On 25 Mar 2006 20:28:03 -0800, "Eric Gisse" wrote:


Nick wrote:
In the case of black holes there is an end to space-time. But how can a
place without space and time move?

Doesn't make much sense does it.

Neither do the ignorant ramblings of a child who believes he
understands something he doesn't.


speaking from experience, eh, geesey?


HW.
www.users.bigpond.com/hewn/index.htm

Henry Haapalainen wrote:
Big Bang ought to obey the laws of physics. And if it does it can never have
happened. Then, is there some important law that has not been found? Maybe
so, but I have no idea of it.

One thing is right, you have no idea.


I think that Big Bang describes a birth of a galaxy, not a birth of
everything. If our universe have a day of birth, there can be no reason, why
it did not happen "earlier".

Henry Haapalainen

"Spaceman" wrote in message
...

"T Wake" wrote in message
...

"Spaceman" wrote in message
...

"Nick" wrote in message
oups.com...
A place with no space or time moves?
Doesn't make sense.

Again,
The problem is thinking that time is only a local thing
and/or it is a thing at all.
A clock may or may not stop functioning beyond an event
horizon, but of course you can time the amount of time it stopped
by simply not being in there.

Ask the blackhole experts how long the time stops for.
Then tell then if it stopped for that long, didn't it still count
as time stopped time.


Science uses absolute timing.

Says who?

Says people who want to actually time things correctly
(scientists that have a clue in other words)

Cite one then please.

"Jeff.Relf" wrote in message
...
snip

Saying this over and over again doesn't make it correct.

"Henry Haapalainen" wrote in message
...
Big Bang ought to obey the laws of physics. And if it does it can never
have
happened. Then, is there some important law that has not been found? Maybe
so, but I have no idea of it.

At present, we have no laws of physics which can model the circumstances of
the early universe. The closer we have got to t=0 the more developed the
physics has become.

I think that Big Bang describes a birth of a galaxy, not a birth of
everything. If our universe have a day of birth, there can be no reason,
why
it did not happen "earlier".

You are free to think anything you want.

As for the birth of the universe, there is also no reason why it didn't
happen when it happened.

"Nick" wrote in message
oups.com...
There are two types of singularity: a zero dimensional point or a point
of nonzero size described by an infinitesimal. One has dimension the
other doesn't. In one gravity goes infinite in the other it is limited.

Black holes don't exist in the form Einstein's theory of gravity says
they do. Time ends in two places in the theory: singularity and suface.


So many words, so little content.

"Eric Gisse" kirjoitti viestissä
oups.com...

Henry Haapalainen wrote:
Big Bang ought to obey the laws of physics. And if it does it can never
have
happened. Then, is there some important law that has not been found?
Maybe
so, but I have no idea of it.

One thing is right, you have no idea.

I didn't try to claim anything else. (HH)


I think that Big Bang describes a birth of a galaxy, not a birth of
everything. If our universe have a day of birth, there can be no reason,
why
it did not happen "earlier".

Henry Haapalainen