Tom Bishop vs. FE Canon

Do you see how this whole discussion demonstrates how dogmatic Flat Earth Theory really is?  Real science is constantly changed and tweaked and improved upon.  You yourself suggest that to do this with Rowbotham's book is akin to heresy!  Careful, Tom, you claim to be an atheist, but I believe you might just worship "Dr" Rowbotham since you hang off every word he says as if you are Moses and he is God!

... [T]he universe was thought to be infinite amongst most Physicists and Astronomers!

Patently false, like much of what TomB says!

Ever hear of checking your cut-and-paste text that it actually deals with the issue? Infinite densities do not mean infinite volume.

Cosmic Inflation is the expansion of space by definition. The quote I provided has nothing to do with the density of the universe, but the eternal expansion of the universe moments after the Big Bang. You're not even attempting to make sense, Gulliver.

Oh, and aren't you the hypocrite, citing Wikipedia after today's tirade about it! For shame!

You are welcome to dismiss your own theory if you wish. However, if you'd like alternate quotes and sources, I am more than willing to provide them:

Here is a paper on the subject by Alan H. Guth, the man who came up with the mainstream idea of Cosmic Inflation:

"The basic workings of inflationary models are summarized, along with the arguments that strongly suggest that our universe is the product of inflation. The mechanisms that lead to eternal inflation in both new and chaotic models are described. Although the infinity of pocket universes produced by eternal inflation are unobservable, it is argued that eternal inflation has real consequences in terms of the way that predictions are extracted from theoretical models. The ambiguities in defining probabilities in eternally inflating spacetimes are reviewed, with emphasis on the youngness paradox that results from a synchronous gauge regularization technique. Vilenkin's proposal for avoiding these problems is also discussed."

http://www.citebase.org/fulltext?format=application%2Fpdf&identifier=oai%3AarXiv.org%3Aastro-ph%2F0002156

Sounds like he's admitting there are problems with the theory... 

Tom: Big Bang theory holds that the universe began at a point and expanded. There was no infinite void to expand into because space was created in the big bang. You can easily deduce from this that, at whatever speed the universe expanded, it has always been and will always be finite.

Tom: Big Bang theory holds that the universe began at a point and expanded. There was no infinite void to expand into because space was created in the big bang. You can easily deduce from this that, at whatever speed the universe expanded, it has always been and will always be finite.

Then why are these physicists saying that the universe is infinite? Even Hawking agrees with an infinite universe. Are you trying to say that you're smarter than these guys?

Sounds like he's admitting there are problems with the theory...

Perhaps so. But do you believe in the mainstream version of the Big Bang? If so, then you believe his theory of Cosmic Inflation. Therefore, you believe that the universe is infinite.

Cite me a source that states that the current theory is of an infinite universe.

Cite me a source that states that the current theory is of an infinite universe.

Look up "Big Bang" in any encyclopedia. It will mention Cosmic Inflation.

Then go back to this thread and scroll up to the article where its inventor, an MIT physics professor, describes the details of the theory.

Cosmic inflation does not demand that the universe be infinite. Cosmic inflation holds that a very very small universe expanded very rapidly for a short time (within the first picosecond) of the big bang. Nowhere does it say it is infinite.

Perhaps so. But do you believe in the mainstream version of the Big Bang? If so, then you believe his theory of Cosmic Inflation. Therefore, you believe that the universe is infinite.

Honestly, I don't believe it as dogmatically as you believe Rowbotham's theories about a flat earth.  And neither do most scientists, for that matter.  The minute we actually think we have everything figured out is the minute scientific inquiry grinds to a screeching halt.

How much has Flat Earth Theory changed in your model in the past 150 years, compared to how much Big Bang Theory has changed in the 97 years since the principles were first introduced?

See what I mean by dogma?  

Cosmic inflation does not demand that the universe be infinite. Cosmic inflation holds that a very very small universe expanded very rapidly for a short time (within the first picosecond) of the big bang. Nowhere does it say it is infinite.

Alan H. Guth says it expands forever. I've given sufficient quotes. Don't you think Alan H. Guth would know about his own inflation theory?

Are you saying that you're smarter than a Harvard Physics Professor?

Expanding forever does not make it infinite! If I take a number and double it forever, after how long will it be infinite?

I love it.  I get what you're saying now, Gin.  He's saying that the universe will always be expanding, not that the universe is infinite in size. 

Tom, you idiot! 

Quote

Ever hear of checking your cut-and-paste text that it actually deals with the issue? Infinite densities do not mean infinite volume.

... T[h]e[SIC] quote I provided has nothing to do with the density of the universe, but the eternal expansion of the universe moments after the Big Bang. You're not even attempting to make sense, Gulliver.

Let's look back at the quote in question... "inflation, volume, matter" that means density is involved. Back to the high school physics textbook comment, TomB, you're out of your league.

Quote

Oh, and aren't you the hypocrite, citing Wikipedia after today's tirade about it! For shame!

You are welcome to dismiss your own theory if you wish. However, if you'd like alternate quotes and sources, I am more than willing to provide them:  ....

Yep! You're a hypocrite!

Don't call Tom an idiot. He's just a bit slow, that's all.

Quote from: Gin on June 04, 2007, 04:30:49 PM

Cosmic inflation does not demand that the universe be infinite. Cosmic inflation holds that a very very small universe expanded very rapidly for a short time (within the first picosecond) of the big bang. Nowhere does it say it is infinite.

Alan H. Guth says it expands forever. I've given sufficient quotes. Don't you think Alan H. Guth would know about his own inflation theory?

Are you saying that you're smarter than a Harvard Physics Professor?

Not at all. We're saying that you're mistaken to claim that a forever inflating universe will become infinite. That's covered in high school pre-calculus. Read about limits.

Not at all. We're saying that you're mistaken to claim that a forever inflating universe will become infinite. That's covered in high school pre-calculus. Read about limits.

The universe has already inflated into the infinite void. The universe isn't inflating by Cosmic Inflation anymore. It has already stopped. Read your own theory for god's sake.

Expanding forever does not make it infinite! If I take a number and double it forever, after how long will it be infinite?

It's not expanding anymore. The universe has already expanded forever. That's why there are stars beyond our Hubble sphere of vision. Cosmic Inflation happened and then stopped according to current models. It was a singular event.

Cosmic inflation "isn't still happening." You're thinking of dark energy and the expansion of the universe. They are two different phenomena of different causes and mechanisms. Cosmologists estimate that the acceleration through Dark Matter began roughly 9 billion years ago. That's much later than the birth of the universe. If Cosmic Inflation and Expansion of the Universe were the same phenomenon then we would have given the two the same name.

Oh, and I would like to see sources for your wild claims. I've given sources, why don't you people ever give sources?

You cannot expand forever in a finite time. This is the MOST foolish think you have so far said. The Cosmic inflation theory does indeed state that expansion only took place for a small fraction of a second, but also that it did not transition a finite universe into an infinite one.

For the last time Tom, THERE IS NO INFINITE VOID into which the universe expanded. The universe itself contains the very concept of space, and thus there can be nothing 'outside' it.

Edit: All RE sources seem to turn into conspiracy propaganda or unreliable lies (see: UNSW, Wikipedia) when they come into contact with you. We stopped providing sources when you made it clear that any that support us are invalid. I will find some if you like, but I doubt it will help.

Quote

Not at all. We're saying that you're mistaken to claim that a forever inflating universe will become infinite. That's covered in high school pre-calculus. Read about limits.

The universe has already inflated into the infinite void. The universe isn't inflating by Cosmic Inflation anymore. It has already stopped. Read your own theory for god's sake.
...

Less than 10 minutes ago, you also said: "Alan H. Guth says it expands forever."

You can't even keep your story straight for 10 minutes!

You cannot expand forever in a finite time. This is the MOST foolish think you have so far said. The Cosmic inflation theory does indeed state that expansion only took place for a small fraction of a second, but also that it did not transition a finite universe into an infinite one.

Time is not quantized. It is perfectly feasible for the universe to expand infinitely in a finite amount of time. If you are going to claim the absurd notion that time is quantized, then I would like to see your source.

For the last time Tom, THERE IS NO INFINITE VOID into which the universe expanded. The universe itself contains the very concept of space, and thus there can be nothing 'outside' it.

The universe created the infinite void, of course. But it expanded into itself none the less.

Less than 10 minutes ago, you also said: "Alan H. Guth says it expands forever."

Forever as in volume and distance, not time.

Whoa now you guys have completely lost me

Now YOU are distorting your source text Tom. "Eternally" means over infinite time. I am not saying time is quantized (I'm not saying it isn't) but nowhere does cosmic inflation state that it expands from finite to infinite. You have yet to back this claim up (your previous quotation says nothing about it).

(what does time being quantized mean?)

Quote

You cannot expand forever in a finite time. This is the MOST foolish think you have so far said. The Cosmic inflation theory does indeed state that expansion only took place for a small fraction of a second, but also that it did not transition a finite universe into an infinite one.

Time is not quantized. It is perfectly feasible for the universe to expand infinitely in a finite time. If you are going to claim the absurd notion that time is quantized, then I would like to see your source.

BUZZ!! Time is quantized, just like the other three dimensions. Please see Expert Answer.

It means that you can't chop it up forever. Quantized means 'made into little pieces' (a very amateurish definition I'm sure). It's like the universe had little pixels. You couldn't have half a pixel of time, only one or none. It makes the universe kind of grainy.

It means that you can't chop it up forever. Quantized means 'made into little pieces' (a very amateurish definition I'm sure). It's like the universe had little pixels. You couldn't have half a pixel of time, only one or none. It makes the universe kind of grainy.

Thanks Ginfag

(what does time being quantized mean?)

It means that there exists a tiniest amount of time, some measure of time that we can't divide. If the quanta were the size of seconds that there would a noticeable "lumpiness" to time. The ticking of a clock, for example, would become a hum.

BTW, this debate is entirely irrelevant. TomB has just started lying about something else to avoid admitting that he's wrong in the first place, standard troll behavior.

BUZZ!! Time is quantized, just like the other three dimensions. Please see Expert Answer

Another boldfaced lie, Gulliver. If you were a physics professor as you claimed then you would know that Quantized Time went out of fashion in the 40's.

Your reference even says so:

"However, no-one has yet been able to come up with a consistent theory of space, time, fields and matter which shows exactly how time is quantized."

Here's a better source: http://van.physics.uiuc.edu/qa/listing.php?id=1234

There is no quantized unit of time. Max Plank himself says that only space is quantized.

Quote from: Gayer loves Haton on June 04, 2007, 04:52:13 PM

(what does time being quantized mean?)

It means that there exists a tiniest amount of time, some measure of time that we can't divide. If the quanta were the size of seconds that there would a noticeable "lumpiness" to time. The ticking of a clock, for example, would become a hum.

BTW, this debate is entirely irrelevant. TomB has just started lying about something else to avoid admitting that he's wrong in the first place, standard troll behavior.

Thanks as well Gully. Sometimes I need some stuff explained to me, I don't do physics y'see.

Quote

BUZZ!! Time is quantized, just like the other three dimensions. Please see Expert Answer

Another boldfaced lie, Gulliver. If you were a physics professor as you claimed then you would know that Quantized Time went out of fashion in the 40's.

Your reference even says so:

"However, no-one has yet been able to come up with a consistent theory of space, time, fields and matter which shows exactly how time is quantized."

Here's a better source: http://van.physics.uiuc.edu/qa/listing.php?id=1234

There is no quantized unit of time. Max Plank himself says that only space is quantized.

From your reference: "...many scientists take the notion of quantized time for granted..."