Science Admits They Made Up Everything About the Big Bang

[r00t]

Big bang is intrinsically illogical when you express it mathematically

0+0=0
0*0=0
0-0=0
0/0=undefined

[kylok]

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Big bang is intrinsically illogical when you express it mathematically

0+0=0
0*0=0
0-0=0
0/0=undefined

Seriously, wtf are you talking about? Let's try and do this in english.

nothing and nothing is nothing.

nothing times nothings is nothing.

the difference between nothing and nothing is nothing.

the number of times nothing can go into nothing is not defined. It's improper to use an equals sign there.

How this relates to the big bang is beyond me. First and foremost the big bang doesn't say we started with nothing, it says we started with something. If anything this supports genesis. There was a beginning.

[r00t]

The big bang theory violates the first and second laws (read: not theories) of thermodynamcs

1. matter cannot be created or destroyed
2. Everything tends towards disorder


It says 0+0=1, and that everything went from disorder (an unstable singularity) to order (our structured universe)

Not only this, but a singularity exploding from rapid spinning (let alone the matter, where'd it get the energy?) would send all particles in the same direction. This is known as conservation of angular momentum, another very basic law of physics.

I'm tellin you, full of holes.

[kylok]

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The big bang theory violates the first and second laws (read: not theories) of thermodynamcs

1. matter cannot be created or destroyed
2. Everything tends towards disorder


It says 0+0=1, and that everything went from disorder (an unstable singularity) to order (our structured universe)

Not only this, but a singularity exploding from rapid spinning (let alone the matter, where'd it get the energy?) would send all particles in the same direction. This is known as conservation of angular momentum, another very basic law of physics.

I'm tellin you, full of holes.

"It says 0+0=1, and that everything went from disorder (an unstable singularity) to order (our structured universe)" - you have this backwards, a singularity is more ordered than a vast and expanding universe. The big bang theory/hypothesis/Idontcare suggests that all the energy/matter of the universe was present at its inception (E=mc^2).

"Not only this, but a singularity exploding from rapid spinning (let alone the matter, where'd it get the energy?) would send all particles in the same direction. This is known as conservation of angular momentum, another very basic law of physics." - You also have this wrong, first of all you're applying Newtonian physics in the relativistic realm which is improper, please do not make the mistake of applying Newtons laws outside of the Earthly realm (that's where they work). Secondly, if you take a look at the classic picture of the cosmic background radiation it's clear (if properly interpreted) that the universe did not expand uniformly, otherwise that picture instead of having blotches of green, red, and black representing temperature differences would all be the same color.

Again - what's your field of expertise in the scientific realm?

[kylok]

http://www.amazon.com/Physics-Scient.../dp/0131495089

This is my physics book btw.

[r00t]

I guess the disorder bit is subjective. There is a relativistic application of the angular momentum formula, to which I was referring to, that basically draws the same conclusion (i.e. uranus and saturn going opposite directions from inertia would be a violation).

[r00t]

http://www.amazon.com/Physics-Scient...xp_grid_pt_0_1

That's mine

[r00t]

mine costs more so is better

[kylok]

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I guess the disorder bit is subjective. There is a relativistic application of the angular momentum formula, to which I was referring to, that basically draws the same conclusion (i.e. uranus and saturn going opposite directions from inertia would be a violation).

I haven't personally seen the bit on relativistic angular momentum - if you could provide a link I'd love to read it. As far as the disorder bit goes - sorry but it's not subjective, you simply have it backwards. Here's an analogy for you - water. Steam is more disordered than liquid water, which is more disordered than ice. The "singularity" is the ice, our universe as we currently observe it is the steam.

[kylok]

Originally Posted by r00t [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

mine costs more so is better

I've actually read mine. Ergo stfu? =D Quote when your book supports your arguments.