The big bang and stellar evolution Pt3

Aller en bas

The big bang and stellar evolution Pt3 Empty The big bang and stellar evolution Pt3

Message  Admin le Lun 2 Avr - 2:49

The big bang and stellar evolution Pt3

An evolutionist astronomer,
*R.H. Dicke, says it well:
“If the fireball had expanded only .1 percent faster,
the present rate of expansion would have been 3 x 103
times as great. Had the initial expansion rate been 0.1
percent less, the Universe would have expanded to only
3 x 10-6 of its present radius before collapsing. At this
maximum radius the density of ordinary matter would
have been 10-12 grm/m3, over 1016 times as great as the
present mass density. No stars could have formed in such
a Universe, for it would not have existed long enough to
form stars.”—*R.H. Dickey, Gravitation and the Universe
(1969), p. 62.
8 - Such an equation would have produced not a
universe but a hole. *Roger L. St. Peter in 1974 developed
a complicated mathematical equation that showed
that the theorized Big Bang could not have exploded outward
into hydrogen and helium. In reality, St. Peter says
the theoretical explosion (if one could possibly take place)
would fall back on itself and make a theoretical black hole!
This means that one imaginary object would swallow another
9 - There is not enough antimatter in the universe.
This is a big problem for the theorists. The original Big
Bang would have produced equal amounts of positive matter
(matter) and negative matter (antimatter). But only small
amounts of antimatter exist. There should be as much an-
72 The Evolution Cruncher
timatter as matter—if the Big Bang was true.
“Since matter and antimatter are equivalent in all respects
but that of electromagnetic charge oppositeness,
any force [the Big Bang] that would create one should
have to create the other, and the universe should be made
of equal quantities of each. This is a dilemma. Theory
tells us there should be antimatter out there, and observation
refuses to back it up.”—*Isaac Asimov, Asimov’s
New Guide to Science, p. 343.
“We are pretty sure from our observations that the
universe today contains matter, but very little if any antimatter.”—*
Victor Weisskopf, “The Origin of the Universe,”
American Scientist, 71, p. 479.
10 - The antimatter from the Big Bang would have
destroyed all the regular matter. This fact is well-known
to physicists. As soon as the two are produced in the laboratory,
they instantly come together and annihilate one another.
We have mentioned ten reasons why matter could
not be made by a supposed Big Bang. But now we will
discuss what would happen IF it actually had.
1 - There is no way to unite the particles. As the
particles rush outward from the central explosion, they
would keep getting farther and farther apart from one another.
2 - Outer space is frictionless, and there would be
no way to slow the particles. The Big Bang is postulated
on a totally empty space, devoid of all matter, in which a
single explosion fills it with outward-flowing matter. There
would be no way those particles could ever slow.
3 - The particles would maintain the same vector
(speed and direction) forever. Assuming the particles
were moving outward through totally empty space, there is
no way they could change direction. They could not get
together and begin circling one another.
bible research, onlinebible, online bible
bible research, onlinebible, online bible

Messages : 564
Date d'inscription : 10/03/2012
Localisation : Paris

Revenir en haut Aller en bas

Revenir en haut

- Sujets similaires

Permission de ce forum:
Vous ne pouvez pas répondre aux sujets dans ce forum