Before the big bang got started....

[The Starmaker]

Now, i notice that
everyones theory of before the big bang or
what caused the big bang is...wrong.

It's going to take you at least 500 years to get it right.

Luckly, I'm here and can save you time..

You got this singlelaurity wrong..

When you reduce the whole universe backwards..
the dot/singlelaurity is actually much bigger
than a dot.


In otherwords, you got the size wrong...

I would say the size was around between 1/4 of the current size of the universe today.


That's a little bigger than a dot, or what you call...the singularity.



Don't tell me I have to wait 500 years for you guys to catch up with me????


You're soooo slow.

[john]

Size is relative.
The Universe has no other thing to
compare itself against.
The size of the Universe is
ALWAYS "infinitely large".
Big Bang is stupid.

[reber g=emc^2]

Micro universe was first to happen.It built a singularity(DNA) So that gravity could create the Big Bang and evolve this singularity to what we see "NOW" There are more universes in the cosmos taking place as I type that ever.The first big bang took place eons ago.A billion trillion universes are turning cold in the time it took Trab to give me this information.Its a theory on how vast and endless the cosmos is.Its matter and energies go to infinity + 1 Trebert Best to keep in mind a BB is an implosion

[john]

The Universe has always been, sir.

[hanson]

"reber g=emc^2" <herbert...@gmail.com> wrote:
Micro universe was first to happen. It took Trab to give me
this information. Best to keep in mind Bert's _Beer Belly_
(BB) is an implosion
>
hanson wrote:
"Trab" is specific for diagnosis of Grave’s disease.
So, Glazier, you sorry Swine, you have still another
disease now, on top of all your mental maladies . Pity.

[The Starmaker]

In other words, according to the laws of nature..there is a limit to the
amount of stars in a universe.


Expansion of that universe allows that limit to increase.

[john]

The Universe being Fractal in nature,
based on Atom/Galaxy iteration,
it will, indeed, appear to be divided
into many universes at every level.
Those 'universes' would be discrete
entities such as organisms.
You or I are a 'universe', according to
the people in one of our atoms.

There is only one Universe. It is
infinite in extent and in local
complexity

[reber g=emc^2]

It could be reality to see universes like we see the layers of an onion.Each layer built by gravity with time.If it has 10 layers we are at the 6th. Trebert

[noTthaTguY]

see\hear, punk;
the first time that Mandelbrot came to the u.,
I was the only one to ask a technical question re computer-science,
although he merely said that it "bleu 00p" or, perhaps,
he meant blew-up, although I don't think that
that is a French useage, but he spent so much time at i.b.m ...

> Expansion of that universe allows that limit to increase.

that is, beause of redshifing, we do not know the finitude
of Universe, nor infinitude

[hanson]

"reber g=emc^2" <herbert...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It could be reality to see universes like we see the
layers of an onion.Each layer built by gravity with time.

If it has 10 layers we, Bert and his fleas, are at the 6th,
& the other 4 are in Trebert's pin-head too. O ya. Hmm

[The Starmaker]

and i took a look at before the big bang...there was no compression of
any kind.


what you did have was a very ordered universe.

[The Starmaker]

The Starmaker wrote:
>
> The Starmaker wrote:
> >
> > Now, i notice that
> > everyones theory of before the big bang or
> > what caused the big bang is...wrong.
> >
> > It's going to take you at least 500 years to get it right.
> >
> > Luckly, I'm here and can save you time..
> >
> > You got this singlelaurity wrong..
> >
> > When you reduce the whole universe backwards..
> > the dot/singlelaurity is actually much bigger
> > than a dot.
> >
> > In otherwords, you got the size wrong...
> >
> > I would say the size was around between 1/4 of the current size of the universe today.

for more exact measurement, ...things that exist today, existed before the big bang.


the only difference is the amount of space these things took up is different than
the amount of space that existed before the big bang...

the amount of space that exist now is bigger than what existed before, but the
amount of things remain the same.


A simple example...

you take a balloon
without any air in it..
and you stuff it with
things...

you want more space, you blow up the balloon.

[The Starmaker]

People are sometimes are TOLD that
there was nothing before the big bang because there was no BEFORE.

But what if you were TOLD wrong? Are you going to wait a thousand years to be TOLD there was a Before???

I can see the big bang, and i see a BEFORE.


I'll draw a simple picture of what it looked like BEFORE the big bang.

(each dot represents a star)


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .


. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .



before the big bang all the stars were aligned, not scattered as you see today in the night sky.

[noTthaTguY]

you mean closest packing of blackholes, but
that would be the i.v.m a la Bucky, a.k.a f.c.c,
face-centered hexahedral.

I think, it is true that
the difference between integers that are expressible
as the sum of three or four secondpowers,
is related to this matric, or metrication,
starting with seven dieameters.

Waterman has this in some manner, although
the "full theory needs other than a central sphere

> I'll draw a simple picture of what it looked like BEFORE the big bang.

[john]

Size is COMPARATIVE

[reber g=emc^2]

I quantum realm its beginning was all tiny bangs.That is the reality of QM TreBert

[The Starmaker]

...and what if Time would to ...'stand still'? There would still be a
BEFORE.

[reber g=emc^2]

Call first time Planck Trebert

[hanson]

The <http://tinyurl.com/Recalcitrant-Swine-Glazierail.com> who
is also <http://tinyurl.com/Glazier-the-Lying-Swine> wrote:
> "Call first time Planck" before you call the Crank Trebert
who smeared his Gutter-physics & his Glazierola into a
dozen+ posts and who has posted for many years now:
**** "I am a proud Jew with a Superiority complex &
**** an IQ of 122", & "I do know how everything works."
>
hanson wrote:
[1] So, Glazier if that is so, then do explain which one/s
[1] of your 17 theories were so profound that they forced
[1] you to shit into inquiring posters' mouths, wish other
[1] people to be dead and even hate their corpes so bad
[1] that you were compelled to piss on their graves and
[1] become Glazier, the criminal Graveyard Vandal.
>
All OTHER issues from / on your many daily posts are
tolerable, for that is your own Weltbild. However, until
you have explained [1] you must be daily reminded to
answer & account for the causes and reasons of your
Face Shitting and your criminal Graveyard Vandalism.
>
After you explain [1], these current daily reminders that
follow all your posts, will no longer be necessary, and
google may be requested to take the not so flattering
posts about you off-line.

[john]

Star
"- show quoted text -

...and what if Time would to ...'stand still'? There would still be a
BEFORE. "

Exactly.
Scientists with NO LOGIC ABILITY
saying things like
"Just because nobody has seen things with
no structure doesn't mean we shouldn't
BASE OUR ENTIRE SCIENCE ON IT."
'tards with 'nyms