Announcement

Collapse

Natural Science 301 Guidelines

This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.

As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.

Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less

The Universe Shouldn't Exist...

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Energy cannot exist without matter, that is, mass.

    The energy equation is dependent on there being defined mass. Energy = mass x (distance / time)2 where distance per time is what we know as the speed of light.

    It is not possible to know an energy without defined mass. Even space itself is defined by the presence of mass.

    So it is distance cannot be defined without the presence of mass.
    Last edited by 37818; 10-29-2017, 12:13 PM.
    . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

    . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

    Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
      I actually agree, and this part o the inspiration for further research. It is not uncommon for scientists to be puzzled and not know nor understand everything.

      What is the problem here?!?!?!
      What makes you think there's a problem? As I visited Edison's work place about ten years ago, I was fascinated by his puzzlement, and the work resulting from it.
      The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Yttrium View Post
        How does that factor into a religious agenda?

        Offhand, it seems to me that you're off base with that comment.
        Using disconnected sound bites to justify science as science fiction. Also considering the source and the history of posts.
        Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
        Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
        But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

        go with the flow the river knows . . .

        Frank

        I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

        Comment


        • #19
          Originally posted by 37818 View Post
          Energy cannot exist without matter, that is, mass.
          Vilenkin,Guth, Hawking,Krauss,and most other physicists and cosmologists disagree. What authority are asserting to support your statement.
          Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
          Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
          But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

          go with the flow the river knows . . .

          Frank

          I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
            What makes you think there's a problem? As I visited Edison's work place about ten years ago, I was fascinated by his puzzlement, and the work resulting from it.
            Your amusement at scientist being puzzled.

            Originally posted by Cow Poke
            But it's always fun to see scientists puzzled.
            Why would it be funny (Sarcasm?) if there was not a problem?
            Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
            Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
            But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

            go with the flow the river knows . . .

            Frank

            I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

            Comment


            • #21
              Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
              Your amusement at scientist being puzzled.

              Why would it be funny (Sarcasm?) if there was not a problem?
              I think you're trying to see something that isn't there. I said it was "fun", not funny.
              The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                I think you're trying to see something that isn't there. I said it was "fun", not funny.
                Either way considering it "fun" or "funny" is an odd response to the normal almost universal puzzlement of unanswered questions by scientists.
                Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                go with the flow the river knows . . .

                Frank

                I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                  Disconnected sound bites from the clueless with a religious agenda.
                  For the sarcastically impaired the following is said in jest

                  which is much, much better than disconnected soundbites from the clueless with an a-religious agenda.

                  Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                  Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                  sigpic
                  I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                    I actually agree, and this part o the inspiration for further research. It is not uncommon for scientists to be puzzled and not know nor understand everything.

                    What is the problem here?!?!?!
                    Sheesh, Shuny --- you said you agree, now you're trying to make a federal case of it? Slow night?

                    Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                    But it's always fun to see scientists puzzled.
                    Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                    I actually agree....
                    The first to state his case seems right until another comes and cross-examines him.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Cow Poke View Post
                      Sheesh, Shuny --- you said you agree, now you're trying to make a federal case of it? Slow night?
                      I did not agree with your sarcastic initial post, nor the under current of a religious agenda of the this thread.

                      I agreed that scientist are universally 'puzzled' concerning the unknowns of science, which is the stimulus for more research in all the sciences.
                      Glendower: I can call spirits from the vasty deep.
                      Hotspur: Why, so can I, or so can any man;
                      But will they come when you do call for them? Shakespeare’s Henry IV, Part 1, Act III:

                      go with the flow the river knows . . .

                      Frank

                      I do not know, therefore everything is in pencil.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Actually, the answer is that during the big bang matter and antimatter were indeed created in equal amounts, but they were separated into two universes: This universe and the antiuniverse where Spock has a goatee.

                        giphy.gif

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by shunyadragon View Post
                          Vilenkin,Guth, Hawking,Krauss,and most other physicists and cosmologists disagree. What authority are asserting to support your statement.
                          E = mc2

                          The m in the equation. Do Vilenkin, Guth, Hawking, Krauss, and most other physicist and cosmologists use a different equation for mass energy conversion?
                          . . . the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; . . . -- Romans 1:16 KJV

                          . . . that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures: . . . -- 1 Corinthians 15:3-4 KJV

                          Whosoever believeth that Jesus is the Christ is born of God: . . . -- 1 John 5:1 KJV

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Ugh, i do not like this article. Basically, measurements of antimatter show it's got a perfect symmetry with matter is how the story puts it, ignoring the fact that it's specific to this one set of circumstances: protons and antiprotons. There are a number of other exotic particles where there is a broken symmetry. They're not enough to account for the abundance of matter as of yet, but there are theoretical ideas for a few additional broken symmetries.

                            So the reality is that we don't yet know why there's this degree of matter abundance, but we're getting close to accounting for it. And new measurements of the antiproton won't change that, because no physicist was expecting the lack of symmetry to be there in the first place.
                            "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by TheLurch View Post
                              Ugh, i do not like this article. Basically, measurements of antimatter show it's got a perfect symmetry with matter is how the story puts it, ignoring the fact that it's specific to this one set of circumstances: protons and antiprotons. There are a number of other exotic particles where there is a broken symmetry. They're not enough to account for the abundance of matter as of yet, but there are theoretical ideas for a few additional broken symmetries.

                              So the reality is that we don't yet know why there's this degree of matter abundance, but we're getting close to accounting for it. And new measurements of the antiproton won't change that, because no physicist was expecting the lack of symmetry to be there in the first place.
                              How can we verify that there is a broken symmetry? Just wondering. It would seem that investigating anti-matter exotic particles would be much more challenging than investigating matter.
                              Enter the Church and wash away your sins. For here there is a hospital and not a court of law. Do not be ashamed to enter the Church; be ashamed when you sin, but not when you repent. – St. John Chrysostom

                              Veritas vos Liberabit<>< Learn Greek <>< Look here for an Orthodox Church in America<><Ancient Faith Radio
                              sigpic
                              I recommend you do not try too hard and ...research as little as possible. Such weighty things give me a headache. - Shunyadragon, Baha'i apologist

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Originally posted by One Bad Pig View Post
                                How can we verify that there is a broken symmetry? Just wondering. It would seem that investigating anti-matter exotic particles would be much more challenging than investigating matter.
                                The LHC and other particle colliders generate antimatter in the form of subatomic particles very regularly. The broken symmetries are in how these decay, not in their production. As a result, various quarks and antiquarks can be treated as equivalents for most things that go on inside particle collisions.
                                "Any sufficiently advanced stupidity is indistinguishable from trolling."

                                Comment

                                Related Threads

                                Collapse

                                Topics Statistics Last Post
                                Started by Hypatia_Alexandria, 03-18-2024, 12:15 PM
                                48 responses
                                135 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post Sparko
                                by Sparko
                                 
                                Started by Sparko, 03-07-2024, 08:52 AM
                                16 responses
                                74 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Started by rogue06, 02-28-2024, 11:06 AM
                                6 responses
                                48 views
                                0 likes
                                Last Post shunyadragon  
                                Working...
                                X