The big bang and a supernova have extremely similar traits that i can not for the life of me see as different events.If the multiverse is true this would theoretically explain how it works and goes along with my last thread of something coming from nothing and always existing with different universal laws.
1.They are both explosions
2.I have heard from different scientist that we are made of star stuff and also big bang material.
3.theoretically that would mean the big bang is the beginning of a universe and the supernova is the end of the long lived star that is a duality (beginning and end)certain stars also turn into a black holes
4.this universe is expanding and black holes sucking in everthing in its path that is another duality (in and out).
5. Near the event horizion of a black hole time slows down a month there is like 5 years on earth which proves my different universal laws theory were time, sapce and gravity could work faster or slower or not exits at all.
6.nothing survives a black hole which theoretically would mean that we are not compatible with the universal laws of that universe(i think black hole are the portals to different universes aka multiverse).
7.i cant think of anything thing more powerful that could create a universe than a star they are are a witch pot cooking with different ingredients for billions of years and then blows up aka pregnant with a universe but instead of 9 months it takes billions of years to be born.
8.its ironic in how everybodys looking for this complex answer and i think its as simple as they big hot orange thing in the sky.
9. I think who ever made up the concept of hell was inspired buy the sun souls burning in a place thats full of fire for eternity (i think thats funny i never really put the peaces together on that until this year).
10.the fact that we dont know what inside of a black hole and the fact the we dont know how or why we exist in this universe is something they have in common.
the only thing i am skeptical about is there is more than one black hole in this universe how can we be going in and out at the same time and be expanding?the only explanation i came up with is were expanding at faster rates then we are giveing out.so basically this muliverse concept would keep creating universes but it would have had to start from something that can always exist(like some form of god or dark matter) or something that can come from nothing like one of guys said was explained by Stephen hawking.so i would like feed back and would like to know if there is anything holes in this theory.
Subscription Note:
Choosing to subscribe to this topic will automatically register you for email notifications for comments and updates on this thread.
Email notifications will be sent out daily by default unless specified otherwise on your account which you can edit by going to your userpage here and clicking on the subscriptions tab.
My point is there are signs and facts that says otherwise which i have pointed out.
You want a physicist.
I see signs and facts that say this thread has much commonality with your thread "Agreeing with Religious People"(Punctuation and capitalization mine). Reposting the same arguments again and again is a sign of trolling.
Nope according to 'Answers" and NASA:
http://www.answers.com/Q/Was_the_big_bang_a_supernova
http://www.nasa.gov/audience/forstudents/5-8/features/nasa-knows/what-is...
I take it back: fifth grade physics alone tells us that the mass of the universe would produce a black hole rather than a supernova. Since the universe is not a black hole, the big bang was not a supernova. Sadly, the NASA and Answers.com pages can't even touch the simplicity of the basest explanation. However, the author is using the similarities as grounds to argue the difference in label, as opposed to the difference in semantics.
Wel,l they DID answer the op. Sorry, it wasn't simple enough for you. Since I am not a scientist I go to the best source for answers, in this case, NASA!
Fair enough.
Exactly Reeves
A supernova is a type of death of a star. Unless you are suggesting the big bang was produced by a star, no, they are not the same. Similar in nature, perhaps, but not the same.
Correction: it's a stage in the death of a star. My mistake.
I left out one more important point that the big bang started from a hot dense point and started to bubble before exploding .the core of a star starts to bubble before exploding as well and whats more hot and dense than the core of a star? also stars farts like some form of letting out energy before exploding which could be were the first particles of this universe came from which started to bubble before exploding
These are to close of similarities to be coincidences.i fell like all my points are accurate information and some of them are opinions and some are scientific facts accurate none the less.and if this was a muder case i would have more than enough proof to convict my suspect.
You should write murder mysteries.
Andrewcgs - "These are to close of similarities to be coincidences."
You are absolutely right. It is no coincidence that hot, highly compressed matter tends to expand. You know, like why they put expansion joints into side-walks?
Nope. Do not pass go. Do not collect 200$.
Nyarlathotep at the least lets ageree thats a commonality between the two events.also the other points are either similarities,dualitys or accurate opinions do you guys agree or disagree?
You've outlined commonalities, and since the only ways to check an analogy are to apply it to a subset, and to derive the assumptions, most of your premises are guarded by the education wall present in this community. Again, you should really ask this question again on a physics forum.
1.They are both explosions
Big bang is an expansion, not an explosion.
-------------------------------
2.I have heard from different scientist that we are made of star stuff and also big bang material.
Yeah, hydrogen comes from the big bang (reheating), heavy elements come from supernovas. Notice they produce different stuff. How can two things be "the same event" if they produce different things?
-------------------------------
That makes sense Reeves
Hydrogen is in star as well! Thats a fact
Andrewcgs - "Hydrogen is in star as well! Thats a fact "
You are objecting to something that was never stated.
The big bang is an expansion not an explosion ok. I would rebut that by saying the big bang is an exploding expansion
So you have created yet another Fischer Price physics difference between them. But I'm assuming you still are advocating that they are "the same event".
Andrewcgs, your dog does not hunt, and your red herring is not red enough.
This all sounds like something that Andrewcgs does not need any help with; let's leave him alone to talk to himself unless he asks a serious question. He seems to be gaining a reputation as a troll.
Its seems like i won't be on this site that
long because im not experiencing any critical thinking skills and it seems like my ideas are to advanced for you guys to comprehend even though you guys might have me on grammar i would trade that every time for a better understanding of the universe.you never know were knowledge is going to come from i could very well be explaining the what happened before the big bang or why it happened but you rejected it because of arrogance and stubbornly blinded by programmed opinions of science because if its not an absolute then its just and opinion and one of the reasons i like science is they never claim that it cant be wrong. The possibility of a concept to come along and disprove highly viewed science ideas to be wrong which i could be very well doing now and thats what i leave open in my process if its not an absolute then its an opinion BUT I HAVE ABSOLUTES IN MY THEORYS FOR EXAMPLE: dualitys, commonalitys and and facts about the known universe as it stance today. but like i said none of you guys have been straight foward about answering why i am wrong. In my experience when somebody goes around questions when they answer mean they dont know,they dont want to know or they dont want to answer truthfully.thats when i know i have something when there is no known legitimate answer why i am wrong and in this case it is both you dont want to know and you dont know about the things i am explaining so this is my last post on this thread and i hope you guy find some wisdom
Andrewcgs: " I think who ever made up the concept of hell was inspired buy the sun souls burning in a place thats full of fire for eternity (i think thats funny i never really put the peaces together on that until this year)."
* The concept of hell was created by ignorant humans who did not know the sun was a star.
Andrewcgs: "10.the fact that we dont know what inside of a black hole and the fact the we dont know how or why we exist in this universe is something they have in common."
The fact that you know naught the answer to either of these places you in a commonality with the humans who invented the concept of hell. Stating you don't know means simply that.
Andrewcgs:".....so this is my last post on this thread and i hope you guy find some wisdom "
This statement has commonality with the statement " I'm taking my ball and going home!". Your "theories" are now exposed to the light of the sun. Can they not withstand scrutiny?
This only strengthens my confidence of my theory. chimp 3 even though they didn't know the sun was a star they see it every day they feel it and was inspired by that to create the concept of hell. but you never respond to my strongest points but search for places were you can twist my point of view and correct me enough with the childish games
You mean the childish games that you started? Bravo on shooting yourself in the arse.
1 through 5 are absolutes they are undeniable facts also the one i added on is a absolute as well both starting from a hot and dense point and both bubbling before exploding. 6 and 10 are half absolutes and half opinion ( nothing can survive a black hole which means we are not compatible with whatever is inside of a black hole. nobody knows whats inside of a black hole today that is facts.)7 through 9 is opinion. chimp 3 you responded on point 10 the part that was opinion and 9 which was also opinion but have nothing to say about the absolute strong points i have explained, which has been a tactic of majority of people on this site so far.
If you really believe you've stated anything undeniable, you may want to see a mental health specialist. The amount of disassociation from reality you seem to be experiencing is not healthy, for you or those around you.
Pages