pinball1970

This is just pointless meandering. What if neutrinos changed near a black hole to form DM that could solve galaxy rotation curves right? Less speculation and open a physics text book, see where you are. Do you know what light is? Do you know Newtons laws? Classical mechanics?

Leave the extended phenotype! Do all the the others if you are interested in Evolutionary biology. The Selfish Gene is a must first, then watch maker. River out of Eden then my personal favourite, Ancestors Tale. If you intend to study Biology at University or have already graduated then try "Ancestors."

Conferences for me but this is legislation rather than science. If a new thing pops up we usually get approached. For science my degree was biology, the physics did not really start till I was in my 30s. Chemistry was ok. Text books and websites since then to learn physics. Some of it that is, there is a lot of it and it's hard!

Ill have a look

If it was real physics of any value, we would be discussing it as a reference to a paper in a peer reviewed journal.

Gravity does not have a will to do anything or have a plan to overcome time whatever that could mean.

Perfect black body do not exist in nature, we have some close approximations. Don't forget that these singularities occur when we wind the clock back on the universe in a classical sense. You may find this useful. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Penrose%E2%80%93Hawking_singularity_theorems From Migl previously "the time 're-winding' of the universe back to a singular state, is a purely classical exercise, and fails for the same reasons as the gravitational collapse of a star to a singularity in a Black Hole. When you get close to singular states, Quantum effects become non-trivial. General Relativity itself, being strictly classical, is not applicable in that domain; that is what the singular state, with its attendant infinities, signifies."

Yes it is not easy. For the record, I am not a PhD I am a BSc and work as a technologist, a lot of the guys on here have higher degrees and doctorates. So like you, I am still working my way through some of the formalism of these concepts. Sometimes that journey led to a brick wall because I am simply not smart enough to read a text on the subject without support, the mathematics is too difficult for me. Realising this and the fact that certain subjects are out of touch is humbling but also liberating because I know there is work to be done! Finding this stuff out is real fun but speculation about the beginning of the universe is Usain Bolt level. "One two three infinity" by George Gamow is a great little book. It gives you a glimpse of the journey Mathematics took in the last 200 years. As i stated before, i am trying to be constructive, positive BUT realistic. If you use the quote function or reply, I will get an alert. FYI

I would check out set theory and guys like Cantor.

This popped up in my feed yesterday. https://phys.org/news/2025-09-life-impact-discovery-links-microbial.html With the paper here. https://www.nature.com/articles/s41467-025-63603-y

That's a good example, "infinity" is not a quantity, it is a concept.

Your intuition is based on your knowledge and experiences of the world, these will have many things in common with all of us as a species. That intuition is great for our macro world but not so good and often useless regarding science. Evolution is completely counterintuitive, QM/QT bears no resemblance to the world we live in. The beginning of the universe, the thing you are discussing, bears no resemblance to anything you have either read or experienced.

I am also trying to be constructive also. My point is you need to have knowledge to make meaningful guesses about the unknown questions in science. In order to think outside the box, learn what is in the box first. ( Not my quote but I thought it appropriate)

What did you mean by quoting him then?

Comparing yourself to Einstein is probably not the smartest move. Let's say you are not doing that, at the least it is a misconception that Einstein was just a genius maverick patent clerk. He was a trained academic who had completed his physics degree, obtained a doctorate and was immersing himself in the available published literature available at that time. When he wrote up some of his most famous ideas, he submitted them to recognized journals.

Good, we are on the same page then. Modern scholarship has more or less the same view. Agree, by "committed to paper" these were not the Gospels, the first writings. Paul's letters came first and these contained literary traditions, written references, stories or poems about Jesus of Nazareth. Then there were the sources that Mark, Matthew and Luke used Mark as a source plus their own sources L and M plus a text citing sayings of Jesus Q. All these were different and by the time we get to John Jesus is not a prophet or Messiah, he is a god on par with Yhwh himself. Prior to that Jesus was the Messiah who had to suffer, a very Jewish Messiah, a Messiah that did not suffer so much or stone, Messiah that was rejected by the Jews, then god. All that by 95CE.

No. You need knowledge first, otherwise you are just making stuff up.

Well you are not so that is tricky. I have already quoted you when seen to favour oral tradition preserving a story and when not. You know what you posted have you got forgotten? It is documented.

In your posts.

So not reliable? Good we finally agree. I have mentioned him as he is a good reference point w.r.t. oral tradition and the early Christianity. I thought of King Kong in terms of storytelling. Three films from the 1930s, 1970s and 2000s. In the first he is a wild beast, angry even evil and Faye Ray screams for half the film. 1976 He is more of a victim of man's greed, the relationship between beauty and the beast is more like a pet and even sexual at times. 2000s the beast is "beautiful" to beauty almost human. Same story told very differently within 100 years. People want to convey a message, a different emphasis, a political point, an Environmental or ideological point. Depends on the time place and speaker. Who knows what the sermon on the mount actually was? Was it call to arms? War? Love and peace? Forget this world it's coming to an end? We have a written account based on stories that were circulating for 50 years.

That is not what happened with Jesus of Nazareth. His story completely changed from the first century during his ministry, to the Gospels, to the first Christian groups which all had different views, to the early church fathers all the way up to 325 to the council of Nicaea.

Air bases, air craft and subs. Trident is getting a refurb, that is independent IIRC. The bases here and in Germany are joint NATO/US, UK. (Wiki)

So nothing to lose then? "Why do we need a world if Russia ceases to exist?" Putin 2018

I wonder what is next on his list? For all my tough talk I really hope this was a mistake not a test.

Is there a question? We can all Google