The 'Multiverse' is just another theory. The Big Bang is just a theory, but this theory is
physically impossible given all known laws of physics, and is currently - as with all scientific theories which you consistently hail as 'Gospel' - being discredited by other eminent physicists as baloney.
What's more; cast your mind back to a previous thread in which I asked you a question on Physics - your favourite subject:
"If the universe is expanding (Big Bang et al) and as light 'diffracts' - spreads out as it travels - independently of this expansion, and if some of these 'dead stars' which are the source of this light are trillions of light years from our vantage point on Earth, then why do we still see the travelling light from these distant dead stars as starlight? Why hasn't it acted in accordance with the 'Laws of Physics' and spread out and dimmed as a massively wide glow of light? Why hasn't it changed colour even as it has 'cooled'? "
And remember that - here again - you did not answer me except with the usual non-relevant ridicule.
Well, I knew the answer and it is highly pertinent here.
Starlight does not diffuse and does spread out and dim, because the latest thinking among physicists is that the universe is
not expanding - which makes further nonsense of your prized 'Big Bang Theory'.
According to the Big Bang theory, distant objects appear fainter but bigger in an expanding Universe, because the surface brightness decreases with the distance, and the light is stretched and further dimmed as the Universe expanded.
Therefore, in an expanding Universe the most distant galaxies should be hundreds of times dimmer than nearby galaxies, but observations in new studies have been published in the International Journal of Modern Physics, which contest that the universe is expanding.
Scientists carefully compared the size and magnitude of about a thousand nearby and extremely distant galaxies, and chose the most luminous spiral galaxies for comparisons, matching the average luminosity of the near and far samples.
Contrary to the 'Big Bang theory', they found that the surface brightnesses of the near and far galaxies are identical.
These results are consistent with what would be expected from ordinary geometry if the Universe was not expanding, and are in contradiction with the drastic dimming of surface brightness predicted by the expanding Universe hypothesis.
Finally, given that you are such a 'science and physics' groupie, how can you state:
"We cannot say there was nothing from nothing line."
By the First Law Of Thermodynamics and other tenets and principles of physics, "Out of Nothing, comes Nothing".
Now your view thoroughly deserves a few;
15-11-2014, 02:53 PM
Threaded Mode