|
|
Posted by rf on 06/30/07 12:20
"dorayme" <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> wrote in message
news:doraymeRidThis-08EFDF.21101430062007@news-vip.optusnet.com.au...
> In article
> <Xns995F17CDF4D72nanopandaneredbojias@198.186.190.161>,
> Neredbojias <neredbojias@gmail.com> wrote:
> If time begins at the start of the BB, there is prior about it.
You miss the point. Both of you. Time did not "begin" at the big bang. It
started to exist, from our point of view. Loose and sloopy I know but, lets
proceed and hopefully clarify a bit...
The big bang did not "start", so to say that time did not exist until after
"the start of the big bang" is erroneous. The big bang simply is. It is a
boundary condition, from our point of view. On our side of that boundary
time exists. On the other side, well, ?
Mr Hawking opines that the big bang is, indeed, a singularity in our concept
of space/time. As such one can not state anything at all about conditions
"on the other side" of that singularity. On this side we have time and space
as we think we know it. On the other side we cannot even conjecture but
there is/was/will be probably no such thing as time and/or space. For us
"the other side" does not exist (from our point of view) as it is not
accessable to us, but we can be sure that different rules apply. There is
probably no HTML.
The jury is still out on the "big crunch" at the other end of our concept of
time. Depends on how much dark matter there is laying about, which is still
under dispute AFAIK.
> Please stop thinking about these things, they can cause brain
> damage in the wrong heads.
Not really. A knowledge of higher mathematics makes it quite easy to
understand. One cannot poke a stick at it, nor explain it clearly to the
layman, but one can debate it ad nauseum, in the arena of the mathematics.
--
Richard.
Navigation:
[Reply to this message]
|