English Deutsch Français Italiano Español Português 繁體中文 Bahasa Indonesia Tiếng Việt ภาษาไทย
All categories

A tiny bit of nothing packed so tightly together that it blew up and produced all the matter in the universe. Seriously now, this is a fairy tale. It is a bunch of armchair calculations, and nothing else.

Nothingness cannot pack together. It would have no way to push itself into a pile.

A vacuum has no density. It is said that the nothingness got very dense, and that is why it exploded. But a total vacuum is the opposite of total density.

There would be no ignition to explode nothingness. No fire and no match. It could not be a chemical explosion, for no chemicals existed. It could not be a nuclear explosion, for there were no atoms!

There is no way to expand it. How can you expand what isn’t there? Even if that magical vacuum could somehow be pulled together by gravity, what would then cause the pile of emptiness to push outward? The "gravity" which brought it together would keep it from expanding.

Nothingness cannot produce heat.

2007-04-22 11:38:14 · 19 answers · asked by Anonymous in Society & Culture Religion & Spirituality

I already did post in the astrophysics section. Lets see what they make of THE TRUTH!!!!

2007-04-22 11:45:47 · update #1

19 answers

Nothingness can apparently produce a supreme being which can then create.

2007-04-22 11:41:31 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 4 1

Apparently you don't know anything about the Big Bang theory, other than it started the universe with a bang.

1) The condensed mass wasn't matter, it was energy, therefore there was nothing to put into a pile.
2) Matter couldn't exist in the "pile" because the electromagnetic bonds, the strong force and the weak force, didn't exist in a way that would hold the parts of atoms together to create matter. That came later after everything cooled down.
3) it wasn't cold, it was really, really hot and that heat wasn't produced by nothingness, but by energy.
4) It wasn't "gravity" that brought it all together, it was the unifcation of the three previously mentioned forces and gravity.

Seriously. Before you try to debunk something, maybe you should learn what it is, first.

2007-04-22 18:49:25 · answer #2 · answered by Muffie 5 · 0 0

Sounds to me like the big bang is understood intuitively by 'let there be light' and by the tao te ching's 'the 10000 things arose out of the one thing.'

There is nothing about this universe's laws which are relevant to the big bang, as it occurred outside the universe and created the universe.

I do believe that all this nothingness exploding is also reflected in all the matter and antimatter in the universe adding up to zero.

2007-04-22 18:44:45 · answer #3 · answered by cassandra 6 · 0 0

You obviously do not understand the big bang theory.

Everything in the universes at one time was one giant mass, someone created some type of explosion (God) there is nothing in the theory about nothingness.

2007-04-22 18:43:37 · answer #4 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

How do you account for the radiation trails leading to the center of the universe?

Or the ever expanding galaxies drifting away form each other.

2007-04-22 18:42:08 · answer #5 · answered by Skeptic123 5 · 1 0

Define "nothing" or "nothingness"

And a scientific theory is not a fairytale. An example of a fairytale would be chritinanity.

2007-04-22 19:34:47 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

Mystery, Paradox and Awe. Like a toenail cell trying to explain the brain.

2007-04-22 18:45:25 · answer #7 · answered by Anonymous · 0 0

there's nothing could come out of nothing.even if people says that big bang comes not from nothingness but from dense huge material where does it came from?
I think its logical that God exists

2007-04-26 04:27:10 · answer #8 · answered by Saya Sendiri 2 · 0 0

No, sorry, it is based on evidence as the best answer we have. It is not claimed to be the absolute "behead everybody who doubts" truth.
Those kinds of truths belong to the desert dwelling goat herding fanatics who gave us religion

2007-04-22 18:44:10 · answer #9 · answered by U-98 6 · 1 0

There are a lot of other reasons why that theory doesn't hold up in addition to the ones you listed. You can read them at http://godrules.net/evolutioncruncher/c02a.htm

2007-04-22 18:44:16 · answer #10 · answered by Martin S 7 · 0 1

fedest.com, questions and answers