Benutzer:KamGur9514: Unterschied zwischen den Versionen

Aus ProbeWiki
Wechseln zu:Navigation, Suche
(Die Seite wurde neu angelegt: „My name: Marquis Fiedler<br>My age: 38<br>Country: Germany<br>Home town: Altendorf <br>Post code: 1855<br>Address: Bissingzeile 16<br><br>Also visit my site [h…“)
 
 
Zeile 1: Zeile 1:
My name: Marquis Fiedler<br>My age: 38<br>Country: Germany<br>Home town: Altendorf <br>Post code: 1855<br>Address: Bissingzeile 16<br><br>Also visit my site [http://webcachekiller.com low Disk space]
+
Every experiment has to show evidence for space-as-a-thing.<p/>
 +
 
 +
<p>But the big [http://example.com myiphonewebsite] no-no is that space-as-a-thing violates the First Law of Thermodynamics. If the standard model of cosmology is correct, the Big Bang created space-as-a-thing from scratch; from absolutely nothing. Though postulated as a given, no one has to come up with an adequate or modify credible how that happened or even could happen. Worse, that process is ongoing. Recall that the late Sir Fred Hoyle was bucketed for advocating the Steady State Universe which required the of matter from - something like atom of hydrogen per cubic mile per or some such arrange of magnitude figure to that. Hoyle could give no mechanism. Of course his retort was that the alternate Big Bang event created everything from nothing all once, again without mechanism given, but that was apparently okay his creation from wasn't. Well creation from nothing is NOT in any cosmology.<p/>
 +
 
 +
<p>I really have to admire the audacity of some cosmologists in their popular writings. In chapter they will suggest the First Law of Thermodynamics about how (hence matter) cannot symbolize created or destroyed only changed from peerless form into another. In other words, there is no such thing a cosmic free lunch; you can't create from nothing. Yet another chapter they note how the DOE density of the is unchanging or it is a constant, even though the Universe is expanding. That contradicts the First Law of Thermodynamics. Since space-as-a-thing translates into the of dark energy and dark energy translates support into the creation of space-as-a-thing (each creating author of the other outer of absolutely nothing) that's a free cosmic lunch. They - cosmologists - contradict themselves. If they don't realize they've it, they don't to be in academia. If they realize this contradiction without commenting same, they deserve to be kicked out of academia.<p/>
 +
 
 +
<p>So if you are advocating space-as-a-thing then you are advocating the creation of from nothing therefore advocating that the First Law of Thermodynamics is negated even as I write and as you read. Good luck with that premise.<p/>
 +
 
 +
<p>Motion, and variations thereof (acceleration, deceleration, momentum, rotation, etc.) [ <img border="5" style="padding:10px;" src=http://trees.hornsby.nsw.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/old-man-banksia-540x272.jpg align=left width="400" height="400" style="Margin:0 0 20px 20px;  ] is entirely independent of space-as-a-thing or even of space-as-a-not-thing. Recall that early 20th Century "New York Times" editorial that rocket travel was refined bunk on the that in space was nothing for the rocket's exhaust to advertise against. That editorial was retracted on the of the Moon landing! So space travel via rocket-ship is possible if space is NOT a thing since relevant forces operate of the existence non-existence of space. If one persists in to link motion and space-as-a-thing, find an that involves motion that also has space-as-a-thing one of the parameters.<p/>
 +
 
 +
<p>Twenty Questions (give or take): If space-is-a-thing...<p/>
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
<p> no-no is that space-as-a-thing violates the First Law of Thermodynamics. If the standard model of cosmology is correct, the Big Bang created space-as-a-thing from scratch; from absolutely nothing. Though postulated as a given, no one has to come up with an adequate or modify credible how that happened or even could happen. Worse, that process is ongoing. Recall that the late Sir Fred Hoyle was bucketed for advocating the Steady State Universe which required the of matter from - something like atom of hydrogen per cubic mile per or some such arrange of magnitude figure to that. Hoyle could give no mechanism. Of course his retort was that the alternate Big Bang event created everything from nothing all once, again without mechanism given, but that was apparently okay his creation from wasn't. Well creation from nothing is NOT in any cosmology.<p/>
 +
 
 +
<p>I really have to admire the audacity of some cosmologists in their popular writings. In chapter they will suggest the First Law of Thermodynamics about how (hence matter) cannot symbolize created or destroyed only changed from peerless form into another. In other words, there is no such thing a cosmic free lunch; you can't create from nothing. Yet another chapter they note how the DOE density of the is unchanging or it is a constant, even though the Universe is expanding. That contradicts the First Law of Thermodynamics. Since space-as-a-thing translates into the of dark energy and dark energy translates support into the creation of space-as-a-thing (each creating author of the other outer of absolutely nothing) that's a free cosmic lunch. They - cosmologists - contradict themselves. If they don't realize they've it, they don't to be in academia. If they realize this contradiction without commenting same, they deserve to be kicked out of academia.<p/>
 +
 
 +
<p>So if you are advocating space-as-a-thing then you are advocating the creation of from nothing therefore advocating that the First Law of Thermodynamics is negated even as I write and as you read. Good luck with that premise.<p/>
 +
 
 +
<p>Motion, and variations thereof (acceleration, deceleration, momentum, rotation, etc.) is entirely independent of space-as-a-thing or even of space-as-a-not-thing. Recall that early 20th Century "New York Times" editorial that rocket travel was refined bunk on the that in space was nothing for the rocket's exhaust to advertise against. That editorial was retracted on the of the Moon landing! So space travel via rocket-ship is possible if space is NOT a thing since relevant forces operate of the existence non-existence of space. If one persists in to link motion and space-as-a-thing, find an that involves motion that also has space-as-a-thing one of the parameters.<p/>
 +
 
 +
<p>Twenty Questions (give or take): If space-is-a-thing...<p/>
 +
 
 +
 
 +
 
 +
<p>

Aktuelle Version vom 23. März 2020, 00:05 Uhr

Every experiment has to show evidence for space-as-a-thing.

But the big myiphonewebsite no-no is that space-as-a-thing violates the First Law of Thermodynamics. If the standard model of cosmology is correct, the Big Bang created space-as-a-thing from scratch; from absolutely nothing. Though postulated as a given, no one has to come up with an adequate or modify credible how that happened or even could happen. Worse, that process is ongoing. Recall that the late Sir Fred Hoyle was bucketed for advocating the Steady State Universe which required the of matter from - something like atom of hydrogen per cubic mile per or some such arrange of magnitude figure to that. Hoyle could give no mechanism. Of course his retort was that the alternate Big Bang event created everything from nothing all once, again without mechanism given, but that was apparently okay his creation from wasn't. Well creation from nothing is NOT in any cosmology.

I really have to admire the audacity of some cosmologists in their popular writings. In chapter they will suggest the First Law of Thermodynamics about how (hence matter) cannot symbolize created or destroyed only changed from peerless form into another. In other words, there is no such thing a cosmic free lunch; you can't create from nothing. Yet another chapter they note how the DOE density of the is unchanging or it is a constant, even though the Universe is expanding. That contradicts the First Law of Thermodynamics. Since space-as-a-thing translates into the of dark energy and dark energy translates support into the creation of space-as-a-thing (each creating author of the other outer of absolutely nothing) that's a free cosmic lunch. They - cosmologists - contradict themselves. If they don't realize they've it, they don't to be in academia. If they realize this contradiction without commenting same, they deserve to be kicked out of academia.

So if you are advocating space-as-a-thing then you are advocating the creation of from nothing therefore advocating that the First Law of Thermodynamics is negated even as I write and as you read. Good luck with that premise.

Motion, and variations thereof (acceleration, deceleration, momentum, rotation, etc.) [ <img border="5" style="padding:10px;" src=http://trees.hornsby.nsw.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2019/02/old-man-banksia-540x272.jpg align=left width="400" height="400" style="Margin:0 0 20px 20px; ] is entirely independent of space-as-a-thing or even of space-as-a-not-thing. Recall that early 20th Century "New York Times" editorial that rocket travel was refined bunk on the that in space was nothing for the rocket's exhaust to advertise against. That editorial was retracted on the of the Moon landing! So space travel via rocket-ship is possible if space is NOT a thing since relevant forces operate of the existence non-existence of space. If one persists in to link motion and space-as-a-thing, find an that involves motion that also has space-as-a-thing one of the parameters.

Twenty Questions (give or take): If space-is-a-thing...


no-no is that space-as-a-thing violates the First Law of Thermodynamics. If the standard model of cosmology is correct, the Big Bang created space-as-a-thing from scratch; from absolutely nothing. Though postulated as a given, no one has to come up with an adequate or modify credible how that happened or even could happen. Worse, that process is ongoing. Recall that the late Sir Fred Hoyle was bucketed for advocating the Steady State Universe which required the of matter from - something like atom of hydrogen per cubic mile per or some such arrange of magnitude figure to that. Hoyle could give no mechanism. Of course his retort was that the alternate Big Bang event created everything from nothing all once, again without mechanism given, but that was apparently okay his creation from wasn't. Well creation from nothing is NOT in any cosmology.

I really have to admire the audacity of some cosmologists in their popular writings. In chapter they will suggest the First Law of Thermodynamics about how (hence matter) cannot symbolize created or destroyed only changed from peerless form into another. In other words, there is no such thing a cosmic free lunch; you can't create from nothing. Yet another chapter they note how the DOE density of the is unchanging or it is a constant, even though the Universe is expanding. That contradicts the First Law of Thermodynamics. Since space-as-a-thing translates into the of dark energy and dark energy translates support into the creation of space-as-a-thing (each creating author of the other outer of absolutely nothing) that's a free cosmic lunch. They - cosmologists - contradict themselves. If they don't realize they've it, they don't to be in academia. If they realize this contradiction without commenting same, they deserve to be kicked out of academia.

So if you are advocating space-as-a-thing then you are advocating the creation of from nothing therefore advocating that the First Law of Thermodynamics is negated even as I write and as you read. Good luck with that premise.

Motion, and variations thereof (acceleration, deceleration, momentum, rotation, etc.) is entirely independent of space-as-a-thing or even of space-as-a-not-thing. Recall that early 20th Century "New York Times" editorial that rocket travel was refined bunk on the that in space was nothing for the rocket's exhaust to advertise against. That editorial was retracted on the of the Moon landing! So space travel via rocket-ship is possible if space is NOT a thing since relevant forces operate of the existence non-existence of space. If one persists in to link motion and space-as-a-thing, find an that involves motion that also has space-as-a-thing one of the parameters.

Twenty Questions (give or take): If space-is-a-thing...