John Smith wrote:
Ahhh, you have me on my use of words...
Let me re-phrase, "Portions of this universe (as heavely bodies) came into
existance over 100 billion years ago..."

Maybe in a parallel universe. But nothing remotely resembling
heavenly bodies existed in our universe before the Big Bang.
Where did you get such an idea?
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Mike Coslo wrote:
What came (or went) before the Big Bang?

An event horizon didn't exist "before" the Big Bang
so "before" has no meaning in that context. If a
clock had existed "before" the Big Bang and survived
the Big Bang, it wouldn't have started running until
"after" the Big Bang. The primeval mass/energy was
virtually infinite. There was indeed literally a beginning
of what we experience as time. When all movement and
change ceases far into the future, what we experience
as time will no longer exist.
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

John Smith wrote:
Where is the 12.5 billion year age of the universe given, I will recheck,
but the universe is much older...
You sure that is not the age of our galaxy?

I was remembering an earlier estimate. The latest is:

http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...ry_030211.html

"The new data show the universe to be 13.7 billion years old, to within
200 million years, Bennett said."
--
73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp

----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+ Newsgroups
----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =----

Yes Cecil:

It seems my figure on the age of the universe was greatly in error...
You see one figure, then a few years slip by on ya, and someone re-writes
the darn books!!!!!

I stand corrected, again.... embarassed-frown

Warmest regards,
John

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
| John Smith wrote:
| Ahhh, you have me on my use of words...
| Let me re-phrase, "Portions of this universe (as heavely bodies) came
into
| existance over 100 billion years ago..."
|
| Maybe in a parallel universe. But nothing remotely resembling
| heavenly bodies existed in our universe before the Big Bang.
| Where did you get such an idea?
| --
| 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp
|
| ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
| http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
| ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----

Yes, Cecil:

Yes, I agree, most are in agreement, at the VERY LEAST, that the universe is
younger than twenty-billion-years old, I concede, I concede!!!! I surrender
even!!!

tearing-off-white-boxers-to-use-as-"flag of truce!" grin



Warmest regards,

John

"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
| John Smith wrote:
| Where is the 12.5 billion year age of the universe given, I will
recheck,
| but the universe is much older...
| You sure that is not the age of our galaxy?
|
| I was remembering an earlier estimate. The latest is:
|
| http://www.space.com/scienceastronom...ry_030211.html
|
| "The new data show the universe to be 13.7 billion years old, to within
| 200 million years, Bennett said."
| --
| 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp
|
| ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
| http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
| ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----

"John Smith" wrote in message
...
I wanted to respond to this right away--your post... but was quite simply
unable.... (I literally spent time starring out a window!)
Realize that I have nothing but questions about the "end of the universe",
I
think it is like that for us all, but, maybe not....
I suspect it to be a sphere, but you have seen the "mobius strip", it at
first looks quite innocently like a two dimensional object, on closer
examination, IT ONLY HAS ONE SIDE!!!!
The universe could very well be like that...
My mind spends a lot of time "out there" when I am slow to sleep....

I imagine most are scarred to speculate--others would probably mock their
efforts....

Any ideas, or models which you can find to build a "mental model" from?

Warmest regards,
John

John,
Here is another thought. Just because we can only see 3 dimensions doesn't
mean we don't exist in more than 3.

Tam/WB2TT
"Cecil Moore" wrote in message
...
| John Smith wrote:
| I think there may be a way if we tear a hole in the "shielding."
|
| Trouble is, we cannot locate the shielding. It's like
| trying to get off the Earth by walking around.
| --
| 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp
|
| ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
News==----
| http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! 120,000+
Newsgroups
| ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
=----

Or, that the reports of UFO's aren't glimpses into another dimesion... but,
a mental model of such escapes me... I will need someone else with a mind
more gifted than mine to supply one... frown

Warmest regards,
John

"Tam/WB2TT" wrote in message
...
|
| "John Smith" wrote in message
| ...
| I wanted to respond to this right away--your post... but was quite simply
| unable.... (I literally spent time starring out a window!)
| Realize that I have nothing but questions about the "end of the
universe",
| I
| think it is like that for us all, but, maybe not....
| I suspect it to be a sphere, but you have seen the "mobius strip", it at
| first looks quite innocently like a two dimensional object, on closer
| examination, IT ONLY HAS ONE SIDE!!!!
| The universe could very well be like that...
| My mind spends a lot of time "out there" when I am slow to sleep....
|
| I imagine most are scarred to speculate--others would probably mock
their
| efforts....
|
| Any ideas, or models which you can find to build a "mental model" from?
|
| Warmest regards,
| John
|
| John,
| Here is another thought. Just because we can only see 3 dimensions doesn't
| mean we don't exist in more than 3.
|
| Tam/WB2TT
| "Cecil Moore" wrote in message
| ...
| | John Smith wrote:
| | I think there may be a way if we tear a hole in the "shielding."
| |
| | Trouble is, we cannot locate the shielding. It's like
| | trying to get off the Earth by walking around.
| | --
| | 73, Cecil http://www.qsl.net/w5dxp
| |
| | ----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet
| News==----
| | http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World!
120,000+
| Newsgroups
| | ----= East and West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption
| =----
|
|
|
|

On Sun, 01 May 2005 17:58:44 -0400, Mike Coslo
wrote:

Cecil Moore wrote:

John Smith wrote:

Portions of this universe are over 100 billion years old--that
translates directly to 100 billion light years... that is a lot of
distance... even thought the echo of the big bang itself may have
subsided, I just cannot believe we can't hear bounces of other signals
(signals which cannot be accounted for)...


How is it possible for portions of this universe to be
eight times older than the Big Bang which occurred
about 12.5 billion years ago?

What came (or went) before the Big Bang?


Fourier-play? :-)