Does Einstein's T.R make any type of B.B. theory impossible?

[EarthScienceguy]

Question to debate

Does Einstein's theory of relativity make anytype of big bang scenario impossible?

Einstein's theory of relativity speaks of an universe in which past present and future all exist.

https://www.pbs.org/video/nova-the-fabr ... n-of-time/

starting at 19.00

If past, present and future can all exist then the Big Bang had to create not just the beginning of our present timeline but every moment every in our entire timeline. Everything that we perceive as happening in a logical chronological order would had to have been created by chance at the "big bang".

Talk about ludicrous speed.

If your answer is you have faith that science will one day come up with a solution, how would free will not be violated?

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 38 by Divine Insight]

I don't need to look it up. I've already studied General Relativity and I know that there is nothing in it that says that anyone can walk through a wormhole and end up thousands of years in the past.

Some scientists have speculated that the equations of GR might be able to be used in a way to potentially allow for this to happen. But those speculations have never panned out. In fact, Kip Thorne and Stephen Hawking have both looked into this quite extensively and came to the conclusion that these speculations are most likely wrong.

So you are wrong to claim that GR says that these things are possible.

Are you saying that general relativity does not predict wormholes?

Stephen Hawking really? In his last book he wrote that it could be possible.

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/home/mosliv ... chine.html

[Diagoras]

[Replying to post 33 by Diagoras]

Oh my!!! You really believe that this is the way relativity works!!!!

No we cannot agree with that at all. Time in the spaceship actually slows down. The clocks, biological functions everything on the spaceship would indicate that only 5 days elapsed. To the person in the spacecraft only 5 days has elapsed.

Well, at least we’ve now uncovered the basic position on which we are most opposed. And I can estimate how ‘sure’ you are of your own position by the number of exclamation marks you see fit to decorate your post with. ‘Very’, it would seem to me.

That being the case, would you do me the courtesy of answering my multiple choice question from a few posts back? If I really don’t understand special relativity, then your answer will likely not be the same as mine would be.

If it is, of course, then we might compare workings to see if one of us has made a basic error - I know I’m fallible enough to forget to convert g/cm-3 to kg/m-3, and you occasionally muddle galaxies with universes, for example.

Being very sure of my own position, I’m eager to have both of our answers up on a public message board for posterity. The question is: are you willing to do the same?

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 40 by Diagoras]

Being very sure of my own position, {/quote]

I am not sure way you are secure in your position. So far you have only produced one WIKI article that was suppose to be in support of your position. The other article at least, I think it was you, did not even support your position.

I have shown how other atheist scientist support my position and how the mathematics supports my position.

People are free to believe what they want.


I’m eager to have both of our answers up on a public message board for posterity. The question is: are you willing to do the same?

I will answer your question in video form

[Divine Insight]

Are you saying that general relativity does not predict wormholes?

No. I'm saying that wormholes cannot be used in the way that you suggest. You are spewing science fiction, not science.

There is nothing in science that says that anyone can travel into the past. If you think there is you are gravely mistaken.

Clearly you know nothing of science. Just because you chose a screen name that suggests that you might know something of science doesn't make it so. You have already proven that you don't understand Relativity even on the most basic level.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 42 by Divine Insight]

Hawking and others believed that might be possible with wormholes and entangled particles.

The only reason why they would think this were even possible if they believed that the past still exists.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 42 by Divine Insight]

Hawking and others believed that might be possible with wormholes and entangled particles.

The only reason why they would think this were even possible if they believed that the past still exists.

So what?

What individual scientists might be willing to entertain does not constitute science.

I believe I had mentioned earlier that Sean Carroll believes in the "Many Worlds" interpretation of QM. Does that mean that reality must split into many worlds with every choice we make? Of course not. What Sean Carroll is willing to believe does not constitute "science".

The same thing holds true for Hawking. Hawking didn't demonstrate that time travel into the past was possible, so it's not science.

There is no verifiable evidence in science that suggests that it is possible to travel into the past.

If you think that the mere opinions of individual scientists constitutes science, then you know nothing of science.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 44 by Divine Insight]

Kurt Godel worked out how time travel in the pasted was theoretically possible without violating any laws of physics.

[Divine Insight]

[Replying to post 44 by Divine Insight]

Kurt Godel worked out how time travel in the pasted was theoretically possible without violating any laws of physics.

So what?

Mathematics is just our description of the universe. Plus we even know for certain that our models are wrong. If the universe had to obey our mathematical laws of physics it would instantly crash and burn.

You are aware that our mathematical models break down when applied to the details of the actual universe are you not?

We have two great mathematical theories of the universe: General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. But when we try to put those two theories together they crash and burn.

You are aware of this right?

We know that General Relativity cannot be correct in its entirety. We are currently searching for a theory of Quantum Gravity. Until we find that, we can't trust what GR might predict in the extremes.

Another thing you are most likely overlooking is that when these mathematicians say that the mathematics of GR allows for time travel into the past they always fail to include the very important additional information that these same equations require that anything like a human being would be instantly destroyed in the process.

The fact is that science does not claim that time travel into the past is possible.

So all you are doing is grasping at speculations.

Moreover, for what purpose are you doing this? To try to make a case for the Hebrew God of Yahweh?

Good luck with that! Hebrew mythology has its own irresolvable contradictions and absurdities. Even if you could actually demonstrate that the past must *"always exist" that still wouldn't help Hebrew mythology.

By the way, what would it even mean for the past to "always exist"? Does that mean that it exists right now, as we speak? What would that even mean?

Clearly there are problems with these ideas that you would prefer to ignore. And why? Because you're hoping to make a case for the Hebrew Yahweh?

Surely you're joking?

Even if your arguments about the past somehow "still existing" had some merit, that still wouldn't help the deeply flawed Hebrew mythology of Yahweh.

By the way, didn't you also argue for multiple parallel universes of the Many Worlds idea where a new universe is create for every choice we make?

If that's the case, then not only a single past would need to exist, but infinitely many pasts would need to exist.

When you went back in time which of those many possible pasts would you visit?

Clearly you aren't thinking these things through very deeply. There would need to exist as many different pasts as there were choices that you could have possibly made at every moment you ever existed.

I think you have some serious problems on your hands when talking about time-travel into the past.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to Divine Insight]

Mathematics is just our description of the universe. Plus we even know for certain that our models are wrong. If the universe had to obey our mathematical laws of physics it would instantly crash and burn.

This is a totally bogus statement because you give no examples.

You are aware that our mathematical models break down when applied to the details of the actual universe are you not?

We have two great mathematical theories of the universe: General Relativity and Quantum Mechanics. But when we try to put those two theories together they crash and burn.

You are aware of this right?

We know that General Relativity cannot be correct in its entirety. We are currently searching for a theory of Quantum Gravity. Until we find that, we can't trust what GR might predict in the extremes.

Another thing you are most likely overlooking is that when these mathematicians say that the mathematics of GR allows for time travel into the past they always fail to include the very important additional information that these same equations require that anything like a human being would be instantly destroyed in the process.

The fact is that science does not claim that time travel into the past is possible.

So all you are doing is grasping at speculations.

This argument has nothing to do with it is possible to travel in the past. Theoretically the math does say that it is possible to travel in the past and I do not know of any world class scientist who works with relativity on a daily bases that does not believe that past, present and future all exists. Now on whether or not we can reach the past is not relevant as to whether it exists or not. And all working physicists agree with that.

Moreover, for what purpose are you doing this? To try to make a case for the Hebrew God of Yahweh?

Good luck with that! Hebrew mythology has its own irresolvable contradictions and absurdities. Even if you could actually demonstrate that the past must *"always exist" that still wouldn't help Hebrew mythology.

Again you seem to love making statements without defending them.

By the way, what would it even mean for the past to "always exist"? Does that mean that it exists right now, as we speak? What would that even mean?

Yes it does. The past is there just like we are here and just like the future is also real like we are here.

Clearly there are problems with these ideas that you would prefer to ignore. And why? Because you're hoping to make a case for the Hebrew Yahweh?

They are not my problems you are arguing with the entire physics community.

Even if your arguments about the past somehow "still existing" had some merit, that still wouldn't help the deeply flawed Hebrew mythology of Yahweh.

Again making statements without backing them up with any facts!!!

I think you have some serious problems on your hands when talking about time-travel into the past.

I am not debating whether time travel in the past is possible or not. I am arguing that past, present and future all exist, whether we can reach the past or not is of no consequence on the debate.

[EarthScienceguy]

[Replying to post 44 by Divine Insight]

What individual scientists might be willing to entertain does not constitute science.

I believe I had mentioned earlier that Sean Carroll believes in the "Many Worlds" interpretation of QM. Does that mean that reality must split into many worlds with every choice we make? Of course not. What Sean Carroll is willing to believe does not constitute "science".

The same thing holds true for Hawking. Hawking didn't demonstrate that time travel into the past was possible, so it's not science.

There is no verifiable evidence in science that suggests that it is possible to travel into the past.

If you think that the mere opinions of individual scientists constitutes science, then you know nothing of science.

This is called THEORETICAL PHYSICS. THEORETICAL PHYSICS guides the RESEARCH PHYSICISTS research. That is how modern physics works.