Wondering if my "Matthew Slepitza's" theory of the big bang could be correct?

     How did you come to know that the Universe is evolving at all? The second law of the thermodynamics claims that the entropy (the chaos) of the Universe is continuously increasing, and the equation of the Black Holes of Hawking shows that the information in the Universe is continuously and irretrievably lost, which means that with every day and in any way the Universe is becoming less and less structured, disposes with less and less information, which sounds much more like stagnation & degradation than evolution & development.
     This is not true. There are found ancient archaeological artefacts of clay disks with star maps ... plotted by hand, but with metrics, and matching almost 1:1 with the present day digital star maps.
     That many more is 13.78 BN years, but what has been right here, in the place of the Solar System in the period from 13.78 mya to 4.54 bya? If your colleagues claim that they have found traces of the Big Bang all over the Universe, why they can't find anything older than 4.54 BN years right here, in the Solar System?
     Do you really think that the discovery and the promiscuous use subsequently of the radioactive substances has been an idea of first brightness. Before using the radioactive fuel for whatsoever, perhaps some people should have discovered ways to decontaminate radioactive pollution of any kind. Before talking on the mass media that the concentrations of CO2 in the atmosphere are 'negligible' perhaps some people should have acquired some idea of how to recycle the CO2 when the things get out of control ... as they actually already are. If we don't stop the CO2 exponent very soon we will have no planet to live on.
     Which is the greatest achievement of the present day science?

I think you may have a greater knowledge of the terminology on several of these matters than understanding of the ideas behind it.
The entropy of the universe and all systems within it does indeed increase over time, but it is a long way from uniform disorder. The Big Bang theory suggersts that it started with an extremely high level of order with energy concentrated at the singularity. It's still got a long was to go.

We know a lot about the processes attending star formation and eventual destruction in a supernova or contraction to a white (or blue) dwarf state (depending on the initial mass of the star. These are processes that involve the evolving disorder of a mature star and its eventual destreuction, while the formation of a star involves gravitatioonal growth, increasing temperatures and ignition to fusion - a process involving increasing local order and decreasing local entropy. All of this occurs repeatedly in the unfolding evolution of our universe.

Chaos is a scientific term describing something entirely distinct from entropy. Chaos instead involves the sensitivity of the behavior over time of non linear dynamical systems to small variations in their initial conditions, and the uncertainties attendant to any prediction of their future state This is what makes it impossible to create accurate long range weather forecasts using numerical models based on current measured conditions. It has nothing to do with entropy.

That the universe and our solar system are evolving is undeniable. Our sun formed about 4.5 billion years ago and it will end its life (and that of the earth) as a red giant in the distant future. That, of course assumes that the earth won't first collide with Venus or Jupiter in a chaotic unravelling of the planetary orbits in our solar system induced by some wandering asteroid.

You overrate the hazards of nuclear radiation. Your body is naturally radioactive, and you live your life bathed in radiation from the sun and naturally occurring radiation from the earth. Moreover common choices affect the levels of that radiation far more than you may realize. If you were to move to (say) Vail Colorado you would be accepting an increase in the natural radiation dose that is several times the legal limit for a worker in a nuclear power plant. Indeed that is true for most cities at high altitude. The public health data doesn't show any effect (except that mortality for a cigar smoking boozer from Las Vegas is a good higher than that of a non-smoking tea totaler from Salt Lake City.

The ancients did indeed produce some fairly accurate star maps. That however doen't mean they understood the reality of the motions of the heavenly objeccts they plotted. That is very obviously what i was referring to. I think you are just throwing stuff out there to see if it sticks.

     ... and where has that Singularity come from? In the known Universe it is formed after collapse of a Neutron Star into a Black Hole ending up into Singularity - what exactly has collapsed before the launching of the Time, when nothing could have existed without the Time component?
     What has been right here, in the place of the Solar System, from 13.78 bya to 4.54 bya?
     ... and from where has the Gravitation (of the Big Bang) acquired the properties to make structuring of whatsoever?
     Chaos is randomness ... and a lot of the processes in the physical world are considered genuinely random - like for example the thermal noise, the photoelectric effect, the quantum state of the electron, etc. If there is so much randomness in the physical world, and after the Big Bang 'theory' denies any participation of any Intelligence in the Creation (if has been created), and in the structuring of the Universe, how exactly the Big Bang 'theory' has succeeded to arrange (without any probability distribution functions) the brilliant structures and set them in brilliant operation ... at any size and dimensions (like for example the chemical elements, the Solar System, etc.)?

Which equation do you think shows that?

Well if photons can't escape a black hole then information can get out of one either. On that point he is correct. However, I'm not at all sure that this result is at all significant in a univerese that includes both black holes and new star formation on an almost continual basis. The universe may not last forever, but that question is not (yet). at issue here. More stuff thrown against the wall to see if it sticks.

Hawking admitted that he was wrong about nothing escaping a black hole and paid off on a bet to that effect.

I wasn't aware of that . How could he possibly know?

Nailed it.

     The one that has sent all the information about the Solar System from time 13.78 bya to 4.54 bya into the Dimension X? What has been right here, in the place of the Solar System during the said period?
     ... and if your favourite theory of the Big Bang has succeeded to lose casually so much information about the Solar System, how will you guarantee that it has not lost even more information about the Universe as well?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Black_hole_information_paradox

You mean the article that states that Hawking wrote an article in 2004 that said that information escapes from a black hole so it isn't lost?

     Forget about the math and the formal models and their physical interpretation. Why don't you tell to the forum everything that you know about our Solar System from time 13.78 bya to 4.54 bya?

Translated: Forget about the facts that I just fucked up on. Let's go straight to my logical fallacy.

about 12.58 BY (I think it was a Tuesday), they ran out of crullers.

Are you still arguing that information is lost in a black hole according to Hawking?

      Absolutely - when someone runs out of glaze the most natural thing next to the mind is to make some more of the fake donuts.
      The truth of the matter is that notwithstanding the big talk about any Big Bang (if has ever happened), and its greatest trump - the Singularity (if existed at all), and no matter whether 12.38 bya or 13.78 bya, the astrophysics and the cosmology ... and their claque - the astro-philosophers, do not dispose with any single bit of verifiable and/or subjectable to validation data and/or information from that period.
      Where is the evidence, for example, about that gravitational collapse of that notorious giant interstellar molecular cloud? Is thare a single molecule and/or wave function ... or their shadows or traces, or whatever, left from that period ... or everything is nothing but virtual reality and interpolation of the imagination to infinity?

Ah, it's the "it can't be true because I don't understand ****" argument.


That should work well for you. About as well as providing evidence to support your own theory.

     Forget about my understanding and your misinterpretation. Why don't you show the evidence ... validly dated back over than 4.54 bya?

I think we are still waiting for any evidence from you to support your theory.

Once you provide that, we can go on to other topics.

After listening to you two, I wonder:
Are you asserting the big bang to have been galactic flatulence?

     Perhaps you mean the aliens-of-the gaps 'theory' of your fellow-Satanist FBM - his broken record has never been my theory.
     Why should I provide any evidence about something that is obvious. Why don't you simply check it up whether it is true or not? Why don't you simply check up how far would we go without morality when we devote ourselves to unlimited greed & unlimited stupidity ... which are not coming out of nowhere, BTW. It doesn't matter who suggested what, and who guessed it first ... and who is trying to sweep it under the table - what actually matters is whether it is true or not, and whether it is critically fatal to our existence and well-being, or not.
     Evidence No.1 to how far the greed and stupidity may go, are the 20 000 sq.km of burning abandoned coal mines in the Gobi desert. If you are wondering which is the primary cause of all that: it is called Modern Money Mechanics.