Re: Evolution is really sun worship

From: C Lund (clund_at_notam02SPAMBLOCK.no)
Date: 08/16/04 

Date: Mon, 16 Aug 2004 09:02:48 +0200

In article <timberwoof-8A966C.13485415082004@typhoon.sonic.net>,
 Timberwoof <timberwoof@stimpberawoofm.com> wrote:
> In article <clund-33705C.10242715082004@amstwist00.chello.com>,
> C Lund <clund@notam02SPAMBLOCK.no> wrote:

(BIG snip)

> > Mind you, I'm not even saying the big bang theory is wrong; I'm saying
> > it's just one more plausible theory among other more or less plausible
> > theories. Maybe the universe was created in a Big Bang. Maybe the
> > universe has always existed and will always exist. Maybe it's a matter
> > of local Big Bangs in an eternal universe. I don't know.

> Oh. For a moment there it seemed as though you were trying to come up
> with all sorts of alternative explanations for observed phenomena as
> though the Big Bang and expanding universe were not how things were.

Nope. Just stating that the Big Bang isn't the fundamental truth many
think it is. B)

> Tell me something ... if there's a universal electron cloud dense enough
> to causes all that Compton-effect redshift, can it still be sparse
> enough to allow the spontaneous generation of matter supposedly allowed
> by quantum physics?

I don't know. Perhaps this universal electron cloud is the result of
the very spontaneous matter generation you've mentioned? (iirc this
spontaneous generation involves a matter/antimatter pair, so it
probably isn't)

> And if in some volume that had been vacuum some matter appeared, would
> it then still be sparse enough to allow the creation of more matter? At
> what point would the existence of spontaneously-created matter prevent
> the creation of more matter? Is that density great enough to allow the
> resulting matter gas to coalesce into galaxies at the rate needed for a
> steady-state galaxy?

Well, the galaxies are not distributed evenly in the universe (another
problem with the Big Bang, I think). Instead you have huge structures
like the Great Wall and vast empty areas where there are no galaxies
at all. Perhaps the matter is generated in the empty areas and then
drawn into the large structures by gravity?

> And why do you need spontaneous creation of matter anyway, in a static
> galaxy?

To replace matter that has decayed. Neutrons decay to an electron +
proton pair, and protons decay into a positron + pion pair.

   http://www.fact-index.com/p/pr/proton_decay.html

For a static universe to work, matter would have to be replenished
somehow.

> To me, the current mainstream explanation seems to fit all the facts,
> and works well enough that a sane person could provisionally (until a
> better explanation comes along) accept it as fact. The various
> steady-state theories have too many holes.

*All* the current theories have holes. That's why I don't place any of
them higher than another. Although I have to admit I prefer the
thought of an eternal universe to that of one created in a Big Bang.
All the outcomes of a Big Bang universe are depressing. Yes, I know
that's not very scientific.. ;) 

-- 
C Lund, www.notam02.no/~clund

Relevant Pages

  • Vestiges of Big Bang Waves Are Reported
    ... >> Vestiges of Big Bang Waves Are Reported ... >> universe after the Big Bang. ... matter was evenly distributed in all ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Vestiges of Big Bang Waves Are Reported
    ... >> Vestiges of Big Bang Waves Are Reported ... >> universe after the Big Bang. ... matter was evenly distributed in all ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Origins and Mental Activity
    ... activity before continuing to chew on the laws of intelligence. ... elements formed after the big bang -- except maybe helium and hydrogen ... throughout the universe, and in great quantity. ... will get the furthest in tracking the formation of matter, ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Limited Evolutionary Potential? - for Marc
    ... I didn't say the big bang theory must be wrong. ... I have a difficult time with the idea that the universe could happen ... I like to think of a design studio with lots of designers, ... I am also taken by how long the evolution of matter from energy took ...
    (talk.origins)
  • Re: Dont like the truth? Lie.
    ... A Quintessential Introduction to Dark Energy ... "Most of the energy in the universe is not gravitationally attractive. ... We are probably the last generation to have been taught that gravity ... Visible matter comes nowhere close to closing the Universe. ...
    (sci.space.policy)