Did Dawkins and and Hawking really admit the Big Bang is impossible?

[pevaquark (Matthew Pevarnik)]

@Relates

I will take your lack of response as agreement with my last two comments, unless you respond otherwise.

Wow, that’s gracious of you.

Shall I speak or remain silent? Certainly sometimes silence is the best option.

@Relates

The beginning of the universe is not a usual situation. It is a singular situation.

So because there is a singular singularity then it is somehow different? You don’t that it is a singular singularity! There are roughly 10^80 protons let’s say in the universe and they all have a singularity according to the incomplete Coulomb’s Law. But maybe there are 10^500 universes that all have singularities. You don’t know and neither do I. But anyways, that is silly to say that because GR (that doesn’t even describe very small things well at all- it fails in every way shape and form when quantum effects are important)- so IF GR predicts a singularity for a scenario that it cannot even describe accurately, then it is not anything significant beyond the fact that the equations are incomplete to describe small things of which the universe once was.

@Relates

It seems to me that this is close to what I have been saying, which is that the strong nuclear force cancels out gravitation.

It doesn’t cancel it out. But what were you saying again about these forces or what was your point?

@Relates

One theory which I read above was that the Big Bang began with all four forces united and balanced . They only became separated one by one during this less that second time period

That’s pretty reasonable given the fact that we have seen the electromagnetic and weak force become one at the high energies involved in particle physics (becoming the electroweak force). Something like this:

@Relates

God is infinite and God alone is infinite.

Okay.

@Relates

I believe that you said that a singularity in math was an infinity.

Did I? There’s a reason I left mathematics and went to Physics. My math colleage loves infinity. I don’t like it for the reasons I’ve explained here (it means there’s something incomplete about a law/theory/etc.).

@Relates

The Big Bang theory says that the universe originally was very small

Yes.

@Relates

infinitely dense

Yeah I don’t know about this one. I mean if you plug in that the radius equals zero then yes, you get infinite density but again the equations don’t even work at this point. The Big Bang Theory again for the I don’t know twentieth time does NOT describe the beginning of the universe. It only describes very well what happened after it began expanding.

@Relates

Please do not be deceived into thinking that generally means never or always.

Sorry you lost me here.

@Relates

A singularity is appropriate at the beginning of the universe, a most unusual situation.

Let me fix this sentence:

‘A singularity only appears at the beginning of the universe because the equations of General Relativity cannot accurate describe quantum effects.’

@Relates

a singularity like a Black Hole which is not a calculation

It’s not? Where do you think what we know about black holes mostly comes from? Ah yes, the equations of General Relativity.