On Monday, January 20, 2020 at 2:31:42 AM UTC-6, Alan Grayson wrote: > > > > On Monday, January 20, 2020 at 1:17:58 AM UTC-7, Alan Grayson wrote: >> >> >> >> On Monday, January 20, 2020 at 1:12:45 AM UTC-7, Alan Grayson wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> On Monday, January 20, 2020 at 12:57:55 AM UTC-7, Bruce wrote: >>>> >>>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 5:59 PM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Sunday, January 19, 2020 at 10:50:46 PM UTC-7, Bruce wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Jan 20, 2020 at 4:19 PM Alan Grayson <[email protected]> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> *Last sentence above: I mean that if it had a "start" with infinite >>>>>>> spatial extent, that would seem to mean it did NOT have an infinite >>>>>>> spatial >>>>>>> extent just prior to the start. For me this seems like a singularity, >>>>>>> an >>>>>>> infinite physical process which occurs in zero time. If I were betting, >>>>>>> I'd >>>>>>> bet on a finite closed universe for any universe which "starts", not >>>>>>> for >>>>>>> the Multiverse. AG* >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> You can bet any way you want. I doubt that the universe gives a shit. >>>>>> >>>>>> Bruce >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> *I'd go further and ask one question: it obviously doesn't. Is this >>>>> your idea of value-added? What I think it displays is your firmly held >>>>> belief that it's flat, and anger that someone might think otherwise. Not >>>>> your finest hour. AG * >>>>> >>>> >>>> Not anger -- just frustration at your intransigence. I don't care what >>>> you think, so why should I be angry? >>>> >>>> Bruce >>>> >>> >> *Correction in CAPS below: * >> >>> >>> *Annoyance is only slightly removed from anger. Maybe you're being >>> intransigent. As Brent pointed out, many origin theories have a "beginning" >>> or "start", so before that our universe CAME INTO BEING, IT didn't exist >>> (not to be confused with the Multiverse, WHICH COULD BE ANYTHING, FLAT, >>> ETERNAL, WHO KNOWS?). But then, magically perhaps, it comes into >>> instantaneous existence having an infinite spatial extent since it's >>> alleged to be flat. For a genius like you, there's nothing to be explained >>> here. AG * >>> >> > *If you had more intellectual integrity, a characteristic lacking in many > physicists/hacks today, instead of mockery you might posit a universe > without a beginning. AG * >
The problem stems from physicists, for the most part, completely mislead people about the relationship between the mathematical language of theories of physics and cosmology and physical reality (which we record via lab instruments and telescopes into collections of data). This is explained in Victor Stenger's https://www.scientificamerican.com/article/physicists-are-philosophers-too/ @philipthrift -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/564a6356-753b-46a3-8518-602dbabf4fca%40googlegroups.com.
