Printable View
Could it be that CMBR is not the making of of Big Bang, rather an evidence of existence of spacetime?
There are only two phenomena in the universe that occupy completely all of outer space: re-spacetime and universal gravitational field. Thus, could it be POSSIBLE that the detected CMBR be evidence of spacetime and not Big Bang?
Jsaldea12
3.24.10
No, not really. It's evidence of a source of radiation, akin to the big bang, and not much else.
No.Quote:
Originally Posted by jsaldea12
Spacetime and the universal gravitational field are the same thing, and that is the whole point of general relativity.
The CMBR is very clearly a remnant of the condensation of matter, the so-called recombination event, about 379,000 years after the big bang. It is very strong evidence for the big bang, as was predicted theoretically by theorists including Dicke and Peebles before it was observed by Penzias and Wilson.
Spacetime is the entire universe, and all of time. That is the thrust of general relativity. The existence of spacetime has absolutely nothing to do with the big bang. The big bang is basically a space-like slice of spacetime.
You might try reading the book The Road to Reality, A Complete Gude to the Laws of the Unverse by Roger Penrose. Penrose is one of the best relativists ever and does a nice job of explaining the nature of spacetime in that book.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmic_...ound_radiation
CMBR is electro-magnetic radiation, spacetime and universal gravitational field, both have electromagnetic property, otherwise light would not have reached us without a medium, that electro-magnetic, gravitational spacetime. Dr. Einstein revived the existence of ether in 1920, that it is impossible to conceived of outer space with ether on which to propagate/ Thus, the POSSIBLITY that that CMBR betrays the most guarded, hard-to-detect hidden existence of spacetime.
Just food for thought…..
Jose s. aldea
3.25.10 .
Oh no. Another one.
The answer here is simple. But since you choose to ignore the earlier correct scientific explanation, perhaps plain language will help.Quote:
Originally Posted by jsaldea12
1. You are totally wrong.
2. You are spouting a typical nonsensical theory that we often see from people with delusions of adequacy.
3. You might do well to seek professional help.
Reiterating, just food for thought, but there is grain, time will tell.
jsaldea12
3.25.10
I agree. Spacetime and universal gravitational field are one and the same!! Pls. refer to posted, "Gravity of newton and gravity of Einstein.
jsaldea12
3.25.10
Your position has been attacked and you refuse to defend it meaningfully. So I'm putting this in pseudoscience. Regardless of whether your ideas make sense or not, this is not how scientific ideas are presented.Quote:
Originally Posted by jsaldea12