Freethought & Rationalism Archive

Bokonon · 06-20-2002, 05:02 PM

The first half is easy to respond to. But the second half I've never observed. Does anyone know anything about it?

You say following the big bang, the laws of physics took hold. How does an uncontrolled explosion, featuring no elements prior to the explosion as you say, produce excellent gravitational and physical laws that keep our universe in working order and expanding at exactly the correct rate as bourne out by Red Shift. Lets look at the expansion of the universe for a minute. The rate of expansion is so finely tuned, that according to Bernard Lovell, if the universe were expanding one millionth part faster, then all the material in the universe would have dispensed by now. If it had been a million millionth part slower, than gravitational forces would have caused the universe to collapse within the first thousand million years or so of its existence. How can an uncontrolled explosion with no particular discernable cause produce that kind of perfect and i repeat PERFECT expansion rate for the universe? Can you answer with references please?

Undercurrent · 06-20-2002, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bokonon:
The rate of expansion is so finely tuned, that according to Bernard Lovell, if the universe were expanding one millionth part faster, then all the material in the universe would have dispensed by now. If it had been a million millionth part slower, than gravitational forces would have caused the universe to collapse within the first thousand million years or so of its existence. How can an uncontrolled explosion with no particular discernable cause produce that kind of perfect and i repeat PERFECT expansion rate for the universe? Can you answer with references please?

So lets see, this person provides no references, himself, but demands that you provide references with any refutation?

You my tell that person that I say that his "fact" is a lie, and ask him if he can answer that with references. I sure as fuck ain't going to do his homework for him...

m.

Autonemesis · 06-20-2002, 05:24 PM

The expansion rate has not been determined to a sufficient level of accuracy to state any such thing. One part in a million is .0001%. The Hubble constant has been estimated to an accuracy of perhaps 5-10% at best. The current consensus estimate averages about 70 km/sec/Mpc +/- 5 km/sec/Mpc.

Lovell is full of hot air.

Valentine Pontifex · 06-20-2002, 05:24 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Bokonon:
The first half is easy to respond to. But the second half I've never observed. Does anyone know anything about it?

You say following the big bang, the laws of physics took hold. How does an uncontrolled explosion, featuring no elements prior to the explosion as you say, produce excellent gravitational and physical laws that keep our universe in working order and expanding at exactly the correct rate as bourne out by Red Shift. Lets look at the expansion of the universe for a minute. The rate of expansion is so finely tuned, that according to Bernard Lovell, if the universe were expanding one millionth part faster, then all the material in the universe would have dispensed by now. If it had been a million millionth part slower, than gravitational forces would have caused the universe to collapse within the first thousand million years or so of its existence. How can an uncontrolled explosion with no particular discernable cause produce that kind of perfect and i repeat PERFECT expansion rate for the universe? Can you answer with references please?

This is basically the flatness problem. An answer for has been found all of 22 years ago. In pre-Big Bang theory it had to be assumed that this just how it so happened to happen. Inflation outright demands that the universe be flat, what the person you quote is calling a "perfect" expansion, as a basic consequence. And inflation was not developed to solve the flatness problem. We don't know if inflation is correct, but will be put severe tests with the MAP mission, upcoming Planck Mission, and other upcoming observations.

<a href="http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html" target="_blank">http://map.gsfc.nasa.gov/m_uni.html</a>
<a href="http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm" target="_blank">http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm</a>

[ June 20, 2002: Message edited by: LordValentine ]

Asha'man · 06-20-2002, 05:33 PM

Actually, there is some truth to this statement. The amount of mass in the universe is amazingly close to the perfect amount that will allow expansion to continue indefinitely. The more astronomers refine their estimate, the closer the value looks. If you express it as a ratio of mass energy to expansion energy, it looks like 1.00000 +/- .000001. I suspect that it will eventually be found to be exactly 1.

However, this value does not seem at all remarkable to me, and it certainly doesn�t prove anything. Personally, I think the amount of mass is a direct function of the expansion rate, and that the mathematics of cosmology will eventually show that they are one and the same. However, since we don�t yet have a theory that is that complete, finding references to prove this would require jumping forward in time, perhaps 20-50 years.

Bokonon · 06-20-2002, 05:38 PM

Quote:

Originally posted by Michael:


So lets see, this person provides no references, himself, but demands that you provide references with any refutation?

You my tell that person that I say that his "fact" is a lie, and ask him if he can answer that with references. I sure as fuck ain't going to do his homework for him...

m.

I did just that...

"I will readily admit that I have not heard this before. As such, I'm not really sure what you're getting at, or more specifically, where you get your numbers. Can you please provide your sources? I have searched but cannot find the source of the information you speak of. Please provide your own source for this."

No worries... I'm now responding to this...

"Another fossil type- homo-erectus or the upright man. Its brain size and shape fall in to the range of mans. I refer to the Encyclopedia Britannica, 'the limb bones thus far discovered have been indistinguishable from those of homosapiens'. Again that is not proof of any kind of missing link"

EeeeeeeeZ.

Bokonon · 06-20-2002, 05:48 PM

Best one yet...

"Again, your opinion, some evolutionists would agree with you, many would not. Can you outline the evolutionary process from the starting point to humans please? Can you back this up with the fossil record and archeological findings as well"

Anyone have any fossils of a microscopic organism? Anyone?

Mageth · 06-20-2002, 06:07 PM

That last one sounds like something randman might say.

beausoleil · 06-21-2002, 12:41 AM

'Full of hot air'

That would be Bernard Lovell, pioneer of the radio telescope, founder of Jodrell Bank etc. Hmmmm.

Godless Dave · 06-21-2002, 02:34 AM

The Big Bang was not an "uncontrolled explosion".

06-20-2002, 05:02 PM	#1
Bokonon Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Left of the Mississippi Posts: 138	I've never heard this one... The first half is easy to respond to. But the second half I've never observed. Does anyone know anything about it? You say following the big bang, the laws of physics took hold. How does an uncontrolled explosion, featuring no elements prior to the explosion as you say, produce excellent gravitational and physical laws that keep our universe in working order and expanding at exactly the correct rate as bourne out by Red Shift. Lets look at the expansion of the universe for a minute. The rate of expansion is so finely tuned, that according to Bernard Lovell, if the universe were expanding one millionth part faster, then all the material in the universe would have dispensed by now. If it had been a million millionth part slower, than gravitational forces would have caused the universe to collapse within the first thousand million years or so of its existence. How can an uncontrolled explosion with no particular discernable cause produce that kind of perfect and i repeat PERFECT expansion rate for the universe? Can you answer with references please?

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

06-20-2002, 05:24 PM	#3
Autonemesis Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: I've left FRDB for good, due to new WI&P policy Posts: 12,048	The expansion rate has not been determined to a sufficient level of accuracy to state any such thing. One part in a million is .0001%. The Hubble constant has been estimated to an accuracy of perhaps 5-10% at best. The current consensus estimate averages about 70 km/sec/Mpc +/- 5 km/sec/Mpc. Lovell is full of hot air.

06-20-2002, 05:33 PM	#5
Asha'man Veteran Member Join Date: Dec 2001 Location: southeast Posts: 2,526	Actually, there is some truth to this statement. The amount of mass in the universe is amazingly close to the perfect amount that will allow expansion to continue indefinitely. The more astronomers refine their estimate, the closer the value looks. If you express it as a ratio of mass energy to expansion energy, it looks like 1.00000 +/- .000001. I suspect that it will eventually be found to be exactly 1. However, this value does not seem at all remarkable to me, and it certainly doesn�t prove anything. Personally, I think the amount of mass is a direct function of the expansion rate, and that the mathematics of cosmology will eventually show that they are one and the same. However, since we don�t yet have a theory that is that complete, finding references to prove this would require jumping forward in time, perhaps 20-50 years.

06-20-2002, 05:48 PM	#7
Bokonon Regular Member Join Date: Mar 2002 Location: Left of the Mississippi Posts: 138	Best one yet... "Again, your opinion, some evolutionists would agree with you, many would not. Can you outline the evolutionary process from the starting point to humans please? Can you back this up with the fossil record and archeological findings as well" Anyone have any fossils of a microscopic organism? Anyone?

06-20-2002, 06:07 PM	#8
Mageth Contributor Join Date: Jul 2001 Location: Deep in the heart of mother-lovin' Texas Posts: 29,689	That last one sounds like something randman might say.

06-21-2002, 12:41 AM	#9
beausoleil Senior Member Join Date: May 2002 Location: US and UK Posts: 846	'Full of hot air' That would be Bernard Lovell, pioneer of the radio telescope, founder of Jodrell Bank etc. Hmmmm.

06-21-2002, 02:34 AM	#10
Godless Dave Contributor Join Date: Feb 2002 Location: With 10,000 lakes who needs a coast? Posts: 10,762	The Big Bang was not an "uncontrolled explosion".

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.