Forums before death by AOL, social media and spammers... "We can't have nice things"
|    sci.space.science    |    Space and planetary science and related    |    1,217 messages    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
|    Message 692 of 1,217    |
|    J. Scott Miller to Phych    |
|    Re: Gravity and the big bang    |
|    05 Sep 04 13:24:59    |
      From: jsfmiller@1netzero.net.retro.com              Everyone else has pointed out problems with your idea, which I cannot add to,       but I will point out a fallacy in your thinking not mentioned. To whit:              Phych wrote:              [stuff deleted]              > The big bang theory postulates the matter came into       > being from a single point in space and is forever ex-       > panding. I am unaware of any measurements       > to prove that the gaps between stars are increasing.       > Perhaps someone can help me with that one. Barring that,       > imagine that a singular event was not the case for matter       > in the universe, but rather many rips in the time/space       > continuum, created perhaps by a vorti powered by some       > unbeknownst celestial event in an alternate dimension.       > Following this, logic, perhaps many of these events occured       > and continue to occur (black hole?). It could be postulated       > that many of the planets surrounding a star were chunks of       > it flung off during its birth, dragging with it a remanant of       > that rip in space fabric. Or the planets could be results of       > their own births, traveling in close enough proximity to a       > nearby star to get caught in its gavitaitional pull.              [rest deleted for brevity]              No, the big bang theory does not postulate that matter came into being from a       single point in space and is forever expanding. The big bang is the creation       of        space and time. There was no preexisting void to fill as you imply. That       effectively negates the rest of your speculation, scientifically.              As to planet formation, look at the protoplanetary disks found in the Orion       Nebula to see that process (there are nice images of it at the Hubble Space       Telescope site). Planet formation seems to be the result of the collapse under       gravity of fragments of gas and dust within an even larger cloud, with disk       formation due to the spin of these fragments during collapse flattening the       fragments out.              If you really are interested in what the big bang theory does (and does not)       say, I recommend the following site:              http://www.astro.ucla.edu/~wright/cosmolog.htm              --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05        * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)    |
[   << oldest   |   < older   |   list   |   newer >   |   newest >>   ]
(c) 1994, bbs@darkrealms.ca