QUANTUM SINGULARITY of GOD Theory and other space stuff!?

Question

Ok as I under stand it the big bang theory states at 1 point in time and space that all known matter in the universe converged into 1 area and then was rapidly dispersed and formed balls of gas that formed stars, planets and all known matter in the universe.

There is something illogical about this assessment. That is to say that would not a huge black hole have been formed and all matter would have been a black hole or later consumed by a that same black hole. What was the force that propelled the matter apart? I say it was the hand of god.


Also why is there a dark energy theory isn’t dark energy the ejecti of Black Holes and therefore not be anti-matter. If that is the case 75% of the known universe is Anti-Matter. Also what is cool is their may be anti-matter life forms which we could not even see. Also it has become clear to me that Black holes must function much as a star does internal not as a rock but some form of anti-matter liquid or gaseous equivalent. Thus as it spins it would not spin at the same rate with. This is possibly what causes them to plus from time to time.

Address any part of the question that you want god, science which I think is the study or creation. Thus science by default is the study of god.

plus should be "pulse" thanks have a good one.

Answer 1

Bingo! give the 'man' a cigar. science is proving the existence of god every day, tho you couldn't make any of them admit it.

Answer 2

Don't let yourself get sucked in to this whole thing about God and science to be compatible, they aren't. All the explainations of the universe and it's phenomenon are mans attemp to understand the world around him and spiraling out into space. But it all goes back to the dark ages, this is the power of the church to draw you into something you cannot prevail over. Soon you will get swamped and sucumb to the establishment. Namely theirs.
God is none of this! He is the embodiment of at shot at life immortal or at least beyond this. Think of it like this - Relegion is the ultimate mysticm, that is the institution of seeking power in and or from some high power. For this one must first have sought and have found such a power. Follow the train of history and even the Bible say it - in the old days the preist of the false idols were called idoletors and their art idolotry, most of them were fakes but not all of them. The trick was to get that thing called a successful contact and then get the spirit to be willing to show up repeatedly. These few had the power to go on to become powerful relegions and often did. And that includs the Godhead, or the throne of God, God the creator, or any other way you want to think of the supream being. What you have got to do is get it right for once! He if you remember didn't deni there were other god's, he flaunts the fact that he is the greatest and challenges you to know this and have faith. And he goes on to at the very same time cast out the art of idolotry and demand it be obsolet and that you know that he will not respond any longer to it ( key word any longer ), but instead his new relegion and only it. Sorry the curch doesn't like to be forced to look at it this way. They would have him the one and only true god and all others fakery. But then they have him talk to Abreham, Moses, ST. Paul on the road to Tarsis, and many more times since. Ending with many names such as God Almighty; God Omi and ten or twenty others. If they talk to him and he talks to them it's just a thing called communication; just idolotry and has always been. But remember you can't except through them; or is it just them trying to keep their job? In the end it's just do you want to believe in him and that he is who he says he is. Some say that Adom and Eve and other claims are misconcrus but serve their purpouse demonstrating his power and little more; it's all a message to be delevered to you and accepted or rejectred. That's his real thing, he offers you the choice of free will.

Answer 3

You're back for more eh? Here's the deal... What you're doing here is deciding to attribute events, whose origins are unknown, to God. This is understandable, and I am not saying that God doesn't exist, but the lack of proof of one explanation (Evolution over Creationism) does not require its contradiction (Creationism over Evolution) to be true. It just goes to prove that Science is incomplete at this given time.

Looking back at human history, I can illustrate much better. Today, we accept that the world is round, and the sun is the center of our solar system. Back, even before the time of Galileo, it was accepted that the earth was the center. How did this change? With discoveries that were yet to be made. Eventually it did, and now we scoff at a person who claims the earth is flat, and the center, the same way how people scoffed at heliocentrism back then.

So a die-hard scientist can claim that an explanation hasn't been found yet to explain all that we observe. It may very well be that in the end both science and religion may come to the conclusion of the existence of an omnipotent being, but until science can come to that conclusion logically, there really is not going be a way to get die-hard scientists to accept the existence of the omnipotent being

Answer 4

The 2 first paragraphs are pure speculation, so I'll let you say what you want but the third one is worth answering. Dark Energy and Black Holes are 2 different concepts. The ejecti of black holes as you say has no significance, because we never actually see ejecti from black holes. Anti-particles on the other hand are very real, these particles are created and used in particle accelerators (positron which is the anti-particle of the electron). Making anti-electrons are difficult and making anti-hydrogen is even harder, it doesn't last very long... (anti-hydrogen being 1 anti-electron and 1 anti-proton). If Black holes are so clear to you then start writing a thesis with some equations not just bla bla and go collect your Nobel Prize shortly...

Answer 5

We'll start with the black hole problem:
We only know from the friedmann equations that the universe converges to a point going backwards in time. Unfortunately the Friedmann equations break down on the small scales as the universe converges to a point. Therefore we don't know the physics of the expansion of the universe the very first instant after the big bang, nor do we know the topology of it. It is impossible to apply the relativistic concept of a black hole during this time as well for the same reason, the Einstein field equation breaks down on small scales.

That said even applying classical relativity to your hypothesis it is possible to get around the immediate collapse of the universe.

The first way is a bit of a stretch because you need an observer outside the universe, however if you believe in a Deity then this should be acceptable to you, physicists dislike this idea because it's logically impossible. From this observers perspective; how long has the universe existed, how big is it, how dense is it. All these questions are impossible to answer. There would be no common scale between the universe and the observer. Time is defined by transfer of information between events, however no information can be transferred outside the universe, because by the time it is the universe will have already entered that space (the big problem with the outside observer). Length scales are defined by distances between events. Since no events are occurring outside the universe, or they are at least disjoint form those inside the universe there is no way to judge your distance from the universe or the by extension the size of the universe. As an example imagine picture of an ant on a white surface, now imagine a picture of a jumbo jet on a white surface. It's impossible to tell which is bigger, because you don't know how far away each picture was taken, there are no common scales between the two pictures or the pictures and you. Without distances and time you have no densities, no velocities, no masses, nothing. You could say that the universe is a static black hole to an outside observer.

Now consider a particle within the big bang, what is your size scale. For the first instance you have none as well. The universes is expanding so quickly that light can't make it between particles, more space is added faster then light can cover it, so you are enclosed in sort of an inverted event horizon nothing can reach you from outside of a small sphere around you. As the expansion decreases your horizon gets larger and larger, and the light and gravity that couldn't catch you previously starts catcing up. But at this point things are already far enough away from you that you are no longer dense enough to recollapse.

(note: you may think that the light not catching up violates the speed of light limit, however, nothing is traveling faster then the speed of light. Let's say for every meter between two objects an extra meter is added every second. so two objects 1 meter apart will be 2 meters apart after the first second, 4 after the 2nd, 8 after the 3rd, 2^n after the nth. Light traveling at 3*10^8 m/s could not reach 2 objects if they were 3*10^8 meters apart because new space would grow at the same rate that the light covered the distance. If the universe expanded at a rate of 3*10^8 meters per meter per second then light a meter away would never reach you ect.)

As per dark energy. Dark energy is a construct of Einstein's field equation, a constant of integration. We have not directly seen it's existence, we only know that the universe seems to be expanding in a way that requires it to exist. Determined values of various densities from the Cosmic Microwave Background have filled in blanks in the Friedmann equations, that result in a non zero cosmological constant, which results in a "force" we call dark energy. It is derived from a completely separate solution to the field equation and has no classical relativity analog to black holes, and no known quantum analog.

Further dark energy is completely and totally unrelated to anti-matter. Anti-matter is included in the baryonic matter that makes up about 3-4% of the universes mass/energy. Because of several weak interactions which favor regular matter over anti-matter, anti matter actually makes up far less of the universe then regular matter.

Anti-matter life forms while theoretically are not impossible and therefore probably exist, somewhere, by some freak fluctuation in densities, would be very visible to us. Light interacts with any charged particle. In fact the emission spectrum of anti-matter atoms are exactly the same as regular matter atoms. We wouldn't know they were anti-matter until we shook their hands and blew up with the energy of several hydrogen bombs, causing quite the inter-stellar incident.

As far as the internal mechanisms inside a black hole. Nobody knows what happens inside of one, and without a quantum theory of gravity it's impossible to even begin to speculate. Classical relativity says that the interior of a black hole is empty space with a two dimensional ring singularity at the center (it degenerates to a one dimensional point in a scwarzschild non-rotating black hole).

Black holes pulse because of matter falling into the black hole being super heated and emitting radiation.

As for god the juries still out, and will be for ever, the very nature of a Deity makes it's existence unprovable.

Answer 6

As I see it you are trying to prove that God exists with science.

Answer 7

quantum theory and creation of the universe is like gestalt - a piece is as "big"/ as important as the whole.

Answer 8

If god is so smart, how ocme he created so many stupid people?