a none to subtle distinction...
Timothy Sutter
then you should note that energy and mass
are =directly= proportional and -not-
inversely proportional.
therefore, small mass gives small energy,
try it;
e=mc^2
if m = [small]
e = [small] multiplied by c^2
which is still a small amount of energy.
try not to find yourself saying,
"if we have infinitessimal mass,
we therefore have infinite energy"
not really,
if you have infinitessimal mass,
and you believe in e=mc^2
then you also have infinitessimal energy.
so, before you say that e=mc^2 was at one time
all energy and no mass,
consider the consequences of such a statement..
zero mass, zero energy.
e = mc^2
e = 0c^2
e = 0
-not- e = infinity.
that would require an -inverse- proportionality
and -that- you ain't got according to e=mc^2
what it appears is that -both-
mass -and- energy were 'created'
-from- the pre-genesis formulation [X]
which cannot be described in 'physical' terms.
not something from nothing,
and not matter and energy from 'pure energy'
cuz if you take 0 [zeeero] mass and plug it into e=mc^2
you don't get infinite 'pure energy'
you get a big fat goose egg [zeeero] for energy.
so, while during the course of chemical transformations,
mass and energy are neither created nor destroyed,
from scratch,
mass and energy were quite definitely,
brought forth, -both of them-
from some pre-genesis formulation, [x]
which has -no- =physical= characteristics.
a none to subtle distinction...
Timothy Sutter
try it;
e=mc^2
if m = [small]
not really,
zero mass, zero energy.
e = mc^2
e = 0c^2
e = 0
-not- e = infinity.
not something from nothing,
cuz if you take 0 [zeero] mass and plug it into e=mc^2
you don't get infinite 'pure energy'
you get a big fat goose egg [zeero] for energy.
Timothy Sutter
see, you may get a situation like this,
A + B ---> C
which is to say, compound A and compound B
react to form compound C,
and lets say,
1 gram of A and 1 gram of B react to give you 300 grams of C,
and you say to yourself,
"ay, we got more mass out than we put in,
we created matter"
only things don't work that way, cuz things react
in molar equivalents, which is to say, some
molecular unit for molecular unit,
where one 'mole' is suggested as 6.02 X 10^23
or some very large number like that,
so-called "avodgadro's number"
so, one 'mole' of basketballs is the same
as one 'mole' of sugar molecules, in number,
but one mole of basketballs may weigh several million
pounds where one mole of sugar molecules weigh maybe
150 grams or thereabouts,
but, when it comes down to it,
one mole of sugar molecules may react with
one mole of basketballs to make one mole
of fictitious element C
and if the reaction produces
60 micrograms of fictitous element C
then, quite likely, that is the
"molecular weight" of C.
so, we didn't "destroy matter"
we just changed it from one
form-ula to another.
sure, basketballs and sugar may not react to make anything,
but the 'concept' is pretty much the same.
but, 'at the beginning'
and i mean precisely right at time T = 0
and maybe even in the 'pluperfect tense'
"before the beginning"
we ain't got no matter and we ain't got no energy,
we got "something else"
and that something else is [x]
the non-physical pre-genesis formulation,
for all practical purposes to 'you'
it is "nothing"
but this "nothing"
may be "something" to someone,
and that "someone" is "God"
but -you'll- be hard pressed to assign an -amount-
of [x] that it 'takes' to -make- 'one universe'
y'ain't got no molecules and such and moles
and avogadro's nummer of what-have-you
-you- got nuthin'
but "God" got some very severe powerfulness...
and -this- God does -not- sell 'permission slips'
=try= not to get slickerd into purchasing a 'permission slip'
especially from some slacker who wants
to sell you =permission= to be a dumbass
-that- you don't need to buy anyway
you're al-ready- well enough equipped to -that- task...