[OOC] Myriad Reality

[whizzball1]

The World said
Ugh, my other two comments didn't go through last night.Spirit, how were the things back up to the big bang proven wrong?

Well, there are already a tonne of things. I can't describe every piece of evidence. You give me one thing, I'll disprove it.

[The World]

Legend said
Not really. Women were treated much better than in most cultures. Plus, you completely ignored the "moral development" stance, because if he demanded perfection immediately, he would have lost his people.

If he didn't lose his people after all the killing he did, he wouldn't lose them over women being equal.

[The World]

whizzball1 said
Well, there are already a tonne of things. I can't describe every piece of evidence. You give me one thing, I'll disprove it.

Background radiation.

[Legend]

The World said
Background radiation.

That actually goes against it, you know.

[Legend]

The World said
If he didn't lose his people after all the killing he did, he wouldn't lose them over women being equal.

They wouldn't follow him. He did things the right and only way. You have no idea what would have happened otherwise.

[The World]

Legend said
They wouldn't follow him. He did things the right and only way. You have no idea what would have happened otherwise.

Neither do you, so you can't say he did it the right way.

[Legend]

The World said
Neither do you, so you can't say he did it the right way.

Yeah I can. Because everything God does is the right way. That's literally the definition.

[whizzball1]

The World said
Background radiation.

Your Background Radiation "Bumps" are getting too low to create galaxy clusters within billions of years. For another thing, another plausible cause of this is large intergalactic clouds of gas colliding with each other. The radiation scattered would be interpreted by the COBE satellite as those "Bumps".

In fact, these "Bumps" are perfectly smooth. Our universe is clumpy, which means that the Cosmic Radiation should be clumpy, but no, it's perfectly smooth. Then they tried to find temperature data that could keep their theory going, but the data they finally found was too small to account for the clumpiness. All in all, background radiation actually works against the Big Bang Theory.

[Legend]

whizzball1 said
Your Background Radiation "Bumps" are getting too low to create galaxy clusters within billions of years. For another thing, another plausible cause of this is large intergalactic clouds of gas colliding with each other. The radiation scattered would be interpreted by the COBE satellite as those "Bumps". In fact, these "Bumps" are perfectly smooth. Our universe is clumpy, which means that the Cosmic Radiation should be clumpy, but no, it's Then they tried to find temperature data that could keep their theory going, but the data they finally found was too small to account for the clumpiness. All in all, background radiation actually works the Big Bang Theory.

Thank you for saving me the effort.

[whizzball1]

Legend said
Thank you for saving me the effort.

You're welcome xD

[The World]

whizzball1 said
You're welcome xD

Damn connection not going through.
Firstly, either you're thinking of something other than radiation, or you got your info from a blatantly false source. Radiation takes the form of waves; they cannot possible be "smooth" as you claim.
Secondly, http://www.universetoday.com/79777/cosmic-background-radiation/[/url

[whizzball1]

The World said
Damn connection not going through.Firstly, either you're thinking of something other than radiation, or you got your info from a blatantly false source. Radiation takes the form of waves; they cannot possible be "smooth" as you claim. Secondly,

Smooth as in not clumpy at all.

[Legend]

The World said
Damn connection not going through.Firstly, either you're thinking of something other than radiation, or you got your info from a blatantly false source. Radiation takes the form of waves; they cannot possible be "smooth" as you claim. Secondly,

Actually, you misinterpreted his statement. The radiation graph that they had was not as necessary for the universe to have been created in a Big Bang. Here is the actual chart.

Hm, it doesn't work.

[whizzball1]

Legend said
Actually, you misinterpreted his statement. The radiation graph that they had was not as necessary for the universe to have been created in a Big Bang. Here is the actual chart. Hm, it doesn't work.

Give us the link.

[The World]

You mean like microwaves? The thing that you say isn't clumped?
And keep in mind, the universe is actually very organized, there's no really much clutter in the universe.

[The World]

http://apollo.lsc.vsc.edu/classes/met130/notes/chapter2/graphics/rad_waves_new.jpg[/url

That is odd.

[whizzball1]

The World said
You mean like microwaves? The thing that you say isn't clumped? And keep in mind, the universe is actually very organized, there's no really much clutter in the universe.

It's still clumpy. Stars clumped into galaxies, clumps of gases, etc. etc..

[Legend]

whizzball1 said
Give us the link.

I tried. It's failing.

[Legend]

The World said
You mean like microwaves? The thing that you say isn't clumped? And keep in mind, the universe is actually very organized, there's no really much clutter in the universe.

When cosmologists thought that the universe was smooth and homogeneous on its largest scales, they were happy to find that the background radiation matched perfectly to a "black body" curve. But when it became clearer that this smoothness did not really exist, it became necessary to find bumps in the background radiation, tiny non-conformities that could explain how the universe got from its smooth, homogeneous beginnings to a clumpy, discontinous present. Data from the COBE probe in 1989 seemed to confirm the perfect smoothness of the background radiation, although later interpretations by George Smoot claim to have found the necessary bumps. The picture I tried to attack is from COBE data that purports to show the anisotropies in the cosmic background radiation

[The World]

Legend said
When cosmologists thought that the universe was smooth and homogeneous on its largest scales, they were happy to find that the background radiation matched perfectly to a "black body" curve. But when it became clearer that this smoothness did not really exist, it became necessary to find bumps in the background radiation, tiny non-conformities that could explain how the universe got from its smooth, homogeneous beginnings to a clumpy, discontinous present. Data from the COBE probe in 1989 seemed to confirm the perfect smoothness of the background radiation, although later interpretations by George Smoot claim to have found the necessary bumps. The picture I tried to attack is from COBE data that purports to show the anisotropies in the cosmic background radiation

If you're using data from 1989 then of course we're not going to get anywhere -_-