关灯
登录后可将在线时长兑换成盟币 ,连续在线 [1] 小时后,每小时 [0.5] 盟币.
×

你已累计兑换次数 0

你已累计兑换积分 0盟币

[宇宙物理] 宇宙大爆炸:最大的科学真理,还是最大的科学谎言?

[复制链接]
henryharry2 发表于 2015-8-23 14:33:38 | 显示全部楼层

权威

 
现在一般认为,星系的中心都会有一个大质量黑洞,假如这个星系在运动,例如银河系就有一个每秒600公里的本动速度,它的中心黑洞也一定跟着以相同速度运动。但这点起码的常识却与广义相对论不相容,按照广义相对论,黑洞的中心是个本性奇点,不会跟着运动。广义相对论有问题,最好不要听宇宙灭亡论专家们的胡言乱语。在我们的理论中,就算是黑洞,不发生相互作用时,也是匀速运动的。爱因斯坦说:“我曾经嘲弄权威,命运却让我也变成了权威。” 俗话说:人一旦变成了神,悲剧也就开始了。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 
 楼主| gqy_97517 发表于 2015-8-24 08:57:31 | 显示全部楼层
 
这才会激励不断去探索。
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 
henryharry2 发表于 2015-8-24 13:29:48 | 显示全部楼层

45个可否定大爆炸理论的事实依据

 
(6) NO WAY TO CLUMP IT—On earth, gas never clumps into a solid. Out in space, where everything is a near-vacuum, it would be totally impossible—impossible in the extreme——for this to occur. Throughout the voids of space between the stars is to be found various gases, the primary one of which is hydrogen. These gaseous compounds never move away from an area of vacuum into an area of congestion or density. Never, never, never. It just does not happen. The hydrogen gas observed by astronomers through telescopes is gradually expanding. None of it is packing together. There are no exceptions! Slow expansion of gaseous matter in outer space is normal, and in accordance with physical laws.
"Scattered through the vast darkness between stars, the molecules of interstellar space range. . These molecules of hydrogen, carbon monoxide, and scores of other compounds generally make up a tenuous soup—a trillion trillion times less dense than stars or planets." —*Allan Fallow, et. al.,Between the Stars (1990), p. 65.
Frankly, after examining item after item of scientific facts in this chapter, we will find the Big Bang theory to be only a connected series of tiny tot stories. Repeatedly, we will find that the theories run counter to the facts.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 
 楼主| henryharry2 发表于 2015-8-24 14:05:20 | 显示全部楼层

45个可否定大爆炸理论的事实依据

 
(7) NO WAY TO PRODUCE STARS—That outrushing gas from the Big Bang that was not able to stop or clump, we are told then did so. And more, it began forming itself into the intricate patterns of planets, stars, and galaxies! This is an important point; in fact, it is a key one. The laws of physics provide no mechanism by which outwardly exploding gas could clump together into stars This is a crucial point.
&quotrobably the strongest argument against a big bang is that when we come to the universe in total and the large number of complex condensed objects in it [stars, planets, etc.), the theory is able to explain so little." —*G. Burbridge, "Was There Really a Big Bang?" in Nature, 233:36-40.
Gas floating in the vacuum of outer space cannot form itself into stars. Once a star is formed, it can hold itself together by gravity, but there is no way that gas in outer space can get the operation started.(All gas clouds in outer space are more rarified than that found in the most rarified vacuum-bottle pressures that man is able to produce on earth.) Yes, once a star exists, it will absorb gas into it by gravitational attraction. But before the star exists, gas will not push itself together and form a star—or a planet, or anything else. It will remain just loose, floating gas.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 
 楼主| henryharry2 发表于 2015-8-24 14:15:29 | 显示全部楼层

45个可否定大爆炸理论的事实依据

 
(8) NO WAY TO PRODUCE COMPLEX ATOMS—*George Gamow and his associates decided that, after the initial explosion, outflowing emptiness first changed itself into hydrogen and helium atoms, with their nuclei, protons, electrons, and all the rest. These two elements are very complex in their structure, even though they have less atomic units in them than do the other elements. (There are 81 stable chemical elements; 90 natural elements; 105 total elements discovered to date; of carbon compounds alone there are thousands.) How can such nuclear complexity emerge from nothing? It cannot be done, yet *Gamow theorized that all the hydrogen and helium in the universe magically brought itself into existence.
(It should be mentioned that only in the intense heat of a nuclear explosion can hydrogen even change into helium.)
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 
 楼主| henryharry2 发表于 2015-8-24 14:50:44 | 显示全部楼层

45个可否定大爆炸理论的事实依据

 
(9) NO WAY TO GO PAST THE HELIUM MASS 4 GAP—In a thermonuclear explosion, hydrogen may be changed into helium, but it is much, much more difficult (some consider it impossible) for hydrogen to go past the "helium mass 4 gap" and produce the heavier atoms in an explosion.
The Big Bang theory requires an atom-building process after the initial explosion. This initial atom-building process is based on successive neutron-capture reactions to achieve elements of increasing atomic weights in a stepwise manner, starting with, according to one Big Bang theory, a 100 percent neutron content of the primordial ylem. According to the theory, at the end of the first 30 minutes slightly more than half of the ylem has been converted into hydrogen, with slightly less than half into helium. But it is quite another thing to go past helium! Physicists know well that, among nuclides that can actually be formed, a gap exists at mass 5 and 8. The first gap is caused by the fact that neither a proton nor a neutron can be attached to a helium nucleus of mass 4. Because of this gap, the only element that hydrogen can normally change into is helium.
It is true that some scientists believe that a hydrogen bomb explosion can produce elements beyond helium, but there is also evidence (which we will discuss later in this chapter) which would indicate that this is not so.
"In the sequence of atomic weight numbers 5 and 8 are vacant. That is, there is no stable atom of mass 5 or mass 8 . . The question then is: How can the build-up of elements by neutron capture get by these gaps? The process could not go beyond helium 4 and even if it spanned this gap it would be stopped again at mass 8 . . This basic objection to Gamow's theory is a great disappointment in view of the promise and philosophical attractiveness of the idea. —.*William A. Fowler, quoted in Creation Science, p. 90 [California Institute of Technology].
For additional information, see the quotation supplement, "3 - The Mysterious Elements," at the end of this chapter.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 
 楼主| henryharry2 发表于 2015-8-24 14:52:59 | 显示全部楼层

45个可否定大爆炸理论的事实依据

 
(10) NO WAY TO COMPRESS LOOSE GAS—Since both hydrogen and helium are gases, they are good at spreading out, but not at clumping together. Both hydrogen and helium are very much like fog. Have you ever seen fog push together into balls? It never does. Stars do indeed have helium and hydrogen—and once together, a star maintains its gravity quite well. But getting it together In the first place is the problem.
"There is no accepted theory as to how the hot gas clouds of hydrogen and helium arising out of the big bang condensed into galaxies, stars and planets. It would seem that the possibility of such a condensation is similar to the probability for all of the air in a room to collect in one corner—just by random motion of the molecules." —H. M. Morris, W, W, Boardman, and R. F. Koontz, Science and Creation (1971), p. 89.
All the gas in those marvelous gas clouds of the cosmologists begins like all the gas clouds now in outer space: with a density so rarified that it is far less than the emptiest atmospheric vacuum bottle in any laboratory in the world! If men cannot push cold hydrogen into a solid on earth where we have lots of barometric pressure from the atmosphere to help us—how do they expect hydrogen to have done it by itself in the near-total vacuum of outer space?
Gas will not naturally compress itself under conditions existing on earth or in outer space. Have you ever seen fog push itself together into solids? This is an important point which we will return to. All hydrogen gas in outer space now is slowly expanding outward; it is never contracting inward.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 
 楼主| henryharry2 发表于 2015-8-24 14:55:56 | 显示全部楼层

(11) NOT ENOUGH TIME

 
11) NOT ENOUGH TIME—Astronomers tell us that the diameter of the universe is over 20 billion light years. Evolutionists tell us that the Big Bang occurred 10 to 20 billion years ago, and stars were formed 5 billion years later. Evolutionary theorists only allow about 21/2 billion years from the time of the Big Bang till hydrogen and helium had spread throughout the universe, and another 21/2 billion years for it to clump together into stars! Their dating problem has been caused by the fairly recent discovery of supposedly faraway quasars (which we will discuss in greater detail later in this chapter).
Scientists now say that the distance from our world to the farthest-known quasars (those with a red-shift of 400 percent) are at least 15 billion light-years! That would make them at least 15 billion years old, which is too old to accommodate the theory.
We have no evidence that hydrogen or helium anywhere in the universe travels at the speed of light (186,000 miles per second). But even if it could, it would take 15 or 20 billion years for hydrogen and helium to reach the farthest part of the universe—or over a trillion years if it went at the speed that hydrogen gas is currently traveling outward from super-novas.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 
 楼主| henryharry2 发表于 2015-8-24 14:57:32 | 显示全部楼层

(11) NOT ENOUGH TIME

 
After reaching the edge of the universe (if there is an edge), it would then take a long, long time for the thinly spread-out hydrogen and helium fog to devise a way to lock together (if the gas had the brains to figure out such a pressing problem).
So there is just not enough time in the evolutionary timetable from the Big Bang till the universe was filled with stars. The Big Bang theorists are divided on when it occurred; some say 20 billion years ago, others 10 billion. We will here assume the longest timeframe: 20 billion years. But quasars have now been found which, by Big Bang-accommodating theories, are "15 billion years old." This does not provide enough time for the gas to spread outward throughout the universe, form itself into stars, then wait while billions of supernovas repeatedly explode (to produce heavy elements [if they could do so]), reform into stars, explode more times, and finally form into our present orbiting stars, galaxies, clusters, and superclusters.
Before concluding this section, we will try to tack down the Big Bang dates. Generally, the Big Bang itself is supposed to have exploded 10 to 20 billion years ago, with the first formation of stars occurring 250 million years after the explosion. At some lengthy time after the gas coalesced into "first generation " stars, most of them exploded, and then, 250 million years later, reformed into "second generation" stars. Our sun is thought to be at least a second generation star, having previously exploded at least once, and perhaps twice. Apparently, no one ever dates the Big Bang earlier than 20 billion years ago. Here are several representative statements:
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 
 楼主| henryharry2 发表于 2015-8-24 14:59:37 | 显示全部楼层

(11) NOT ENOUGH TIME

 
"Big Bang: According to a widely accepted theory, the primeval moment, 15 to 20 billion years ago, when the universe began expanding from a single point." —*Kirk D. Borne, et. al, Galaxies (1988), p. 134.
"Until 250 million years after the Big Bang, Gamow maintained, matter took the form of a thin gas, evenly spread throughout space . . Each cloud began to condense and break up into myriad stars ." —op. cit., pp. 113-114.
"What is the universe like? If it had a beginning, how did it begin? How did it evolve to make galaxies, stars, planets, and ultimately human beings? These are the sorts of questions astronomers are trying to answer as they aim their large telescopes toward the depths of outer space.
"In this century, they've developed a picture of the universe as having an explosive beginning, which they call the Big Bang. According to Big Bang cosmology our universe began around 10 billion years ago. Then came a time when the galaxies were made as matter collected into islands in space in which stars were born." —*Star Date (radio broadcast), October 2, 1990.
"When did the big bang take place?. . A figure that is generally accepted as at least approximately correct is 15 billion years. If an eon is 1 billion years, then the big bang took place 15 eons ago, although it might just possibly have taken place as recently as 10 eons ago or as long as 20 eons ago. "—*Isaac Asimov, Asimov's New Guide to Science (1984), p. 44.
回复 支持 反对

使用道具 举报

 
您需要登录后才可以回帖 登录 | 立即注册

本版积分规则


2威望

1546盟币

4关注

3粉丝

19帖子

排行榜
作者专栏

关注我们:微信订阅号

官方微信

APP下载

全国服务热线:

4000-018-018
Copyright   ©2005-2018  博研网Powered by©Myboyan.com    ( 粤ICP备10062441号 )