Le mar. 21 janv. 2020 à 08:44, Alan Grayson <[email protected]> a écrit :
> > > On Tuesday, January 21, 2020 at 12:33:26 AM UTC-7, Quentin Anciaux wrote: >> >> >> >> Le mar. 21 janv. 2020 à 08:29, Alan Grayson <[email protected]> a >> écrit : >> >>> >>> >>> On Tuesday, January 21, 2020 at 12:00:22 AM UTC-7, Brent wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On 1/20/2020 10:09 PM, Alan Grayson wrote: >>>> >>>> >>>> *Maybe I can summarize it this way; if it had a beginning, which I will >>>> label as T = 0, and was finite in spatial extent, including zero spatial >>>> extent, it has remained finite in spatial extent since all expansion rates >>>> are finite, and have been going on for finite time. Thus, if it started as >>>> finite, it must remain finite to avoid a singularity; namely, an infinite >>>> expansion rate.This is really easy, and shouldn't present a problem. OTOH, >>>> if it had a beginning and was spatially infinite at that time, it's not >>>> null at that time, the beginning. * >>>> >>>> >>>> But it's simply your prejudice that it can't be null at T<0 and >>>> infinite at T=0. >>>> >>> >>> *At its beginning it's null. This is my definition, if you will, of what >>> exists at "the beginning" for our universe, nothing. You can call that a >>> prejudice but it's much more logical than positing a creation event with >>> something already in existence, or infinite at T > 0. It seems you're the >>> one with illogical prejudices. AG * >>> >>>> >>>> >>>> Above you explicitly allow that a finite space might come into >>>> existence at T=0, i.e. one that was null at T<0 and finite at T=0. You >>>> wrote, "*if it had a beginning, which I will label as T = 0, and was >>>> finite in spatial extent". * But that is just as much a discontinuity >>>> or "singularity" that you consider a logical contradiction, as the coming >>>> into existence of an infinite space at T=0. >>>> >>> >>> *Yes it is, but I was just allowing the possibility of finite spatial >>> extent at T = 0, as a way to emphasize the fact that once finite, always >>> finite. In any event, for consistency and what I believe, it had zero >>> spatial extent at the time of creation AG * >>> >> >> Then it is a singularity, any finite amount of matter in a zero volume, >> has infinite density ==> singularity. >> > > *Firstly, there was no matter at T = 0, but you can argue infinite energy > density. I'm fine with that; no BB. AG * > So that's not a singularity... no matter, then matter... arf > >> Also zero to finite, or zero to infinite; are both as magical... it's >> your prejudice not to see it. >> > > *I have no idea why space-time expands, no one does, but if it does, it > goes from zero volume to increasingly larger finite volumes* > You talk as such volume had any meaning before expansion started... expansion is about space. There was no space, then there was space, if the matter content was infinite it is still infinite after expansion started, just matter is now separated with expanding space... and we only see our small part, because speed of light is limited... that doesn't mean anything about finite universe... just because we can only see what's causally connected. Anyway, you can convolute it the way you like, any starting is a singularity, weither to explain it you go a level below needing a substratum in which our universe is created, not answering where this substratum come from and why that one, doesn't need turtle and elephant below. Quentin > *, unless zero volume was never it's state, in which case you've falsified > the BB. Time to publish? Also, it can't go from finite to infinite volumes > when the expansion rates are finite. Why is this so hard to see? AG * > >> >>> Offenses to your intuition are not necessarily logical contradictions. >>>> >>>> Brent >>>> >>>> *So the assumption that it's spatially infinite at the beginning when >>>> it should be null (at the beginning) is a contradiction. (Proof by >>>> contradiction). AG* >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>> 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/19bef91b-12fa-412f-9cc7-55800cf4f7c9%40googlegroups.com >>> <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/19bef91b-12fa-412f-9cc7-55800cf4f7c9%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> >>> . >>> >> >> >> -- >> All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy >> Batty/Rutger Hauer) >> > -- > 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/b65d5ad5-53ea-427b-83fc-4a448d0ee926%40googlegroups.com > <https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/b65d5ad5-53ea-427b-83fc-4a448d0ee926%40googlegroups.com?utm_medium=email&utm_source=footer> > . > -- All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. (Roy Batty/Rutger Hauer) -- 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/CAMW2kAr6w3Z_ra67KzHtfLb9VwcZBEv5-YDmQOfS9T0AS1-O%3Dw%40mail.gmail.com.
