a Flying Spaghetti Monster. Furthermore, it is disrespectful to teach our beliefs without wearing His chosen outfit, which of course is full pirate regalia. I cannot stress the importance of this enough, and unfortunately cannot describe in detail why this must be done as I fear this letter is already becoming too long. The concise explanation is that He becomes angry if we don’t.
You may be interested to know that global warming, earthquakes, hurricanes, and other natural disasters are a direct effect of the shrinking numbers of Pirates since the 1800s. For your interest, I have included a graph of the approximate number of pirates versus the average global temperature over the last 200 years. As you can see, there is a statistically significant inverse relationship between pirates and global temperature.
In conclusion, thank you for taking the time to hear our views and beliefs. I hope I was able to convey the importance of teaching this theory to your students. We will of course be able to train the teachers in this alternate theory. I am eagerly awaiting your response, and hope dearly that no legal action will need to be taken. I think we can all look forward to the time when these three theories are given equal time in our science classrooms across the country, and eventually the world; One third time for Intelligent Design, one third time for Flying Spaghetti Monsterism, and one third time for logical conjecture based on overwhelming observable evidence.
Sincerely Yours,
Bobby Henderson, concerned citizen.
click here for more, more, MORE! (http://www.venganza.org/)
-
I'm afraid our school board cannot adhere to your wishes regarding the curriculum since several concerned parents have pleaded that all references to Noodly Appendages be kept from the children.
With regards,
-
LOL
(http://www.venganza.org/images/spreadword/havetouched.jpg)
-
If creationism is going to be taught alongside evolution, then I demand that Flying Spaghetti Monsterism be given the same time.
Ramen, brothers.
BTW, has anyone noticed the correlation between global warming and the number of pirates?
-
HAAAARRRRRRRRRRR!!!!!!!!!!!!11111111111111!!!!!!!!!!!
Say It!!
Bronk
-
Does that mean the Italians are the truly chosen people??????
-
Might get a better following in Canada. I hear they believe they can control international waters.
-
Hmm... so it is ok to mock a beliefe shared by so many if you are one of the saintly and all knowing (and fully tax supported monopoly) school boards..
The arrogance should offend anyone no matter what your beliefes.
I did not see any private school boards on that list I don't believe. Talk about your lockstep arrogance.
lazs
-
Try this: who does google return for the search "creator of the universe" (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%22creator+of+the+universe%22&btnG=Search)
-
Ah, I see the Touch is spreading...
-
Don't offend Him, Lazs, or He'll use His Noodly Appendage to foul all the sparkplugs of your hotrods.
-
Originally posted by xrtoronto
Try this: who does google return for the search "creator of the universe" (http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&q=%22creator+of+the+universe%22&btnG=Search)
LOL
-
Originally posted by Maverick
Does that mean the Italians are the truly chosen people??????
No. Pasta is of Chinese origin.
-
Look at the picture. Those look like meatballs not won ton!
-
Marco Polo......
-
Originally posted by Tarmac
LOL
(http://www.venganza.org/images/spreadword/havetouched.jpg)
That spaghetti monster looks like it has 2 eyeballs, 2 brown testecles, and a long spaghetti noodle that is trying to touch another man.
Must be a California religion.......
-
Careful guys! It doesn't pay to tick off the Creator.
He might decide to have a little fun with ya after you pass. At least he would if he were anything like me.
You might find yourself reincarnated...as a Muslim...living in Pakistan...and wearing a veil.
Now THAT would be JUSTICE!
:D
-
You can choose to believe that the universe and all matter popped into existance by chance (with perfect laws waiting to be obeyed), then life itself popped into existance and evolved into humans, or you can have an open mind and consider that some kind of intelligence *may* be responsible for it all.
Which is more incredible to believe?
I choose to have an open mind.
-
Well, it's either intelligent design or unintelligent design. Based on the posts in this thread I'm leaning towards the latter.
-
See Rule #5
-
was all of the matter in the universe created?
Can anyone answer that simple question? :lol
-
#3 on google's photo graphic list of creators of the universe:
(http://www.visi.com/~spookshow/files/joe089.JPG)
but i buy #10 a bit more, he is chinese & his jacket is made of some sort of pasta
(http://www.wsu.edu:8000/wciv/a/aa/aad/aad61.jpg)
possibly spaghetti
:noid :noid :O :O :aok :cool: :furious :rofl
-
try this in google:
church of the global warming
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&lr=&safe=off&q=church+of+the+global+warming&btnG=Search
-
I'm willing to go out on a limb and say that the people who believe that everything popped into existance at random out of NOTHING, and that life formed by chance AFTER everything was randomly created from NOTHING,
I'm going to suggest that if this is one's summary of Darwinist Evolution, then one needs to revisit the subject in much greater depth.
There are a few key ideas missing here.
-
string theory........ spagetti.......string theory.......spagetti..... hmmmmmmm
-
Hey, don't forget the meatballs!
-
Originally posted by Mr Big
You can choose to believe that the universe and all matter popped into existance by chance (with perfect laws waiting to be obeyed), then life itself popped into existance and evolved into humans, or you can have an open mind and consider that some kind of intelligence *may* be responsible for it all.
Which is more incredible to believe?
I choose to have an open mind.
Hey, self-proclaimed smart guy!
If you've equipped with an IQ above 2 digits, you should have realized that believing 'that the universe and all matter popped into existance by chance' is basically the same as believing into an intelligence behind everything, because either this intelligence itself popped into existence by chance, either it has been created by a higher intelligence, either it has always existed. Anyway, it is only a matter of faith but neither 'explanation' is more logical or probable than any other. Or we are all playing some super advanced version of 'The Sims' in a full blown virtual world and when we die in game, we wake up in our true form...which can be another simulation...
I've finally chosen for the Flying Spaghetti Monster cause I like pasta and pirates.
-
MT,
You're behind the times my man! String theory is OUT! Inflationary theory is IN! The Reciprocating Universe theory, which had been out, has been given new life by the Brane theory and is once again IN!
As a result, there is once again a creditable line of respected scientific thought that states that "eternity" is a distinct possibility.
This opens the possibility that some form of life "evolved" beyond death and weariness in the unimaginable past and has the ability to manipulate the forces of creation.
All of man's existence on this puny orb is but one drop of water in an unending ocean of time. Who are WE to say it isn't possible?
Regards, Shuckins
P.S. Imagine a single proton. Then, imagine a point in space one-billionth the size of that proton. That is the point, according to scientific theory, that all matter in the universe sprang from. A very small point...small enough to be "manipulated."
-
Originally posted by Mr Big
was all of the matter in the universe created?
Can anyone answer that simple question? :lol
Sort of like asking, "How long have you been beating your wife?". What makes you think matter was created to begin with?
-
Sharp! Sometimes I'm so sharp, it's almost frightening!
:D
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Sort of like asking, "How long have you been beating your wife?". What makes you think matter was created to begin with?
I don't pretend to know. I posed it as a question anyway. Do you think matter was created?
Seems to me that the only two possibilities are that it was either created, or it always existed.
I prefer to keep an open mind and am open to the possibility that the universe is the result of a higher intelligence.
Some poeple seem to dismiss out of hand that an intelligence could have created the universe, yet they don't seem to have a problem with any other theories that don't make much sense.
Either way, it comes down to "faith" in order to hold a strong opinion either way.
-
Originally posted by Mr Big
Seems to me that the only two possibilities are that it was either created, or it always existed.
I prefer to keep an open mind and am open to the possibility that the universe is the result of a higher intelligence.
Doesn't sound like much of an open mind to me.
-
Originally posted by deSelys
Hey, self-proclaimed smart guy!
If you've equipped with an IQ above 2 digits, you should have realized that believing 'that the universe and all matter popped into existance by chance' is basically the same as believing into an intelligence behind everything, because either this intelligence itself popped into existence by chance, either it has been created by a higher intelligence, either it has always existed. Anyway, it is only a matter of faith but neither 'explanation' is more logical or probable than any other. Or we are all playing some super advanced version of 'The Sims' in a full blown virtual world and when we die in game, we wake up in our true form...which can be another simulation...
I've finally chosen for the Flying Spaghetti Monster cause I like pasta and pirates.
The funny thing is, you have almost nailed my exact argument on the subject. I have stated many times that to believe that a higher intelligence could have created the universe is no more far fetched than any other theory.
It's the people that dismiss even the possibility of a higher intelligence, or intelligent design, that are the closed minded ones.
So, thanks for playing.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Doesn't sound like much of an open mind to me.
In what way?
-
Seems to me that the only two possibilities...
-
Actually, I thought my question was a good one.
"was all of the matter in the universe created?"
It doesn't presume anything, other than the fact that all of the matter in the universe does exist.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Well, it does seem to me that all the matter was either created, or it just always existed.
Just say what you mean, cause I might have an argument for you.
-
Originally posted by Mr Big
Actually, I thought my question was a good one.
"was all of the matter in the universe created?"
It doesn't presume anything, other than the fact that all of the matter in the universe does exist.
Hmmm... this was not the statement I commented on.
-
Originally posted by Mr Big
Well, it does seem to me that all the matter was either created, or it just always existed.
There is no other possibility?
-
Was for Skuzzy.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
There is no other possibility?
Like I said, just say what you mean and lay it on me. We're all friends here. ;)
I think you understand what I said.
-
Originally posted by Mr Big
Was for Skuzzy.
Actually, you said it before Skuzzy. ;)
-
Originally posted by Mr Big
Like I said, just say what you mean and lay it on me. We're all friends here. ;)
I think you understand what I said.
I'm asking. Are those the only two possibilities?
-
Originally posted by Sandman
Actually, you said it before Skuzzy. ;)
Skuzzy replied to it, as though I was stating that all the matter was created.
-
Originally posted by Sandman
I'm asking. Are those the only two possibilities?
Like I said, no need for games. I said that it seems to me that there are only two possibilities.
You can spring your trap at any time, because I think I have an argument for what you are going to lay on me.
Taken down to just bare logical thinking.
1. matter does exist
2. for something to exist, it has to have an origin
-
Originally posted by Meatwad
That spaghetti monster looks like it has 2 eyeballs, 2 brown testecles, and a long spaghetti noodle that is trying to touch another man.
Must be a California religion.......
See Meatwad sold his Soul...explains the Stock thing and his eyes for the likes of P3nis3s and Te3t1cles...Evil, I say EVIL!!!!!
:O
Not giving my name... cause Evil is as Evil does....
Nash
-
This might answer some of your questions:
http://www.discover.com/issues/apr-02/cover/ (http://www.discover.com/issues/apr-02/cover/)
-
If time is indeed truly linear and the concept of the beginning of time actually is a given, how can matter have always existed without being created?
-
Originally posted by Shuckins
This might answer some of your questions:
http://www.discover.com/issues/apr-02/cover/ (http://www.discover.com/issues/apr-02/cover/)
"All matter plus all gravity equals zero. So the universe could come from nothing because it is, fundamentally, nothing."
If everything is nothing then one theory is as good as any other.
-
Originally posted by midnight Target
string theory........ spagetti.......string theory.......spagetti..... hmmmmmmm
M Theory takes strings and adds one more dimension, making membranes.
So it wouldn't be a spaghetti theory, more of a lasagna or possibly even a ravioli theory.
Of course if one rolls the membrane into a tube, then Rigatoni maybe.
-
Originally posted by Maverick
If time is indeed truly linear and the concept of the beginning of time actually is a given, how can matter have always existed without being created?
The way I view it is that all the matter probably always existed and that there was no time.
Isn't time just relative to motion? No motion, no time. That doesn't rule out matter existing for an infinity though.
Even if you 'create' matter, it has to be created with *something*, and that something would have had to exist before. The cycle is an endless loop that can't have a beginning, imo.
For me, I tend towards a universe in which matter always existed....even though I can't tell you how that could be possible. It's just what I personally feel is the most logical thing.
-
Originally posted by Mr Big
Taken down to just bare logical thinking.
1. matter does exist
2. for something to exist, it has to have an origin
I will agree that at least I perceive that you perceive that matter exists, however all that I perceive is just what my brain is telling me.
This could all be a dream world illusion of existence, all made up in my subconscious…. If that is even real.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
I will agree that at least I perceive that you perceive that matter exists, however all that I perceive is just what my brain is telling me.
This could all be a dream world illusion of existence, all made up in my subconscious…. If that is even real.
So, you admit that you have a brain that tells you stuff? :D
Brain matter?
-
Originally posted by Mr Big
So, you admit that you have a brain that tells you stuff? :D
Brain matter?
Perhaps you didn't read this part..."all made up in my subconscious…. If that is even real."
-
That all of space/time came from nothing is not at odds with the belief in a creator. In fact, it's pretty much required imo. Apparently, some believe space/time created itself from nothing while others believe it was created by an intelligent being from nothing. True or not, it's more reasonable to believe in intelligent design if for no other reason than that is our only experience.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Perhaps you didn't read this part..."all made up in my subconscious…. If that is even real."
You said that all you percieve is what your brain is tellling you.
You have a conscious existance, at the very minimum. In order to have even a conscious thought, you would have to assume that you actually exist in some form or another.
Even if you had only a "subconscious" that makes up everything for you, then that would presume you exist.
-
Originally posted by lukster
True or not, it's more reasonable to believe in intelligent design if for no other reason than that is our only experience.
You experienced the intellegent design of say... a pine tree?
Or did you just percieve it?
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
You experienced the intellegent design of say... a pine tree?
Or did you just percieve it?
I have seen them explode into existence...in a vacume, of course.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Perhaps you didn't read this part..."all made up in my subconscious�. If that is even real."
Read an article in Reader's Digest a few months ago written by a guy purportedly to have been recruited by the Pentagon to do remote viewing. He relates some of his episodes and mentions that they were calling this the "matrix" long before the movie. No idea if there was an ounce of truth to any of the story but it was interesting.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
You experienced the intellegent design of say... a pine tree?
Or did you just percieve it?
All of my experience is based on intelligence. Pay no attention to my wife. ;)
-
Originally posted by Mr Big
You said that all you percieve is what your brain is tellling you.
At least that is what I think you think I said. But perhaps that is an illusion in itself.
You have a conscious existance, at the very minimum. In order to have even a conscious thought, you would have to assume that you actually exist in some form or another.
I could perhaps exist not in a material sense, but only as a pure energy form. Then it wouldn't matter.
Even if you had only a "subconscious" that makes up everything for you, then that would presume you exist.
Perhaps I only think I exist.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
At least that is what I think you think I said. But perhaps that is an illusion in itself.
I could perhaps exist not in a material sense, but only as a pure energy form. Then it wouldn't matter.
Perhaps I only think I exist.
lol!
;)
-
Originally posted by Mr Big
Like I said, no need for games. I said that it seems to me that there are only two possibilities.
You can spring your trap at any time, because I think I have an argument for what you are going to lay on me.
Taken down to just bare logical thinking.
1. matter does exist
2. for something to exist, it has to have an origin
Except of course flying spaghetti monsters
-
Question: could FSM microwave himself to such temperatures that he would not be able to consume himself?
-
Originally posted by AWMac
See Meatwad sold his Soul...explains the Stock thing and his eyes for the likes of P3nis3s and Te3t1cles...Evil, I say EVIL!!!!!
:O
Not giving my name... cause Evil is as Evil does....
Nash
BAH!!! :D
-
I don't know if the flying monster exists or not... don't really care.
I don't want it to intrude in my life tho.
If there were hundreds of millions of people that believed in him I would want the theory of his existance and his version of how the world was formed to at least be meantioned when evolution or the big bang theory was mentioned tho.
I don't think he has much of a following tho save a few school board members and smurf governors so he can pretty much be ignored by me and the kids. The time spent not learning about him could be used to learn to read or something.
lazs
-
Originally posted by lazs2
If there were hundreds of millions of people that believed in him I would want the theory of his existance and his version of how the world was formed to at least be meantioned when evolution or the big bang theory was mentioned tho.
lazs
A higher number of supporters doesn't make a theory more valid than another. Remember when the tiny group of guys who were claiming that earth was round were considered as nutjobs by the majority?
-
Originally posted by Mr Big
2. for something to exist, it has to have an origin
Why?
Originally posted by Maverick
If time is indeed truly linear and the concept of the beginning of time actually is a given, how can matter have always existed without being created?
You work from from a theoritical position and assumption. Time is a separate concept from existing matter.
Everything is theoritical until proven otherwise. Nothing is impossible until you accept it is.
If you accept some form of intelligence created all matter, then you would also have to answer the query, "Where did that intelligience spring from? And who/what created it?". Working from the presumption all matter has always existed grants a higher probability some intelligence was able to evolve and create sub-species. I do not neccessarily subscribe to that.
And if you wish to answer, "It is all about faith.", then you are just taking the cheap way out of the question. A non-answer, if you will. I could just as easily say my approach is all about faith as well and leave it at that. I won't though. I think that is the cheap way out,
-
deselys... that is why I say that I can't tell you if those guys are right or not. Since there is no written or verbal history of what they say is true going back past a few years tho and they have so few followers...
They would have to be pushed asside with other fringe beliefes as not being worth the valuable time needed to explore their beliefe.
Now... if you could offer the option to attend the lesbian lifestyle lecture or to here the high pries to the flying monster then that would be a viable option. Since the time would be pretty much wasted and not relevant to schooling the flying monster would at least be more academic.
lazs
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Why?
Because all things that exist were originated... except God, who has existed forever and ever.
Unless you hold the rule "2. for something to exist, it has to have an origin" [cough] sacred [/cough] then of course, God does not exist because he had no origin.
This is all so confusing.... I think I shall just stick to questioning my own existance.
-
How do we know the "big bang" started the expansion of space? By that I mean how do we know space ever expanded at all. Aren't we assuming this based on the "red shift" while observing other bodies? What if instead of space expanding all matter is condensing? Would this have the same observable effect?
-
The problem is, scientists don't claim to know, they claim to be trying to figure it out using data and theories that can be reproduced by others. Religionists, on the other hand, say "oh, we know" and cite their faith/beliefs as all the proof that's needed. Religion is answers that cannot be questioned. Pastafarianism is looking more attractive every day.
R-amen.
-
I guess this would be the "great satan"?
(http://www.round-here.net/blog/photos/thumbs/567.jpg)
-
Originally posted by Chairboy
Religion is answers that cannot be questioned.
That sounds an awful lot like what Al Gore and others are saying about Global warming.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Why?
You work from from a theoritical position and assumption. Time is a separate concept from existing matter.
Everything is theoritical until proven otherwise. Nothing is impossible until you accept it is.
If you accept some form of intelligence created all matter, then you would also have to answer the query, "Where did that intelligience spring from? And who/what created it?". Working from the presumption all matter has always existed grants a higher probability some intelligence was able to evolve and create sub-species. I do not neccessarily subscribe to that.
And if you wish to answer, "It is all about faith.", then you are just taking the cheap way out of the question. A non-answer, if you will. I could just as easily say my approach is all about faith as well and leave it at that. I won't though. I think that is the cheap way out,
Skuzzy,
I didn't say that time and matter were part of the same concept. I was questioning from a purely corelational aspect. As I said, if time is truly linear and one direction only, there by definition has to be a beginning of time. Also assuming, Yeah I know that is a bad word here but, that time is NOT an invention of people but in fact a real universal concept predating people there has to be a beginning of time.
Given those concepts of time, linear, unidirectional, and a universal concept, not a construct of mankind, a finite begining must exist.
If time is correlated to the state of matter, not causationally but through the concept of if time follows the above concepts, there must have been nothing before time existed. The existance of matter may not have come into play until time starts. A counter point to this would be that time could not exist without the prior existance of matter, but without time how could you have "prior"?
I'm not postulating a faith based or big bang theory at all, just a question regarding 2 concepts we all deal with.
For those who have a purely faith based concept of existance, upon the moment of death they should have an answer. This is assuming they are correct in their faith.
For those who have no faith based existance there won't be an "answer" per se as they will cease to exist at the time of death. This is assuming they are correct in their belief there is no faith based explanation.
Nasty situation there and unfortunately no one has been able to definitively determine the truth then bring it back, except for those who are faith based. Rats, there's that cyclical thing again. :D
-
Originally posted by lukster
How do we know the "big bang" started the expansion of space? By that I mean how do we know space ever expanded at all. Aren't we assuming this based on the "red shift" while observing other bodies? What if instead of space expanding all matter is condensing? Would this have the same observable effect?
Dark bands in the spectrum of starlight can be identified with certian elements. The dark band associated with wavelength of (for instance)hydrogen is shown to be red shifted in far off stars. The only way that hydrogen wavelength changes is with Doppler, that means the stars are moving away with significant speeds.
This effect, if the universe were condensing, would show a blue shift.
So we have observed that 99.99% of the galaxies are moving away. (Andromeda is one of the few getting closer and we are on a collision course! We're all gonna die! aaaaaahh!)
The observations of the expansion of the universe show the expansion, and General Relativity, which has been shown to be accurate with many experiments, explains the expansion. Once you look at the time scale goes into reverse the volume of space goes to a minimum.
General Relativity crashes into Quantum Theory once the universe shrinks to near Plank length size, so no theory exists which explains what happened in the first few moments.
-
No one has yet to model the actual regression of time, with any degree of accuracy. Some postulate the various masses simply intersected at some point, rather than being blown from a single point.
Mav, even if time is linear, there is nothing which states it had to start somewhere. A single point can represent infinity. No beginning, no end. Indeed, a single line can also represent infinity.
The concept of starting and ending is one created by man. Where does space end? Where does it begin?
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Where does space end? Where does it begin?
Don't know where is begins, but it ends 2.35 miles WSW of the central fire station of New Brunswick, NJ.
-
I didn't say that the universe was condensing or collapsing, I said matter. Imagine that all matter everywhere is being sucked into black holes or something to that effect. The apparent result would be that of everything getting further apart. This is off the top of my head. I have no idea if there isn't some easy proof to counter it.
-
Originally posted by lukster
That sounds an awful lot like what Al Gore and others are saying about Global warming.
Not quite. Al Gore does psuedo-science and then extolls the truthiness of it. I think he really does believe it though, and so badly wants it to be true, it could be called his religion. I've met people like that.
Science is provisional truth. A conclusion is proved, then accepted as truth until it is debunked. The truth is subject to testing.
Religion is absolute truth, the word of God (or Gods), usually from his/her/its prophets.
-
Originally posted by lukster
I didn't say that the universe was condensing or collapsing, I said matter. Imagine that all matter everywhere is being sucked into black holes or something to that effect. The apparent result would be that of everything getting further apart. This is off the top of my head. I have no idea if there isn't some easy proof to counter it.
The Pauli exclusion principle prevents matter from getting much smaller.
-
Originally posted by indy007
Not quite. Al Gore does psuedo-science and then extolls the truthiness of it. I think he really does believe it though, and so badly wants it to be true, it could be called his religion. I've met people like that.
Science is provisional truth. A conclusion is proved, then accepted as truth until it is debunked. The truth is subject to testing.
Religion is absolute truth, the word of God (or Gods), usually from his/her/its prophets.
I have to argue the absolute truth part in regards to religion. If that were true then we should have but one religion based on the earliest of beliefs. Religion evolves, much like science.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
The Pauli exclusion principle prevents matter from getting much smaller.
Ok, how about the space itself existing within and near matter being warped (condensed) by that matter? Some do believe that gravity is evidence of this effect. Could it be possible that this effect is accelerating?
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Don't know where is begins, but it ends 2.35 miles WSW of the central fire station of New Brunswick, NJ.
One down, one to go.
-
Originally posted by lukster
Ok, how about the space itself existing within and near matter being warped (condensed) by that matter? Some do believe that gravity is evidence of this effect. Could it be possible that this effect is accelerating?
General Relativity explains gravity as the warping of spacetime.
The expansion of the universe looks as though it is accellerating, so there is a force akin to the cosmological constant that is overwhelming gravity's attraction on the intergalactic scale.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
General Relativity explains gravity as the warping of spacetime.
The expansion of the universe looks as though it is accellerating, so there is a force akin to the cosmological constant that is overwhelming gravity's attraction on the intergalactic scale.
Tell me what I'm missing then. Either the universe is expanding at an increasing rate caused by a force we believe to exist only because we believe that it must based on that expansion. Or, our plot of space in the universe is shrinking due to forces we may understand and be able to explain.
Yeah, I knew about General Relativity.
-
Originally posted by Skuzzy
Where does space end? Where does it begin?
I can answer this one! It begins and ends in the area between the ears of several folks who post on this board, it also is a vacuum!
:p :p
-
Originally posted by lukster
Tell me what I'm missing then.
Talk about a set up.... and I am passing on the opportunity.
Originally posted by lukster
Either the universe is expanding at an increasing rate caused by a force we believe to exist only because we believe that it must based on that expansion. Or, our plot of space in the universe is shrinking due to forces we may understand and be able to explain.
So we are shrinking away from the rest of the universe rather than the rest of the universe expanding away... Where are we shrinking to? There is room to expand.
If the universe was universally shrinking, the stars would be coming at us and blue shift, not red shifted starlight spectrums would dominate.
If our neighborhood were shrinking and the rest of the universe were not, then that would be a case for locality in the laws of physics.
-
Originally posted by Holden McGroin
Talk about a set up.... and I am passing on the opportunity.
So we are shrinking away from the rest of the universe rather than the rest of the universe expanding away... Where are we shrinking to? There is room to expand.
If the universe was universally shrinking, the stars would be coming at us and blue shift, not red shifted starlight spectrums would dominate.
If our neighborhood were shrinking and the rest of the universe were not, then that would be a case for locality in the laws of physics.
Two things:
First, my understanding of an expanding universe is not that bodies are necessarily moving further apart through space but that space itself is expanding which is causing these bodies to be further apart. Room to expand has no validity in this context as the room itself is expanding.
Second, like I said before. I'm not suggesting that the universe is getting smaller. Space not warped (or less warped) by matter remains constant while the space more warped by matter becomes ever smaller.
Changed a word for clarification.
-
Originally posted by lukster
Space not warped (or less warped) by matter remains constant while the space more warped by matter becomes ever smaller.
Then the center of galaxies would become ever smaller...as they have a greater density than the edges.
As we are in the galactic suburbs, our corner would be less "getting smaller" than the galactic center.
the observations of redshift are consistant with general expansion. They are inconsistant with general contraction, or even local contraction.
Gravity causing a warpage enough to alter our observations would need to come from a nearby black hole and the existance of a black hole would cause gravitational lensing that we could easily detect.
The gravity required to cause a general collapse of the universe is an order of magnitude more than that which observed matter can provide. Hence one of the drivers for the idea of dark matter.
-
cosmology is one of those topics where everyone is an expert, lol:noid :noid :noid
-
Ah well, maybe the universe is just running out of steam and light is getting tired and slowing down. ;)
-
Originally posted by lukster
Ah well, maybe the universe is just running out of steam and light is getting tired and slowing down. ;)
I've seen that modeled exactly.... in the form of O'Club message threads.
omg, O'club is teh universe!!!!!!11!
:D