The Religions of Physics 1; Hyperinflation after the Big Bang?

These theories merely represent the best way we can explain the origin of the universe given the observations we are able to make of the universe as we now see it.

The theory of inflation is not the only theory, it is just the best "fit" to our present observations and so is given most credence in the scientific world ( I think credence is from latin for belief).

When something is obseved to contradict these theories (such as faster than light neutrinos - I believe the latest refined experiment confirmed the original results), these theories have to be refined or completely rejected as has happened repeatedly over the ages.

Please remember that the Big Bang Theory is exactly that, a theory. However, it is one that by far is the best we have for explaining the Universe we see around us. Those of us that work with and within it daily are fully aware that it is incomplete, and we all expect it to be modified and refined to the point where it becomes more and more accurate. I appreciate the difficulties a non-specialist may have with some of the assertions made by the theory, but none of those assertions are baseless. The assumption that the laws of physics and the constants postulated remain the same everywhere is a product of the fact that if they were not, the Universe would be very different to that which we observe. Had the sequence of events immediately after the Big Bang been radically different, again, what we now observe would be very different, that is, if we were here to observe. As we become able to observe the Universe on larger and larger scales, we find the same patterns repeated over and over. If we could step outside this Universe and observe it, it would appear homogeneous at all scales, which is exactly as predicted by the Big Bang Theory. One should be careful when discussing Chaos. It means different things in different contexts, but nevertheless can be compared with entropy, especially in the field of cosmology. This again, is exactly what we observe in the known Universe. By science programs I suspect you mean those shown on TV. It should be remembered those shows are made with a lay audience in mind, and discussing the unknowable is probably the fastest way to lose the audience they depend upon. To suggest that the non-observable Universe is different is to suggest that there is a preferred frame of reference, i.e. one centered upon us, making the human race somehow set aside from the rest of creation. This may be something that makes fundamental religionists happy, but leaves physicists and cosmologists distinctly uneasy!

There is no such thing as "chaos", atleast in the early universe. "Chaos" comes after life arises.

Just because we don't understand what occurred between Time Zero and a Planck Second afterwards, or a googolplexth of a Planck Second afterwards, doesn't mean that it was "chaotic". It simply means we lack the capacity to understand what occurred then. Rest assured, what occurred was governed by physical laws.

"Isn’t it equally possible that these laws came into existence at a period after the Big Bang and that the Space/ Time continuum coalesced after something that to our current knowledge of Physics could only be described as Chaos."

Everything that occurs in the universe occurs for a "reason" (don't mistake "reason" for "purpose").

That "reason" is either the deterministic laws of nature, or the nondeterministic act of a free-willed being.

There is no evidence that the behaviour of the early universe was governed by a free-willed being. On the contrary, the distribution of matter in the universe is exactly what you would expect from quantum fluctuations occurring during the earliest parts of the universe, resulting in minute density variations determined by the nonquantized nature of space.

There's simply nothing there to suggest anything different.

Addendum: SmartAZ - "Speculations about the big bang and related effects are just that: speculations."

Redshifts are not the only evidence for the Big Bang.

The Cosmic Microwave Background Radiation and universal elemental abundance resulting from primordial nucleosynthesis (which, by the way, is accurate to within *forty orders of magnitude*), were not simply *confirmed* by the Big Bang Theory, they were *predicted* by it, *before* they were discovered.

No educated person denies that the Big Bang is fact. To do otherwise is to demonstrate an ignorance of modern cosmology.

Both yourself and SmartAZ should go to a few lectures of Physics, Cosmology and more importantly learn some basics of science.

Forget the current nonsence about FTL neutrinos or whatever they might be, they would change nothing anyway if they were proven to exist, and that experiment will have to be tested any number of times in any number of locations before they are confirmed, and in the end they will have no effect on the Universal Expansion Theory we refer to as the Big Bang, and in fact these FTL neutrinos may in fact be what expanded the universe at the very beginning, so we would have more comfirming evidence, or which there is much already, to confirm that the Big Bang happened. The Big Bang is a fact, forget definitions of the word theory here, they count for nothing, the Big Bang happened, we know it happened, we have all the evidence we need to prove it happened, go look it up, read a book by Simon Singh, called the Big Bang, he explains it all.

As for SmartAZ trying to claim there are other explanations for the Red Shift, try some, I will happiuly destroy them all for you in ten seconds, Red Shift, and the equivalent Blue Shift are examples of the Doppler Effect.

Just for the Juniors in the room, that includes you SmartAZ, a train coming toward you makes no sound, this is because the sound waves in front of it are being pushed together, this means that they are at a frequency that you cannot hear, as the train goes passed you, I hope you are standing on the platform not the tracks, the noise increases as the sound waves lengthen, and you can hear the train as it heads off into the distance. This is a simple explanation, there are other factors at play, but they are not significant.

Now, this translates to light, objects that are moving toward you appear 'blue' as the light waves are shortened, and objects that are 'red' are moving away because the light waves are lengthened, it is no more diffcult than that.

As for star luminosity, this is basic physics too, we know what stars are made of, mainly hydrogen, some helium, and then various bits and bobs of other stuff, we know the temperature of our own star, the Sun, we have measured it, and we know the luminosity of that star, we have measured it, this is after all the 21st Century and we have sent probes to do the job. Spectrographics tell us the make up of other stars, so we can be sure that other stars that are of a similar luminosity,l and that luminosity will fade with distance. In other words, if you have two torches, each exactly the same specification, and you have one close by, you can measure the luminosity of that torch, you can then measure the lumiosity of the second torch, hey presto, simple maths, you know the distance between the torches, and in exactly the same way we measure the distances between ourselves and other stars.

Nothing in science is complicated, it can all be explained in simple and easy terms, what complicates science is people, people who refuse to see that what is being said is true and then try to muddy explanations that work with nonsense to hold up outdated beliefs.

"Religions" is a good choice of words. Everything you have mentioned is an item of imagination, not observation. Red shifted light from galaxies has been observed, but there is no evidence to support the assumption that the red shift is caused by motion. There are other causes of red shift. There is no evidence to support the assumption that all stars of a type are the same luminosity. That means that estimates of distance are based on guesses. It is quite possible that stars look small and dim because they are in fact small and dim. Speculations about the big bang and related effects are just that: speculations.

It is not a disgrace to admit you don't know something. It is a disgrace to pretend you know something when you don't.

"Uniontera poem is to ferrari what big bang theory is to porsche."

Hope it helps.

People can make an answer but there is no a reason. (This is your so-called free will.)

God can make a reason but there is no an answer. (This is your so-called destiny & chance.)

Sometimes I say, Newton's apple is more clever than Newton.

Let's go!

Time has two properties.

Progress(related to evolution) and Event(related to Creation) by turns.

and Probability exist between two properties.

Mobius strip explains it very well. (one progress, one event, one probability)

Look at this!

Chicken (event) Egg (progress) & Egg (event) Chicken (progress)

Schrodinger's cat was placed between one properties, just event. So, probability can not exist.

Wave-particle duality of light, also.

Progress / Event / Probability is a time. This is my trinity.

------

Does time have the shape? Does soul have the shape?

Everything has the shape but these two in the world.

So, I made a great assumption "Time is soul. (thinking, memory, etc.)"

It was the beginning of my UNIONTERA.

We know...

To our great discouragement, these doesn't have one way by us.

Time walked to the way of science. Soul walked to the way of religion.

Now, I propose a great reconciliation.

Light up candle for a second. A second of light exist permanently or not?

------

Einstein deceive our world.

I mean, why he didn't tell us this so easy common sense.

The only base which can be the cause of Einstein's assumption...

[Assumption] "principle of constancy of light velocity".

[The only base] "Time of light is different from the starting point time."

This base is not an assumption but a common sense. Can you see?

This common sense is a certain evidence for me.

This is my uniontera.

Existence is the time expressed by light itself. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=AN1jTwHUC7E

- Key Point -

1. When same times met ... Arrow A (Cause of Laser / Origin of Death / Reason of Chemical reaction)

2. When different times met ... Arrow B (This is your so-called "Gravity" / Cause of Higgs boson / Origin of Life / Reason of Biological reaction)

3. The rose line is the beginning light. (result from Genesis 1:3)

4. The existence of different time. (result from relativity of light)

5. 2 dimension is not a space. (result from 2-axis, math)

6. Universe came from nothing. (result from No.5 / cf. Playing with bubbles)

6-1. A barrier[posititon] exist between the inner and outer bubbles. But universe do not have that barrier. (Cause of Inertia / Reason of Sun / Position of Antimatter / Origin of Fire / cf. Expansion, Conservation of parity, Time-reversal invariance)

6-2. Nothing is not a no existence. No existence is a zero dimension. There is two zero dimension. One has a position. The other doesn't have a position. These different positions were connected by something. That "something" is not a what but a way. (Cause of Light / cf. Ether)

7. Progress / Event / Probability is a time. (This is my trinity.)

8. Wave-particle duality of light, creation & evolution, uncertainty principle, etc. (result from No.7)

9. Coalescing of different times. (Cause of Rotation & Spin / Equator has plenty of time. / Origin of Colour / Reason of Reflection / cf. Strong interaction)

10. Your so-called "Black hole" is a wholly condensed time. (cf. Kerr spacetime)

11. The reason of your so-called "Magnetic field". (result from step3 and 4)

11-1. The reason of your so-called "Dark matter". (result from step3 to 4 / Energy-Mass duality / cf. Dark energy "step4 to 3")

12. The reason of your so-called "Electric field". (result from the crack of time / Same time's crack is a different time's connection. / Cause of Static electricity)

13. Your so-called "Space" is a crack of time. (result from No.12 / Cause of Lightning / Reason of Refraction / cf. Weak interaction)

13-1. The reason of your so-called "Capture & Decay". (result from No.13's crack of time / cf. Violation of time-reversal invariance)

13-2. The reason of No.6-2's "position & none position". (result from No13-1's "capture & decay")

13-3. The reason of No.13's space. (result from No.13-2's "position & none position" / cf. Noneconservation of parity)

14. Boundary is a crack of space. (result from No.13 / Same space's crack is a different time's contact. / Cause of Superfluid / cf. Fractal)

15. Boundary is nothing. Your so-called "Hole" is a boundary itself. Also, nothing is K=0 temperature. (result from No.14 / cf. Calabi-Yau, Hilbert space)

16. This is a wall of your so-called "Fire". (result from No.15) - copyright ⓒ uniontera

Our nonsense has come from one time. Uniontera is a key.

English is not my first language, sorry!

If it is difficult to understand, just remember & enjoy "Hand touching everything is a time". This is the only one result of uniontera.

@Uniontera6

what a load of tosh