New in cosmology and fundamental physics

nothing from nothing leaves nothing. only cuz u dont need something to now have nothing. right ? kinda like some ppls brains here. but s/t hasta be before u can say "oh, i recall having that...or i wuz born blind so how can i miss vision ? n/t really cant compare itself to n/t...esp if there never WUZ s/t. s/t hadta be there first cuz the arrow doesnt point both ways. maybe uncles eyes do but hes looking thru a npd windshield. see ? so we can go from s/t to n/t in all sortsa servicable ways. but try going from n/t to s/t without a sack a popcorn...and then convince me. YOU can convince urself all u want ! ...a brains capable a tricking itself umpteen. until u yump off the bixby bridge in a sudden burst a romantic im leaving. but trust me. its gonna be alot more than justa ouchy.

Something from nothing and nothing from something can happen in a local context because there's something outside the locality to put something into it - or for what's going out to have that outside location in order to be somewhere.

...via materialism ?

is subjective.
In math and physics there's quite an effort to be objective.
But - that gets 'interfered with'. Putting it mildly.
That has to be though. Applications. Applied science. Applied maths.

Ah, but -1 from nothing leaves 1.

the BBT is kinda like pouring water on salt. its self-extirpating. only cuz u cant base it on math (like they do !) cuz u cant get something from nothing in math...NOR the physical sciences. so, hey u guys ? ...where did this "something" come from to kick off this SO CALLED big bang ?

it sure didnt come from nothing. or better yet. remove space & time and explain to me WHERE ALL this energy & matter (that were packed into this infinitely dense infinitely hot singular node) came from ? and plz dont lie to urself and tell me it made itself up...pffft !!

The Big Bang model doesn’t actually claim “something came from nothing"; it just describes the earliest moment our physics can meaningfully talk about. Cosmology doesn’t say the universe popped out of literal nothing. It says we can trace it back to a hot, dense early state, and beyond that our current math breaks down.

Nobody claims the Big Bang came from nothing --- it's just a question that remains unanswered. We as people have to be ok with that.

A lot of people have problems with that, and explaining seems to go straight over their heads. Science is in general about what is known and strongly believed. At the boundaries of that is stuff that is conjectured and stuff that is not known at all. To concentrate on where the Big Bang came from and suchlike is leaving the science behind and trying to use something outside it as a way to attack it. And that attack is not well motivated. One version of it uses the reasoning "you don't know everything, therefore you know nothing".

In truth, there is very strong confidence in a very hot, very dense, almost perfectly uniform, almost uniformly expanding early universe back as far as our knowledge of physics goes. There is strong belief in partially understood aspects of what came before that - especially inflation. And there is very poor knowledge of the very earliest stages because we have no empirical knowledge of physics at the relevant temperature and density, and good reasons to believe it is significantly different to what we do know. And when it gets to the extreme of the Planck temperature, we are pretty sure it is nothing like anything we do know, but are not sure exactly what that is.

Hi L.
A simple but not so well-known fact is that when many people are talking about the big bang and 'spacetime' and the like - they leave out that they are models.
They leave that out - so much of the time ...
Then 'rumour builds'.
With rumour flames fed by variability in usage of words like 'theory'.

The Big Bang model doesn’t actually claim “something came from nothing"; it just describes the earliest moment our physics can meaningfully talk about. (but ur sure wondering about it arentcha !) Cosmology doesn’t say the universe popped out of literal nothing. (but didnt steven squawking say that ?) It says we can trace it back to a hot, dense early state, (this isnt penny and sheldon u know) and beyond that our current math breaks down. (maths not spose to)

Nobody claims the Big Bang came from nothing --- it's just a question that remains unanswered. We as people have to be ok with that. (but i can tell ur not ! ...the grandest of all questions and yet empty like humpty dumpty)

I'm not sure EE knows it - but a good-sized asteroid is passing close to earth - or did.
Maybe the size of a bus or two. Moving quite fast.
Apparently they're quite common but not that easy to detect when they're far off but approaching.
Next could be - how big to survive entering the atmosphere? How slow or fast?

That one is nearer than I guessed - a mere 50,000 miles. It is 16-35 meters across. If it hit the Earth (which is 8000 miles across) it would make quite a bang. The uncertain size means it is not possible to tell if it would reach the ground. It could, especially if it's at the upper end of the estimated range of size.

But it won't, because it is going to miss by a tiny 6 Earth diameters.

Surprising there has not been more fuss about this.

Back on topic, you are invited to a Gemini chat about the problem of energy conservation in general relativity, leading to the notion of a zero energy universe in which (in a meaningful sense) energy is conserved (with the average energy density being zero!)

https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/scientists-think-just-accidentally-proved-130000847.html

Surprising there has not been more fuss about this.

maybe cuz itd be like a beebee hitting a cue ball ?

or better ? ...something thats 5.3 micrometers in diameter. iows a bacteria ? ... or a red blood cell ?

a perfume atomizer shoots out abt 50 microns dia.

its not gonna do a/t. not like this...

Unlike Creationism. Which instead of say the universe came from nothing, it says the universe came from…. Nothing?

🤔