The Big Bang never happened

quote:

---

(Larry) Don't you have any of your OWN thoughts about this subject that you would like to share?

---

My original thoughts are simple. I do not see a collasping universe. I do not believe that all matter has been created at some past event and now it is just a matter of running down. I believe that matter is being created NOW reflected by the behavoir of galaxy and our Sun. I believe that this production of energy does not come from nothing, rather it emerges from the INSIDE of empty space - the fifth dimension. I describe this INSIDE as a PURE ENERGY, which to me means a kind of energy not doing anything.

Is there any empirical evidence for the above?

This is what I found


It is assumed that redshift means velocity, and from this assumption it is assumed that velocity means expansion and from this it is assumed that expansion came from a point and from this it is assumed that the point was a big bang.

But that didn't work out, so they had to create the entire universe, and more, first. They did this with unimaginable speed. Then it stopped (since it is not subject to the laws of physics during acceleration, apparently it is not subject to any laws during deacceration) . But even then they had to invent invisible matter and invisible energy to make things work out right.

There is no evidence that redshift has a velcity component, indeed the evidence indicates that it does not have a velocity component. it has been found to be quantized, Or even a distance component, it has been found differing from the same place. Without this redshift velocity there is no acceleration. Without an acceleration, there is no way to go backwards to a beginning.

There is only now.

The only thing with no beginning and no end. I think Schroedinger said that.

They really are saying something like

"Our theory does not have an ordinary explanation for the galactic outflows, and the only thing we can think of that might produce these outflows is a black hole's accretion disk which is sucking more matter than radiation pressures allow in, the excess is the outflow we observe. Whenever we see a great outflow of matter/energy we now know we have found a black hole sucking matter in."

Somehow I have this feeling that if I admitted to the powers to be that I am confused, their reply would be something like "Good!"

And that is not what I thought science was about. Don't care about the axioms, or the methodology, or the uncertainties, or the mathematics. Science is about telling the truth. If science cannot tell the truth, and if it is an assumption or it is a fact, then all of the above is for naught, and we are left with nothing more than a brand new belief system, aka "religion" , with its priests and popes along with their secret knowledge that only they know all about.

The scary part is that the big bangers have got mathematicians creating mathematical equations which support their theory. I also heard that mathematics is a tautology, what comes out is what one put in. Well, when mathematics can describe emergence, when (1,1,)R=11 then let's talk

How did we get here? Here, where popular opinion rules what is science and what is not science. How did we get here where the evidence for something as important as the evolution of the Universe is invisible evidence? And for what reason has this invisible evidence been conceived? Because no visible evidence exists"

I can't believe that after all of these thousands of years of scientific research, the grand culmination of it all will be based on invisible/black/dark evidence.

Imagine what you might say if someone came up to you and said that he had a storehouse of energy and when you aksed him to show it to you, he said, can't, it's invisible.

So that is what I would like to contribute to cosmology. What do we see Now? What are galaxies actually, read really doing? What does a star do? What does our Sun do? What we see is inexplicable outflows of energy everywhere. Structures that formed too fast, strauctures that rotae tooo fast, structures that outflow too fast and our own Sun having a anomalous extra-chronosphere temperature increase above the much cooler surface.



"Our theory", they seem to be saying, "starts out before the laws of physics, and nearly instantaneously creates a universe of space. And after the universal space has been put in place, then we have the radiation of the big bang all over the place. As this cools down, the forces take hold and all of the necessary atomic elements are created in the proper proportions."

The thing about plasma, a state of matter like taking about liquids, is that it is scalable, what this means here is that what applies on a micro scale also works on the macro. One can observe the ebbs and flows of galactic plasma in one's basement. For that matter one can go to menards and purchase a plasma ball and there is is.

My interest is actually in crop circles. Crop circles are often seen being formed by Balls of Light. I believe these BoL's are balls of plasma. Similar balls of plasma have been seen coming from the fizzures of earthquakes, swanpland, coming off the contacts of a submarine battery then floating down the passageway, and even in an airplane drifting down the aisle. Lot's of work is being done (Morley B King)with plasma in attempts to create free energy. Some of these machines work, they actually do create more energy than they consume.

Let's set aside the plasma balls of light which appears to heat plant nodes such that they bend, not break, in an obviously intelligent way. Consider only that the plasma ball of light is floating i midair, never mind what it is doing there. Just that it is floating around is enough to establish an energy source unlike any classical kind we can devise. THe plasma ball of light does not follow Maxwell's equations.

Expand this to the center of the galaxy and it becomes clear that the so-called Black hole is actually what it looks like - a white hole spewing out plaama created matter/energy jets/geysers/winds/flows.

I am not the only one...

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">quote:

---

"In the late 1950’s when the prestigious Armenian astronomer,
Viktor Ambarzumian was president of the International
Astronomical Union he said that just looking at pictures
convinced him that new galaxies were ejected out of
old. Even now astronomers refuse to discuss it, saying that
big galaxies cannot come out of other big galaxies" <hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Tommy said

"My original thoughts are simple. I do not see a collasping universe. I do not believe that all matter has been created at some past event and now it is just a matter of running down. I believe that matter is being created NOW reflected by the behavoir of galaxy and our Sun. I believe that this production of energy does not come from nothing, rather it emerges from the INSIDE of empty space - the fifth dimension. I describe this INSIDE as a PURE ENERGY, which to me means a kind of energy not doing anything."

---

Your right in that the total universe will not collapse.

But! you do have the collapse of matter as part of the recycling process.
We see this in the formation of new stars and Black Holes.

Matter is consistently being formed from active galactic centres ejecting and from exploding stars and during the life of a star.

There is no 5th dimension and there is no santa clause.

The pure energy that you are speaking of is high density plasma
which forms part of the recycling process.


Have a nice day.

Harry

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Your right in that the total universe will not collapse.

But! you do have the collapse of matter as part of the recycling process.
We see this in the formation of new stars and Black Holes.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Perhaps my own interpretation of the big bang theory is not correct. I thought that they are saying that the Universe collapsed from pure radiation, and that gravity took over and further collected ALL the matter into quantum fluctuative clumps we call a galaxy. In a sense matter collapsed into the stars. That is how I interpret the BB.

I think that if gravity were such a powerful force, it would simply attract all matter into one big blob. I look at a globular galaxy, and I don't see that happening. All I need is one exception...

I do not see this cosmic gravitation happening.

The Black Hole is a conjecture. It has not been directly observed. What has been observed is a anomalous outflowing of matter/energy, and in order to explain this outflow, a black hole has been hypothesized as the source of this outflow on the basis that no other source could be imagined.

The BB theory is grounded in matter suspended in a space. They are constrained to create a matter explanation for the outflow, and ingeniously devised the black hole along with its accretion disk. And since ALL matter is assumed to have been created at the Big Bang, the matter must be coming from outside. But the matter coming from inside to the outside, the outflow, well, that is redirected outside matter. Matter that wasn't allowed into the black hole.

But if the assumption is changed so that there is an energy INSIDE,
that this energy comes all the way outside as a AGN outflow would be of no surprise. Or mystery...


<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Matter is consistently being formed from active galactic centres ejecting and from exploding stars and during the life of a star.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Well let's be a bit more specific about what you and I mean by matter.
To me matter is an electron and an proton (I don't know what the neutrino does) (which by the way are the constituents of the state of matter called "plasma"), and it is these ingredients which are then mixed in various ways to make up the atomic elements. The simplest form is atomic hydrogen made of one electron and one proton interacting as a whole "atom.". This is matter. All other forms of matter are but different arrangements of these elementary parts. Plasma is matter too. A star is a ball of plasma, electrons and protons.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">There is no 5th dimension and there is no santa clause.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Harry, the Fifth dimension is not a speculation (theory) someone had, it is something that has been found through experimentation. Casimir found this anomalous energy when he placed two polished plates together, They stuck together. This is now well known and is called the Casimir Effect. But even more famous is Bell's Theorem and the subsequently experiments by Alan Aspect. In short, the two photons remain stuck together even when we separate them. Furthermore they act as if stuck togehter instantaneously. This is where "non-locality" comes from. Non-locality is accepted by physicists as fact. But not so well known is synchronicity, which is something that has to happen to you. And then there is the Phantom DNA. Gariaev of the Russian Acedemy of Science was able to measure and record the magnetic fields of a DNA molecule. They used laser light and mirror effects. As astounding as that may seem, what is extraordinary is that when they remove the DNA from the chamvber and recalibrate it, they found that the magnetic fields remained in place. And then there is the matter of electron and magnetic moments and does the electron get its energy from? And how does the mag wave excite the elect wave which excites the mag wave which excites and so on forever? Maxwell called it the Fourth dimension after Riemann's conception of it.

Like you said, there is no Santa Clause.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The pure energy that you are speaking of is high density plasma
which forms part of the recycling process.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">

Not in my mind. What you are talking about is matter. Plasma is a form of matter. Squish it together and it still is matter. What I am talking about is that this matter is actually an atomic process, and thus by definition is an open system. Matter is not a speck of some sort of inert stuff, it is interacting movement of potentials. Matter is energy doing something. For matter to exist as it does as a closed system as classical theory has it, is essentially acting as a perpetual motion machine. The classical view of matter is impossible.

What I am saying is that matter is being supplied by an energy through the INSIDE of space, and if we think in terms of dimensions, it would be regarded as the Fifth dimension. The Fifth Dimension is INSIDE the Fourth Dimension.

However, as has been pointed out, visualizing the Fifth dimension is impossible, and while many many names have been given to this impossible to see concept, I have come to see it as the INSIDE of empty space. Nick Herbert puts it this way -- "Beneath phenomena, the world is a seamless whole."

As far a recycling, again, you are talking about the integrative system one aspect of which is recursive feedback which can be called recyclic. Don't forget that this process forms new wholes and has emergent properties which cannot be gleaned from the cyclic parts and that the mode of inquiry is of the interconnections. Especially don't forget that because it is the relationships that are primary, ALL the members of the cast have a part in the play.

The thing about crop circles and the plasma balls of light, is that they are intelligent. And the UFO's which have been sighted over the years always seems to be described as balls of light. Plasma balls of light.

So it may very well be that these inexplicable balls of light most probably balls of plasma current flows (Plasma current is both magnetic and electrostatic) are but micro stars. Miniature versions of what a plasma ball looks like. Expand it to something the size of our Sun, and that is what a cosmic ball of plasma looks like.

I am not going to fall into the trap of naming the INSIDE for the simple reason is that whatever name I choose, limits are imposed by definition. And when these limits are exposed then the whole idea is brought into question.

But I can talk about what it does. When Bell formulated his famous Bell's Theorem, it wasn't until Alan Aspect conducted the experiment that "non-locality" was observed. Aspect's experiment involved two photons, ejected from a single crystal, the spin of which could be accurately measured. They found that the photons, although separated in space, remained as if still a single entity. The technical term is phase entanglement. The experiment shows that the photons act as if they are interconnected by a single entity. Experiments have shown that there is a deeper level than just matter in space.

INSIDE space...

Tommy

PS: The difference between my reasoning and the maihstream line of reasoning is that I assume a beginning from a whole and they assume a beginning from parts. It is easier conceive of how a whole divides into parts than it is to conceive of how parts become a whole.

[/quote]

Tommy your ideas come from what you think. The knowledge you have will paint the model in your mind.

Sometimes we read things that are logical and it forms part of our belief system. You will need to read more and more and more and try to keep out of your own way.

I try to use the same logic, for I know I'm my worst enemy.

---

The recycling process is probably the most simple of all models.
It does not require you to bring in ideas that are far fetched.

We know the 4 forms of matter and plasma is one.

tommy said
"What I am saying is that matter is being supplied by an energy through the INSIDE of space, and if we think in terms of dimensions, it would be regarded as the Fifth dimension. The Fifth Dimension is INSIDE the Fourth Dimension."

This fifth dimension in my opinion is the wrong track. You are making statements that come from the stone age.

But than again I maybe wrong.

I always try to keep things simple, the universe is in a simple chaos. The model of the universe is so intersting that i have been looking at it for the last few decades.I once thought along the same lines as you and The Big Bang and other models.

Slowly slowly I realised that the information that was fed to me by many cosmoligists was preventing me to see through all the BS the real picture.


Harry