• Quick note - the problem with Youtube videos not embedding on the forum appears to have been fixed, thanks to ZiprHead. If you do still see problems let me know.

JEROME - Life and Linear Time

JEROME DA GNOME said:
Evidence that stars are powered by fusion? Did not think so.

What causes these anisotropies according to BBT? How are they consistent with BBT? Opps, they are not!

Unless, are you aware of science experimentaly producing fusion?

The laws of physics and math are violated by the BBT. Here you are making the excuse that we just do not have the math and physics to explain it.

No, BBT started with the premise that there was "In the Begining" a tiny fireball.
Click to expand...

Every statement quoted above is by itself sufficient evidence that you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.

And yet you write with such arrogance and vitriol... where does that come from?

Did a cosmologist run over your dog? Step on your favorite toy?
 
Last edited:
Is denying that stars are powered by fusion a new twist to all this or have I just missed this until now?
 
DeiRenDopa said:
I'm not Wrangler, but I hope you won't mind me jumping in with a (very) brief answer ...
Click to expand...

Do I mind? You are kidding, right?

You think I could have answered that question so clearly and succinctly?

I'll consider that a compliment!

I knew a litte of what you posted, but your faith in my grasp of the minutae of this argument is ill founded, unfortunately.
 
sol invictus said:
Every statement quoted above is by itself sufficient evidence that you have absolutely no clue what you're talking about.

And yet you write with such arrogance and vitriol... where does that come from?
Click to expand...

If every ststement you quoted is evidence that I have no clue as to what I am talking about than you should easly be able to counter.

Why not attack to argument? Why are you attacking me? Is it that you fear not being part of the backslapping party?
 
JEROME DA GNOME said:
Why not attack to argument?
Click to expand...

Because every time someone does that you ignore them and continue to make the same nonsensical and false statements. But since you asked, I will do so.

JEROME DA GNOME said:
Evidence that stars are powered by fusion? Did not think so.
Click to expand...

There is massive evidence for that. First, we understand the laws of physics enough to know when fusion will occur. That's why we can build hydrogen bombs and controlled fusion tokamaks. The necessary conditions are satisfied in the sun. Second, we can observe the sun and ask whether the predicted spectrum of light, neutrino flux, temperature, etc. are consistent with the standard solar model. They all are, mostly to within 1%, and moreover the uncertainties are well controlled and understood (they mostly have to do with the fluid dynamics of the interior, which is hard to model in detail).

What causes these anisotropies according to BBT? How are they consistent with BBT? Opps, they are not!
Click to expand...

One of the great successes of the modern BB model is that it produces a flat, homogeneous, and isotropic universe with a scale-invariant spectrum of density perturbations, consistent with observations.

Unless, are you aware of science experimentaly producing fusion?
Click to expand...

Have you never heard of hydrogen bombs? Tokamaks? Lawrence Livermore Laboratory? Any of the many plasma physics labs? ITER?

The laws of physics and math are violated by the BBT.
Click to expand...

Really? Last time I checked the laws of physics - namely general relativity - do not allow anything else. In fact there are actually a set of mathematical theorems (due to Stephen Hawking and George Ellis) which prove that a big bang is an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics.

No, BBT started with the premise that there was "In the Begining" a tiny fireball.
Click to expand...

This is not even wrong, and I'm not sure what to say about it. The BBT started with the observation that distant galaxies are moving away from us with a speed proportional to distance, and asked what that implies.

Now after requesting it, I'm sure you'll ignore this post and just go on repeating your silly falsehoods.
 
Last edited:
sol invictus said:
There is massive evidence for that. First, we understand the laws of physics enough to know when fusion will occur. That's why we can build hydrogen bombs and controlled fusion tokamaks. The necessary conditions are satisfied in the sun. Second, we can observe the sun and ask whether the predicted spectrum of light, neutrino flux, temperature, etc. are consistent with the standard solar model. They all are, mostly to within 1%, and moreover the uncertainties are well controlled and understood (they mostly have to do with the fluid dynamics of the interior, which is hard to model in detail).
Click to expand...


You have confused fission with fusion.

Here you have failed.


One of the great successes of the modern BB model is that it produces a flat, homogeneous, and isotropic universe with a scale-invariant spectrum of density perturbations, consistent with observations.
Click to expand...

As such observed anisotropies contridicts this.

Here you have failed.



Have you never heard of hydrogen bombs? Tokamaks? Lawrence Livermore Laboratory? Any of the many plasma physics labs? ITER?
Click to expand...


You have confused fission with fusion.

Here you have failed.



Really? Last time I checked the laws of physics - namely general relativity - do not allow anything else. In fact there are actually a set of mathematical theorems (due to Stephen Hawking and George Ellis) which prove that a big bang is an inevitable consequence of the laws of physics.
Click to expand...

You are in dispute with science. T=0 according to the Big Bang violates physics and math.

Here you have failed.



This is not even wrong, and I'm not sure what to say about it. The BBT started with the observation that distant galaxies are moving away from us with a speed proportional to distance, and asked what that implies.
Click to expand...

Really? The BBT started with the observation that distant galaxies are moving away from us. How many galaxies were we aware of in 1929?

Here you have failed.




You may try again if you like.:)
 
JEROME DA GNOME said:
You have confused fission with fusion.

Here you have failed.
Click to expand...

You have failed to research even the most simple of his examples, the Hydrogen Bomb.

A fission trigger may be used, but the hydrogen bomb ends in a fusion reaction.

When you call fail on someone without even researching the material...

Epic Fail happens.
 
JEROME DA GNOME said:
You have confused fission with fusion.

Here you have failed.
Click to expand...

HYDROGEN bombs, Jerome. They FUSE hydrogen and its isotopes into helium and its isotopes. That's called FUSION, and it's the process that occurs in the sun.

As such observed anisotropies contridicts this.

Here you have failed.
Click to expand...

You seem to be incapable of reading. As I already said, the BBT predicts inhomogeneities (and therefore also anisotropies).

You have confused fission with fusion.

Here you have failed.
Click to expand...

No, Jerome. Every experiment I listed there is a FUSION experiment.

You are in dispute with science. T=0 according to the Big Bang violates physics and math.

Here you have failed.
Click to expand...

Try to tell that to Albert Einstein, Stephen Hawking, and every general relativity book every written. As I said, not only does the BB not contradict the laws of physics, there is a mathematical proof that it must always have occurred (subject to some assumptions which are satisfied by our universe).

Really? The BBT started with the observation that distant galaxies are moving away from us. How many galaxies were we aware of in 1929?

Here you have failed.
Click to expand...

At least 46, according to wiki

You may try again if you like.:)
Click to expand...

You're making yourself look really, really dumb, Jerome. My advice is to run away now.
 
Last edited:
JEROME DA GNOME said:
You have confused fission with fusion.

Here you have failed.




As such observed anisotropies contridicts this.

Here you have failed.






You have confused fission with fusion.

Here you have failed.





You are in dispute with science. T=0 according to the Big Bang violates physics and math.

Here you have failed.





Really? The BBT started with the observation that distant galaxies are moving away from us. How many galaxies were we aware of in 1929?

Here you have failed.




You may try again if you like.:)
Click to expand...


http://www.internationalskeptics.com/forums/showthread.php?postid=3652250#post3652250

What a momentous day. Jerome you've finally succeeded.
 
As we are an educational group...

The sun is mainly hydrogen and helium. Due to the heat and gravitational force at the core, the sun fuses hydrogen into helium. The helium formed is just a bit less massive than the original hydrogen...the release of energy based on Einstein's famous formula is what keeps us warm.

As the sun ages, it will continue to fuse elements until carbon, oxygen...etc form. This will continue until Iron and Nickel are formed. Nickel and Iron have the highest binding energy per nucleon holding the nuclei together--the nucleai of iron and nickel are the most "stuck together" with the strong nuclear force. Therefore elements higher on the periodic table are not formed.

Eventually, the fusion reaction will spread out from the core and the sun will become a red giant and toast the inner planets...in about 5 billion years; when that happens, it will pulse and blow iron and other stuff out into space. Then it will collapse into a white dwarf.

Our sun isn't big enough to blow up like a super nova...in super novas, the energy of the explosion will actually manufactor the entire periodic table of elements--since they are rare, the heavier elements are rare as well. (this has sort of been reproduced during underground hydrogen bomb tests.)

Hmmm forgot fission

fission is splitting heavy elements with a neutron...such as uranium 235. This doesn't happen in the sun, but does occur at your local nuclear power plant.


glenn

http://nobelprize.org/nobel_prizes/physics/articles/fusion/index.html
 
Last edited:
Tubbythin said:
Wow. Just wow.
Did you not even think to google what Sol listed before making such an unbelievably ridiculous statement?
Click to expand...

Well, he probably will have to admit he was wrong on this issue.

I have a feeling that the reason he disappeared earlier could be embarrassment related.
 
Tubbythin said:
Wow. Just wow.
Click to expand...

Yeah, you just can't ignore stupidity of that magnitude.

Tubbythin said:
Did you not even think to google what Sol listed before making such an unbelievably ridiculous statement?
Click to expand...

Anyone who was paying attention in high school physics (hell, middle school physics) would learn the difference between fission and fusion.

I'm going to assume that Jerome spent most of his high school days in metal shop.
 
Last edited:
Gate2501 said:
Well, he probably will have to admit he was wrong on this issue.

I have a feeling that the reason he disappeared earlier could be embarrassment related.
Click to expand...
It wouldn't be the first time.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Back
Top Bottom