I have a severe problem with this entire thread!
What exactly determines the particular properties, such as charge,
angular momentum, mass, etc., of this universe? Why are we assuming that
the choice of what went into the zero net sum is a prior definite and
constrained. The question of the universe here is not so simple that it
can be represented the same way that we can note that 1 - 1 = 0. Even in
arithmetic model, we have to offer within our explanations what where
the summands <http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/summands#English> that let
to the sum of net zero. For example, 5 - 5 = 0, 4 - 4 = 0, etc. x - x =
0. What is x? We cannot assume without discussion what is x!
It seems to me that this entire thread is infected with post hoc
ergo propter hoc reasoning and we should reconsider exactly what is
being contemplated. I suggest reading of a good book on Cosmology, such
as "Principles of Physical Cosmology" by Phillip James Edwin Peebles
where one finds a very nice discussion of these issues of without the
nonsense of logical fallacies.
On 8/2/2012 2:49 PM, ronaldheld wrote:
If this universe has zero net energy charge and angular momemtum, I see no
problem being created via a chaotic inflation scenario.
"Nature, to be commanded, must be obeyed."
~ Francis Bacon
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Everything List" group.
To post to this group, send email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
For more options, visit this group at