Originally posted by shunyadragon
View Post
Announcement
Collapse
Natural Science 301 Guidelines
This is an open forum area for all members for discussions on all issues of science and origins. This area will and does get volatile at times, but we ask that it be kept to a dull roar, and moderators will intervene to keep the peace if necessary. This means obvious trolling and flaming that becomes a problem will be dealt with, and you might find yourself in the doghouse.
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
As usual, Tweb rules apply. If you haven't read them now would be a good time.
Forum Rules: Here
See more
See less
Hologram This...
Collapse
X
-
-
A short post about how I'm not qualified to disagree with you, because I've what... not cited online articles? I've stated some facts, and some problems with your post. You've responded to neither except by denying what I've said, and posting bulk citations without context, and you've demonstrated that you didn't even understand the contents of the things you cited, vis-a-vis Richard Carrier's article.
Am I qualified? Yes, I'm the only one of us who's studied this as a post-graduate level. The only reason I don't get more technical is A: You wouldn't be able to understand it, and there's no use in showing off. B: It involves math, and this forum does not have LaTeX support and I don't feel like seperately importing a dozen well crafted pngs.
Now, back to ignore with you. Will be seeing you.
Like this.
This message is hidden because shunyadragon is on your ignore list.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Truthseeker View PostIf I were you, I'd say, instead, "We do not have observations that indicate the currently-observable universe is an open system. And furthermore, if we do have such observations such that we can naturally infer energy input to the universe, then we can redefine 'currently-observable universe' to include the sources of such energy. Hence it is natural to assume that the presently-observed universe is closed, at least for theoretical purposes."
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostThe science of cosmology extends beyond our current observable universe. I do not think there is an assumption we can make either way. Sound theories propose we are in a multiverse with many possible universes, therefore the possibility of an open system.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Truthseeker View PostYou seem to say that we should not have a variety of theories.Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-09-2015, 08:35 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Truthseeker View PostPerhaps you should rephrase.Last edited by shunyadragon; 07-10-2015, 07:18 PM.
Comment
-
Originally posted by shunyadragon View PostNo, we have insufficient evidence to assume a conclusion either way. Our Universe may be closed system (unlikely), or as is the most likely case, in my view an open system at the beginning and end within a greater cosmos we call the multiverse like bubbles in carbonated water.
Comment
-
Originally posted by Truthseeker View Postfifync (bolded words). Now, the "greater cosmos" is not observable beyond the universe that we live in, right?
Comment
Related Threads
Collapse
Topics | Statistics | Last Post | ||
---|---|---|---|---|
Started by rogue06, 05-03-2024, 02:47 PM
|
3 responses
30 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
05-07-2024, 08:07 PM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 05-03-2024, 12:33 PM
|
5 responses
48 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
Today, 11:35 AM
|
||
Started by rogue06, 04-27-2024, 09:38 AM
|
0 responses
14 views
1 like
|
Last Post
by rogue06
04-27-2024, 09:38 AM
|
||
Started by shunyadragon, 04-26-2024, 10:10 PM
|
5 responses
24 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
04-28-2024, 08:10 AM
|
||
Started by shunyadragon, 04-25-2024, 08:37 PM
|
2 responses
14 views
0 likes
|
Last Post
by shunyadragon
04-25-2024, 10:21 PM
|
Comment