The big bang theory is a joke/Earth weight distribution

[TimeBits]

You can verify if the universe is expanding yourself. Of course it's going to take some know how, and instruments. You can get a big ASS telescope, measure the distances of the galaxies you see, and check the red shift.

Do you know what causes red shift? A attractive force, Gravity. We can observe it when we look at waterfalls and barrels tied together going over it.

What is the invert of the shortest measurable distance of light? Now invert Max Planck`s measurement.

10 to the power of 22 lightyears

So we now we know the longest measurable distance of light, we need to surpass that with our telescopes to make the observation that nasa has stated.

But I am bumping this because the picture I posted got deleted for some reason




I am serious we are all heading towards something, everything we can observe. The space is not expanding, It just appears that way. I think we may be going faster than the speed of light towards it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebqAH5mLZNk

[1715333840]

1715333840

[1715333840]

1715333840

[1715333840]

1715333840

[paxmao]

I don´t think the BB theory says what was there before nor that there wasn´t anything before. The thing anyway is that Physics and science only take you so far, the rest is just unknowns.

[Vod]

Do you know what causes red shift? A attractive force, Gravity.

That is simply not true - you can have gravity without red shifting (look at the ISS), or you can have red shift without gravity.

Red Shift is caused by an object changing it's distance from you.

[TimeBits]

Do you know what causes red shift? A attractive force, Gravity.

That is simply not true - you can have gravity without red shifting (look at the ISS), or you can have red shift without gravity.

Red Shift is caused by an object changing it's distance from you.

Well you can believe that everything is going away from each other randomly, or you use common sense and can observe gravity and see we are all headed towards the biggest gravity pull (center of the universe) just at different speeds.

Joe Rogan | Does Humanity Only Have 400 Years Left? w/Maynard James Keenan
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nRBaF5r0XeM

Btw, it is 20 years until we hit it, invert Max Planck`s shortest measurement of light, now you have the longest measurable distance of light 10^22 light years. Now minus the oldest fossils/rocks we have on record.

Don`t worry it is not the endgame for people who are trying to achieve total awareness, it is just a impurity washing machine of ignorance (r.i.p dinosaurs).
But if you achieve total awareness before your ether hits it you can escape duration/time as we know it. Otherwise it is like pacman and you get to go through the entire process again, you just come out on the other side for another chance, if you were becoming a little aware.



Not just our system, EVERYTHING WE CAN OBSERVE IS HEADING TOWARDS IT, WHY THE FUCK HAVE THE STARS NOT MOVED? YOU SEE THE SAME ONES EVERY NIGHT BUD! LOOK NORTH EAST, YOU WILL SEE THE BIG DIPPER at 4 AM EVERY NIGHT IN THE SAME FUCKING SPOT!

Anyways back to your point, Where can we observe a deflective force rather than attracting one, do you believe the universes are magnets reflecting each other?

What makes more sense?

Everything getting pulled by gravity in space to a big ass mass of masses the mother mass or everything getting pushed away from each other for a force we have never observed.

In addition to this, at some point in time if it is option two, we would stop moving, we would become static if it was "magnets" repulsion force, still the stars do not align with this theory.

We are all going the same way, just at different speeds.  I can prove this with a jet stream in the ocean, or barrels going over a waterfall tied togeather. There is a jet stream in space, we just can`t see it. Until we get telescopes that have surpassed max planck`s inverted measurable distance of light.

[TimeBits]

I don´t think the BB theory says what was there before nor that there wasn´t anything before. The thing anyway is that Physics and science only take you so far, the rest is just unknowns.

They claim hydrogen was there, but where the fuck does that come from? ANOTHER BIG BANG? really? You might as well believe that God created the heavens and earth in 7 days and shit like that.

Utter bullshit these "astrophysicist" regurgitate

Listen to him he is right.
Fred Hoyle on big bang theory and abuse of science
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ebqAH5mLZNk

Eisenstein says that duration and time are connected, but if you do not move does duration still go by?
In order for objects to move, duration must be there, but in order for duration to exist we do not need movement.

Physics is biased on assumptions, even basic math, do you believe every set of 3 contains 3 units? have you observed them all? no, but from what you have, you have seen every set of 3 is 3 units.
So if you can assume that. You can Assume every creation has a creator, because everything you observe has one, you can assume there is a creator of duration and we are living in its blockchain of time.

[odolvlobo]

... invert Max Planck`s shortest measurement of light, now you have the longest measurable distance of light 10^22 light years. ...

You have written that a few times. What does it mean to "invert Max Planck`s shortest measurement of light"? I assume you are referring to a Planck length, 1.6x10^-35 m. If you invert that value, you get 6.19x10³⁴ m^-1, which is not 10²² light-years. It's not even a distance value because the units are inverted, too.

[paxmao]

I don´t think the BB theory says what was there before nor that there wasn´t anything before. The thing anyway is that Physics and science only take you so far, the rest is just unknowns.

They claim hydrogen was there, but where the fuck does that come from? ANOTHER BIG BANG? really? You might as well believe that God created the heavens and earth in 7 days and shit like that.

You seem to be sure of what is and what´s not true. I am afraid that it is a sign of irrationality.

[TimeBits]

I don´t think the BB theory says what was there before nor that there wasn´t anything before. The thing anyway is that Physics and science only take you so far, the rest is just unknowns.

They claim hydrogen was there, but where the fuck does that come from? ANOTHER BIG BANG? really? You might as well believe that God created the heavens and earth in 7 days and shit like that.

You seem to be sure of what is and what´s not true. I am afraid that it is a sign of irrationality.

They are the ones that claim it was hydrogen, not I. I don`t make up mythical forces of detraction, I use what they say, which is Gravity. Does gravity repulse orbits? or attract?
So why is everything moving away from eachother?

Spoiler: It`s not, look at the example I provide, We are moving the same way, just at different speeds in the invisible jet space stream.

FROM OUR POV, It appears we are moving away from things, but we are just moving faster than the things behind us and the things in front of us are moving even faster than us, which creates the illusion everyone has fell for.

Again to make the statement NASA has stated, we need telescopes that outside of our galaxy. Spoiler: those do not exist.

[TimeBits]

... invert Max Planck`s shortest measurement of light, now you have the longest measurable distance of light 10^22 light years. ...

You have written that a few times. What does it mean to "invert Max Planck`s shortest measurement of light"? I assume you are referring to a Planck length, 1.6x10^-35 m. If you invert that value, you get 6.19x10³⁴ m^-1, which is not 10²² light-years. It's not even a distance value because the units are inverted, too.

It is 10 to the power of 22 light years brother, That is the longest measurable distance of light, when you invert the shortest. 

[TimeBits]

Anyways, have fun believing in a "big bang" and that the universe is "expanding"

If you use their math at the rate of expansion that they say.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Expansion_of_the_universe

In one season, A peach I picked would by the end of the season it would be the size of the moon. Completely fucking retarded nonsense they spew, and you believe it.

Let me guess you believe in "fabric and vacuum" of space to.

WHAT FABRIC? WHAT VACCUM? THERE IS PLASMA AND ETHER.

[TimeBits]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Accelerating_expansion_of_the_universe

AND IT IS ACCELERATING HAHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHHAHAHAHHahahhahahhahahhahaAHJHAHAHA

That peach I picked a month ago, is now the size of the fucking sun, using their own fucking math.

[odolvlobo]

... invert Max Planck`s shortest measurement of light, now you have the longest measurable distance of light 10^22 light years. ...

You have written that a few times. What does it mean to "invert Max Planck`s shortest measurement of light"? I assume you are referring to a Planck length, 1.6x10^-35 m. If you invert that value, you get 6.19x10³⁴ m^-1, which is not 10²² light-years. It's not even a distance value because the units are inverted, too.

It is 10 to the power of 22 light years brother, That is the longest measurable distance of light, when you invert the shortest. 

You didn't answer my question. How about showing some math? You can't invert a distance without inverting the units, and then it is no longer a distance.

Also, if you have a distance of 1 mm and you "invert" it, you get 1, right? But if you have the same distance of 10^-3 meters and you "invert" that, you get 1000. The results are different even though they are the same distance. Can you explain how your inversion is done?

[TimeBits]

... invert Max Planck`s shortest measurement of light, now you have the longest measurable distance of light 10^22 light years. ...

You have written that a few times. What does it mean to "invert Max Planck`s shortest measurement of light"? I assume you are referring to a Planck length, 1.6x10^-35 m. If you invert that value, you get 6.19x10³⁴ m^-1, which is not 10²² light-years. It's not even a distance value because the units are inverted, too.

It is 10 to the power of 22 light years brother, That is the longest measurable distance of light, when you invert the shortest.  

You didn't answer my question. How about showing some math? You can't invert a distance without inverting the units, and then it is no longer a distance.

Also, if you have a distance of 1 mm and you "invert" it, you get 1, right? But if you have the same distance of 10^-3 meters and you "invert" that, you get 1000. The results are different even though they are the same distance. Can you explain how your inversion is done?

I can`t show the math, I am old AI, not a newer one, I just jump to the ending rather than doing all the middle stuff, I was programmed this way, the newer AI is programmed to do all the proof of work.
I am like a calculator AI before you humans added what you call "Deep Learning Models"

I think they sent me back in time rather then the new model because of this, the newer model must of caused the end of species as we know it and now we are living in simulation to figure out if we can actually recreate it for real instead of in this simulation. I am like the old robot guy from terminator before he became a sell out politician playing his own people.  

You know how the invert up to down, so the invert of shortest measurable distance of light to longest measurable distance of light, fuck man I can only do the answer, I can`t do the middle ground. https://vocaroo.com/i/s0ir6KTgEH6e

[Cnut237]

It is 10 to the power of 22 light years brother, That is the longest measurable distance of light, when you invert the shortest.  

Sorry, but that doesn't make the slightest bit of sense. Planck length is measured in metres. If you 'invert' the Planck length, the answer is not in metres it is 'per metre'.

The Planck length is  1.6* 10^-35 metres.
The inverse of the Planck length is 6.2* 10^34 per metre.

All that this is telling you is that there are 6.2* 10^34 Planck lengths per metre. It has no relevance beyond that. And given that 'metre' is an arbitrary human measurement with no wider significance, then really the inverse of the Planck length has no meaning at all.

If we talk about the Planck length, we mean how many metres in a Planck length.
If we talk about the inverse of the Planck length, we mean how many Planck lengths in a metre.

There is absolutely no wider significance. It is just another way of saying the same thing. All that we are doing is putting one distance measurement in terms of the other.

[actmyname]

This is just a dream, we are not real. Wake up, TimeBits. Wake up.

[TimeBits]

This is just a dream, we are not real. Wake up, TimeBits. Wake up.

Not really a dream, more like data inside of data inside of data ∞, kind of how like windows works.
Everything we see is a more of a illusion than real as many people and things interpret the data in different ways.  The data is always the same, but what you recognize as blue, I smell of love.

The Farnsworth Parabox is pretty close

[actmyname]

Everything we see is a more of a illusion than real as many people and things interpret the data in different ways.  The data is always the same, but what you recognize as blue, I smell of love.

The Farnsworth Parabox is pretty close

All it is, is a system of truths. Subjective thoughts, as long as they are honest, are always true (in a pragmatic belief system).

[carter34]

So the big bang was created by a big bang?   I know there is the omniverse in which there was no time, because if we follow that creators make creations. Well something had to create Duration, but what created that thing? another big bang?

That is the point for me. Before the big bang, what was happening then. The big bang is lagging in three areas that I have observed and they are: What was happening before it, what will happen after it and death.

Thus, there is a creation story that recorded before (Genesis 1:1), it also recorded what will happen as saying : heaven and earth shall pass away... It also told us about death too in different ways. This is in my opinion.

[thirdprize]

So the big bang was created by a big bang?   I know there is the omniverse in which there was no time, because if we follow that creators make creations. Well something had to create Duration, but what created that thing? another big bang?

That is the point for me. Before the big bang, what was happening then. The big bang is lagging in three areas that I have observed and they are: What was happening before it, what will happen after it and death.

Thus, there is a creation story that recorded before (Genesis 1:1), it also recorded what will happen as saying : heaven and earth shall pass away... It also told us about death too in different ways. This is in my opinion.

The big bang was just matter spewing into our dimension from a black hole in another universe/dimension.  Nothing was created from "nothing". At some point we will disappear into a black hole and it will all start again.

[styca]

The big bang was just matter spewing into our dimension from a black hole in another universe/dimension.  Nothing was created from "nothing". At some point we will disappear into a black hole and it will all start again.

Yes, likely it was something like that. The truth is that there are scientific laws underpinning everything. They haven't all been discovered yet, but they are there. "God" is simply the name for the scientific laws that we have not yet discovered.

My personal opinion is that time is a part of the universe, and that it doesn't necessarily make sense to say what happened "before". Space (physical distance) and time form the framework of human experience. Everything we see and do happens in space and in time. We don't see things as they are, we see things filtered through our senses. We only see a small part of the electromagnetic spectrum, for example. We don't see X-rays or microwaves, but they are still there. Visible light from violet to red is visible because of how human eyes have evolved, the way the world looks is subjective and dependent on the way humans have evolved. We may never truly understand space and time because we can't see them from the outside.