http://www.usa-int.com/SDAILABS/AVT.html
2007-12-09 17:41:31 · 11 answers · asked by HotDockett 4 in Science & Mathematics ➔ Astronomy & Space
AVT is an interesting theory that shows some of the shortcomings and flaws in the Big Bang theory. But it inflicts more contradictions that are lies when observing the world around us. The claim the the law of entropy is wrong is a wishful thinking of the AVT proponents. Fact is that the universe and nature does not organize itself to a higher order.
Also the statement that thoughts and information are a form of energy is wrong. Information is neither matter nor energy. Even when matter is needed to store information and energy is needed to transmit information.
Conclusion: Both theories, Big Bang AND also AVT are flawed and can not explain our universe in a credible way.
2007-12-09 18:08:08 · answer #1 · answered by Ernst S 5 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Credibility is not an issue here although I must agree with Elohimself that SDAI Labs is arrogant and little credible.
The issue is that the Big Bang is only an observation: if galaxies expand, they must have been close together at one point in the past. Both Hubbles red-shift observation and the cosmic background has been observed by many; their existence is not disputable. But it doesn't make the Big Bang a certain reality.
Our problem is that we can hardly live with an open question. Maybe, one day, we will know for certain the origin of the universe. Maybe we will not.
2007-12-09 19:33:42 · answer #2 · answered by Michel Verheughe 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋
The AVT thing is garbage. It cannot explain the presence of lithium in the universe, which can arise only from energy-absorbing thermonuclear reactions. The big bang does so nicely, and gives good values for the quantities of the elements.
2007-12-09 19:27:39 · answer #3 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 0⤋
the super bang has no longer something by any skill to do with evolution different than interior the minds of creationists. One is an argument in physics and cosmology, the different is biology. it is genuine that many that settle for evolution additionally settle for the super bang ( or, as Calvin known because it, "the horrendouse area kablooie" ), however the only connection is they're the two logical, if incomplete explantions for stated phenomena. technological wisdom can in elementary terms describe that that's observable ( the two immediately or by way of it incredibly is effects) subsequently our skill to posit ideas stops on the super bang. Your 2 questions are sturdy and substantial, yet they have no longer something to do with technological wisdom and there is not any declare to their answer. the undeniable fact that there is a few thing quite than no longer something isn't any doubt certainly one of the superb argument there is for some style of god inspite of the undeniable fact that it would not refute the super bang, It in elementary terms shows that once he created a universe the super band became his tecnique. Evolution on the otherhand, being a much extra moderen occurance and lots extra easilly studied because of the fact it is ongoing, enjoys such overwhelming info that it is close to to irrefutable by way of all people who's purpose. Creattionists prefer to pretend that the super band and evolution have some style of connection interior the desire that the doubts with regards to the super bang will rub off on evolution. Neither of those is mandatory. If there's a god who created the universe, his wonderful act of creation became interior the super bang and he brought about existence to devolop following an evolutionary technique. Neither of those is inconsistant with the existance of god different than if he's the limited element the fundies make him out to be.
2016-11-14 06:50:28 · answer #4 · answered by ? 4 · 0⤊ 0⤋
i actually took the time to read some of that. and it kind of astouned me. i never thought it possible for someone to write so much bollox trying to use existing theories.
even the definition of the word energy astouned me. there is a finite amount of matter and energy in the universe. and secondly, dimensions have nothing to do with energy or matter itself. dimensions are 'space' and energy and matter is that which inhabbits space. energy or matter does not have dimentions, the universe has dimensions.
as for the explanation on vortices, again i kind of wondered. the picture of the galaxy is indeed in the shape of the golden cut ratio. HOWEVER there are many many many many galaxies, and they most definately do not all contain this shape. there are spiral(the one depicted), circular, eliptical and irregular galaxies.
energy is of infinite potential? youll find that energy and potential energy are actually two completely different things. potential energy is a mathmatical tool to be able to solve simple physics problems in kynetic or thermodynamics, amoung others.
the calculation for the speed of light seems to have no boundries, utterly devestating the pretty established theory that c has a maximum speed in a vacuum.
and id hate to beak it to you, but there is most definately no unified field theory as of yet. im SURE such a huge scientific discovery would have been in every newspaper around the world.
the article is amusing at most, but im afraid i will go for big bang...
2007-12-09 17:57:07 · answer #5 · answered by mrzwink 7 · 5⤊ 0⤋
Reads like the ponderings of a backwoods philosopher translated into Japanese, from Japanese into German and back to English again by people who know no physics.
There were a couple of bits that almost made sense.
Looks like it's still the big bang folks.
2007-12-09 21:29:27 · answer #6 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 0⤋
SDAI Labs looks like a cheesy fraud put together by a bunch of retards. They're probably crooks who have heard about an approaching energy crisis and are trying to position themselves to profit from false promises about a wonderful new source of energy based on quantum physics. They're cocky, arrogant clowns who mistakenly believe that they can fake physics well enough to fool physicists. Either that, or they're physicists who got drunk and decided to create that website as some kind of joke.
2007-12-09 18:47:38 · answer #7 · answered by elohimself 4 · 1⤊ 0⤋
Big Bang
2007-12-09 17:48:18 · answer #8 · answered by Anonymous · 4⤊ 0⤋
Well,one thing is for sure, the trolls will never stop using the Big Bang to get attention.
:-)
2007-12-09 19:39:07 · answer #9 · answered by Anonymous · 1⤊ 1⤋
well at least when he explained 'vortexes' he didnt use the example of water going down a drain.
2007-12-09 17:53:42 · answer #10 · answered by Faesson 7 · 1⤊ 0⤋