How about a simple theory? give opinions on why not?

DrDave

Newbie

Posts: 6

How about a simple theory? give opinions on why not?

« on: July 16, 2011, 10:55:03 PM »

Big Bang
There was no Big Bang. We only perceive it as a bang. The Universe is expanding but what the big heads don't see is the fact that all matter (every particle) in the Universe is also inflating in direct proportion with the expansion of the Universe. It is so simple, it is pathetic. This explains everything from what causes gravity, to how time is not a dimension as much as it is an effect, to the speed of light and the so called missing matter. Gravity is simply the resistance to inflation of matter. We can't see this because our measuring tools are changing right along with us. We can't see the missing matter since we can't see its inflation. This also explains the speed of light. We only perceive it as a constant because we are limited from our point of view and measurement tools. Light speed is increasing in direct proportion to the expansion of the Universe and the inflation of all matter. We don't need all this speculation to solve the problem. It is laughing at us. This theory unifies everything and does it so perfectly. The Universe was always here and always will be, with or without us.
EDIT: Try to disprove it nasdaq
EDIT: How many galaxies have you seen disappearing OKLA? Secondly, what would the red shift have to do with it? EPIC FAIL ANSWER
Take 2 balloons and inflate them at the same rate as they are moved away from each other. Are they still moving away from each other? Of course!
Take a stick of dynamite out in the open, light it and film it with a high speed camera. Does it not look like a single stick? Yes. Is it made up of particles? Yes. So far, the negative answers haven't produced one iota of proof.


	Logged

bosnian_samurai

Newbie

Posts: 1

Re: How about a simple theory? give opinions on why not?

« Reply #1 on: July 17, 2011, 06:37:06 AM »

Well first off, I'd like to say that this is a very unique idea, and that it is quite impressive. It usually works out best if reality could be explained in simple parameters, in your case, instead of in convoluted nonsensical equations, as in the case of quantum mechanics. The only issue is that this may not be true. I don't see how all of the particulars are concerned with the expansion of space-time. Are there any mathematics that could support your claim? Or perhaps a thought-experiment?


	Logged

straightshooter

Newbie

Posts: 4

Re: How about a simple theory? give opinions on why not?

« Reply #2 on: July 17, 2011, 10:17:18 AM »

If everything is expanding, then rewind everything and and everything had to have been very close together till you get to a point where everything in the universe is together; then put it in motion and you have the big bang. You haven't explained that one yet. Also, you need to explain the cosmic background radiation, and why galaxies are less developed the deeper we look into space, (and hence the further back in time we look).


	Logged

oklatonola

Newbie

Posts: 45

Re: How about a simple theory? give opinions on why not?

« Reply #3 on: July 18, 2011, 07:11:38 AM »

EASY to disprove. IF everything is expanding at the same rate, NOTHING would be red-shifted. Most galaxies ARE red-shifted and they are moving away faster the farther away they are. EPIC FAIL in basic physics. You don't understand the difference between VELOCITY (first derivative of position) and ACCELERATION (second derivative of position).EPIC FAIL A SECOND TIME.

The red shift has EVERYTHING TO DO WITH IT. Go take a basic physics class, again. That's where the difference between acceleration and velocity is taught and explained. Of course, you will sass the teacher, who will promptly get a security guard to expel you from class and drop you administratively from the course.You are like the person who shot Gabby Gifford, declared mentally incompetent to stand trial.

You are not competent to judge what is scientific proof. You don't understand the difference between velocity and acceleration. You prove your own incompetence.

BTW, you cannot e-mail me. I blocked you months ago.


	Logged

Blazing_D

Newbie

Posts: 3

Re: How about a simple theory? give opinions on why not?

« Reply #4 on: July 18, 2011, 07:46:30 AM »

yes


	Logged

GLH

Newbie

Posts: 9

Re: How about a simple theory? give opinions on why not?

« Reply #5 on: July 18, 2011, 08:00:01 AM »

Your idea fails as a theory because it doesn't fit and explain all the available evidence and information, such as

- Red Shift (nothing would exhibit Red Shift if it were all expanding together)
- Older or less developed galaxies observed in deep space (i.e. the further back in time we look the less developed galaxies are)
- the fact that if everything is expanding then this implies it must be expanding from something - so run time backwards until you get a single point. This is then no different to Big Bang
- Your theory fails to explain the origins of matter despite the fact that reverse extrapolation places it all in one infinitely small starting point.

"Try to disprove it nasdaq" - it's not the job of anyone to disprove a concept. If you want it recognised as a Theory then you must provide the proof. At present your idea has considerable difficulties to overcome (which is probably why it was no doubt thought of and discarded long ago in favour of the present theory)


	Logged

DLM

Newbie

Posts: 11

Re: How about a simple theory? give opinions on why not?

« Reply #6 on: July 18, 2011, 08:16:07 AM »

You asked what redshift has to do with the Big Bang. Evidently, there is quite a bit of research still needed to be done on your part before you attempt to discredit something you do not have a simple grasp of:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Edwin_Hubble#Redshift_increases_with_distance

Scientists have been looking for observational evidence to discredit the Big Bang Theory for several decades. That's what the peer review process of science does best, discredit flawed theories. So far, the Big Bang explains all of the observational evidence we have gathered. If you have some piece of data that directly conflicts with this, publish your findings in a scientific journal. That will undoubtedly earn you a Nobel Prize, as oppossed to simply impressing the twenty people who happen to come across this question.


	Logged

Pages: [1]

« previous next »