|
Post by abacus9900 on Oct 18, 2010 16:37:04 GMT 1
Well, your friend Sir Roger Penrose seems to have gone off the idea of creation ex nihilo so are you suggesting he's stupid too? But, of course, you, er, don't watch Horizon do you, so you choose to believe it's all a plot or something.
As for irony, well, what you do is not so much irony as cruelty.
|
|
|
Post by Progenitor A on Oct 18, 2010 17:15:07 GMT 1
O, and as regards my comments about students, some people don't understand irony either..................... Irony my left testical! Gloating that's what it was, the same irresponsible gloating one-upmanship that you display so frequently right here. Quite frankly I do not believe that you are either a sceintist or a lecturer
|
|
|
Post by speakertoanimals on Oct 18, 2010 17:29:56 GMT 1
Not at all. As I keep saying, there are various possible suggestions, once we starting to think about how quantum gravity might modify the classical result. I think Penrose would formerly have agreed with the there was no before as being the only option, precisely because of the problem of the second law of thermodynamics. Now, he seems tom be suggesting there are ways round that -- so, not because he thinks that creation ex nihilo is daft, just that there are more possibilities than that, if we can get round the second law problems.
Which is perfectly good science -- instantons should make one set of predictions, whereas the bounce will make slightly different predictions, and hopefully predictions that can be tested. Saying there are more possibilities than was once thought isn't saying that some of those possibilities are totally wrong, and certainly not for the simplistic reasons that some on here are trying to advocate.
|
|
|
Post by Mr Red on Oct 20, 2010 13:24:17 GMT 1
What happened before the BB? It was bangs all the way back.
I know what comes after the BB it is a C
|
|