Hi, Stephen (after along time!),
it is about THE "after Big Bang" inflation .

I am a 'noninflationary' guy: IMO inflation was deemed necessary to cope
with the mathematical problems connected the Big Bang idea and applying the
present (here and now) system's math to it - at a system ENTIRELY different
from conditions we experience as the basis of such math.

In my 'narrative' ( don't call it theory) about "a" big bang origin (which I
accept in spite of my scond thoughts of the validity of the expansion) -
I assign the starting conditions and the applicability of early-universe
to the transition "no-space to space" from the a-spatial proto-Big Bang into
our space-time system. The transition from nonexisting (=zero) space into
"space" is indeed an (infinite?) inflationary change.
Same thing with 'time', wich would explain the marvels of the (infinitesimal
small fractions of the "FIRST" second): the transition of "NO TIME" into a
'time-system' - expressed in terms of physical quantization applied to the
Big Bang conditions.

I don't want to start an argument on this, I am not ready - it is a

Have a good 2009

John Mikes
On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 12:11 AM, Stephen Paul King

> Hi Ronald,
>    Some people, myself included, would be a lot more comfortable with the
> whole inflation idea if a) there where some experimental evidence of the
> scalar fields that are required and b) some sound explanation where given
> as
> to how an in principle unknowable phenomenon - the BB singularity itself -
> is any different from a Creative Deity, sans only the anthropomorphisms.
>    R. Penrose, in his book Road to Reality,  brought up a very clear case
> that inflation does not solve the horizon problem when we consider causaly
> disjoint regions; has any one countered his arguement?
> Kindest regards,
> Stephen
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "ronaldheld" <ronaldh...@gmail.com>
> To: "Everything List" <everything-l...@googlegroups.com>
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 7:22 AM
> Subject: Re: Newbie Questions
> I do not see the Inflation paradigm as ad-hoc, for it explains the
> flatness, Horizon problem and lack of early universe relics better
> than any other to date. Now the Big Bang may be replaced by
> oscillating solutions from LQG or other theories, but AFAIK they still
> need an Inflation period.
>                                      Ronald
> >

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to everything-l...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to 
For more options, visit this group at 

Reply via email to