The Most Foolish Theory in Physics

[ben m]

I've never said i was a cosmologist. I am a physics student, and there is a lot of physics involved in cosmology.
... How long will it take you guys to realize i am entitled to talk about subjects i am allowed to talk about, if it concerns physics. Most of my posts consist of this nature through and through.

You can talk about any subject you want. That is not the problem. This is the problem:

I am absolutely sure that (even with the alternative theories flying around) that big bang is one of the most erreneous theories ever created. And here is why.

Who here can talk real physics?

P.S - I am not a layman by the way.

Does no one here know physics?

... but i hate it when amatures who have not experienced a higher level of education in physics to refute my claims with the highest impunity resorts me to see little good in their actions.

Zig, go away. You aren't contirbuting anything remotely to science, other than buzzwords stringed with no real meaning.

and if you didn't get that, it basically yeh, your wrong. The energy is certainly constant. And the CMB is almost just as smooth, a consequence itself of inflationary phase.

... Obviously i need to do more homework for someone who doesn't know jack about the topics they like to argue:

Oh yeh? Are you gonna make yourself more like a fool?

Most of your posts consist of that nature through and through. Do you see the problem?

 

[Singularitarian]

Yeh, make it all one sided. I love how you did that.

 

[ben m]

certain aspects of the cosmology i was presenting simply because it spoke of hard physical scientific fact i am aware of

Some of the "facts" you think you are "aware of" are false; they are mistakes in your understanding of reality. They're as false as the "(x/x) = x" algebra mistake you made in another thread.

Just because it is in your head somewhere, filed under "science", does not mean it is true.

 

[Singularitarian]

You forgot the general attutitude when i first arrived, wasn't made very welcome at all. But i got over that, and realized this place was not be taken seriously.. I mean, how could one?

 

[Singularitarian]

Some of the "facts" you think you are "aware of" are false; they are mistakes in your understanding of reality. They're as false as the "(x/x) = x" algebra mistake you made in another thread.

Just because it is in your head somewhere, filed under "science", does not mean it is true.

You forget... did i not admit to the mistake?

How can you use this as an example, when i admitted to the error...

 

[ben m]

You forget... did i not admit to the mistake?

How can you use this as an example, when i admitted to the error...

I'm using it to point out: you admitted one error; that's good, so you recognize the concept of "error" and "realizing there was an error" and "sometimes the other guy is right". All good.

There are many other errors which you have not admitted. Most of the string of insults above are your responses to people trying to point out these errors.

 

[Singularitarian]

Ben, i have admitted to error if i believed i have indeed been in error, something which happens to us normal humans beings all the time in life.

Ben, i could be doing something much more interesting than argue everytime when someone is right or wrong, or is not entirely clued up on a particular area of cosmology. I could be looking at porn or something, but here i am again, wasting my time, taking erreneous claims and insults from people.

 

[Audible Click]

You forgot the general attutitude when i first arrived, wasn't made very welcome at all. But i got over that, and realized this place was not be taken seriously.. I mean, how could one?

It's a skeptic forum and you posted things that were corrected for you by physicists, teachers, and laymen. There is no such thing as a welcome mat here. You took a position and proceeded to defend that position with known inaccuracies. We get that you're not going to be swayed in your opinions so if this forum is not to be taken seriously by you then why continue this debacle?

 

[Singularitarian]

None of my essays contained any fabrication of science. I've studied them verociously over many hours. Now, mistakes now again, yeh, i've made two i can think of since i came here... Guess what one of them is?

 

[Olowkow]

... Now, mistakes now again, yeh, i've made two i can think of since i came here... Guess what one of them is?

Remaining?

 

[catbasket]

... Now, mistakes now again, yeh, i've made two i can think of since i came here... Guess what one of them is?

Typing?

 

[Audible Click]

None of my essays contained any fabrication of science. I've studied them verociously over many hours. Now, mistakes now again, yeh, i've made two i can think of since i came here... Guess what one of them is?

Coming here and expecting your theories to be taken at face value?

 

[ben m]

Ben, i have admitted to error if i believed i have indeed been in error, something which happens to us normal humans beings all the time in life.

Do you ever ask yourself whether you might be in error?

Do you have a way of finding out whether or not you are in error?

 

[Singularitarian]

Yeh the mistakes, i noticed them too as i was writing lol

But, no seriously, one of them was coming here. Even some of the most wisest and professional physicists make mistakes all the time, even in area's they do understand. I don't mind making errors, it just reminds me i'm on the right track.

Problem with you guys, is that you have consistently made errors in the past, then even some of you have the cheek (like what's his name... the guy who made the same mistake as me about calling the notations superscripts), even he popped in recently to explain how simple my most current ''misunderstanding'' of the z notation, but that never stopped him from acting the ****.

The arrogance here is only magnified more when it complains about someone elses arrogance. Then it just gets boring, to the point of the slitting your wrists.

 

[ben m]

None of my essays contained any fabrication of science. I've studied them verociously over many hours.

And here's the problem.

Science---especially for a student---is not done by writing something down and "studying it". Why not? Because it's easy to make mistakes that way. Teachers do not assign problem sets and say, "OK, solve these problems and tell me whether you got them right."---they correct and grade them, because things that students think are right are often wrong. Scientific journals and funding agencies do not say, "Study your theory for many hours and we'll publish/fund it"---they send your carefully-studied work off to expert reviewers who search for mistakes.

 

[godless dave]

Yeh the mistakes, i noticed them too as i was writing lol

But, no seriously, one of them was coming here. Even some of the most wisest and professional physicists make mistakes all the time, even in area's they do understand. I don't mind making errors, it just reminds me i'm on the right track.

We're not talking about errors. We're talking about ignorance. You claimed that a particular theory was nonsense even though you admit you haven't studied one of its most basic components.

That would be like claiming Chomsky's Transformational-Generative approach to linguistics is nonsense and then admitting you don't know what a verb phrase is.

 

[catbasket]

Even some of the most wisest and professional physicists make mistakes all the time, even in area's they do understand.

That's another of your typos. It should say "the most foolish and amateur physicists make mistakes all the time, especially in areas they think they understand".

 

[Ferguson]

Actually, I've found this forum quite welcoming, even when saying controversial things or things I later find to be incorrect. However, if your idea of "welcoming" is having those who have knowledge in the topic bite their tongue and bow to your grand pronouncements from ignorance, just to inflate your own ego, then, no I don't expect you'll feel "welcomed." At least, not on any forum dedicated to critical thinking.

Also, don't take this as an insult, but spelling is important (especially if you intend to use lots of technical words), there are many of your posts where I have to guess which word you are attempting to use, and given the other grammatical issues it makes the... reasoning... of your posts quite hard to follow.

I think you should continue your studies, and do more research in to the BB, if you'd like to debate it in a way that sounds credible. Of course, you can talk about whatever you'd like (in most western nations), but you can't expect people who know the topic to bend to your will, just because you say so.

(P.S. While we're listing our irrelevant credentials for the sake of posturing, I have a BS in physics from MSU (home of the beautiful NSCL!))

 

[Dancing David]

Yeh, I haven't studied generally any area of cosmological redshift, though i do know scientifically what it is.
I am not ashamed to admit this, i don't see why anyone should.

That is cool, but it is crucial to the composition of the CMB.

 

[Singularitarian]

Actually, I've found this forum quite welcoming, even when saying controversial things or things I later find to be incorrect. However, if your idea of "welcoming" is having those who have knowledge in the topic bite their tongue and bow to your grand pronouncements from ignorance, just to inflate your own ego, then, no I don't expect you'll feel "welcomed." At least, not on any forum dedicated to critical thinking.

Also, don't take this as an insult, but spelling is important (especially if you intend to use lots of technical words), there are many of your posts where I have to guess which word you are attempting to use, and given the other grammatical issues it makes the... reasoning... of your posts quite hard to follow.

I think you should continue your studies, and do more research in to the BB, if you'd like to debate it in a way that sounds credible. Of course, you can talk about whatever you'd like (in most western nations), but you can't expect people who know the topic to bend to your will, just because you say so.

(P.S. While we're listing our irrelevant credentials for the sake of posturing, I have a BS in physics from MSU (home of the beautiful NSCL!))

Oh brilliant. Can we have a discussion then on the theories merits, and how they pose their problems onto us in a metaphysical wonder?

For instance, the ghostly existence of the wave function inhereted every moment of existence, which then reconciles the idea that the universe was chosen from an infinite amount of set-up conditions... Then there is the question as to whether our theory is actually correct, because it has errored many times in the past, and so had to be reconfigured, two major reconfigurations where mentioned in the essay ''the not enough time'' model and the ''inflationary phase'', where the latter posits more problems today than the former did conceptually. Are we to simply adopt the spontaneous idea that there is a whole new quantum field, with real effects only moments after big bang? We are already struggling with the theories we have, such as the Higgs Boson, hopefully a problem which will be resolved when the LHC contributes its science to the world after analysation. But of course, you could also debate that these conversations are worthless, means nothing, and ultimately a waste of time.