Path: ...!weretis.net!feeder8.news.weretis.net!feeder1-2.proxad.net!proxad.net!feeder1-1.proxad.net!cleanfeed3-a.proxad.net!nnrp2-1.free.fr!not-for-mail
Newsgroups: sci.physics.relativity
Subject: Re: The CMBR Disproves the Big Bang.
From: nospam@de-ster.demon.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Reply-To: jjlxa31@xs4all.nl (J. J. Lodder)
Date: Sun, 2 Mar 2025 13:12:10 +0100
References: <582d81a086d369cf0cd2e78d401de6ec@www.novabbs.com> <vparjj$3ints$1@dont-email.me> <cc6c5a5e40eb4f771dd12ce7ee558f16@www.novabbs.com> <4e287200afacf83d6a0412238f3e180a@www.novabbs.com> <vpf8kq$h0b0$3@dont-email.me> <vpg9a8$mn2j$1@dont-email.me> <67bdc531$0$28081$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <pkOdnbcj05T3dCL6nZ2dnZfqn_WdnZ2d@giganews.com> <67c1a0fb$1$11446$426a34cc@news.free.fr> <gLidnUciq9CDaVz6nZ2dnZfqnPudnZ2d@giganews.com> <67c2e713$0$11432$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <1828ad9f153d5033$379151$1494137$c2365abb@news.newsdemon.com> <baacnWoeTP8Dt176nZ2dnZfqnPWdnZ2d@giganews.com>
Organization: De Ster
Mail-Copies-To: nobody
User-Agent: MacSOUP/2.8.5 (ea919cf118) (Mac OS 10.12.6)
Lines: 95
Message-ID: <67c44b1b$0$11460$426a34cc@news.free.fr>
NNTP-Posting-Date: 02 Mar 2025 13:12:11 CET
NNTP-Posting-Host: 213.10.137.58
X-Trace: 1740917531 news-4.free.fr 11460 213.10.137.58:60305
X-Complaints-To: abuse@proxad.net
Bytes: 4023

Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 03/01/2025 04:29 AM, Maciej Wozniak wrote:
> > W dniu 01.03.2025 o 11:53, J. J. Lodder pisze:
> >> Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>> On 02/28/2025 03:41 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>> Ross Finlayson <ross.a.finlayson@gmail.com> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> On 02/25/2025 05:27 AM, J. J. Lodder wrote:
> >>>>>> guido wugi <wugi@brol.invalid> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Op 23/02/2025 om 14:46 schreef Paul.B.Andersen:
> >>>>>>>> Den 22.02.2025 20:18, skrev LaurenceClarkCrossen:
> >>>>>>>>> The velocity-distance relation fails to explain the redshift
> >>>>>>>>> distance
> >>>>>>>>> relation because the latter is exactly the same in every
> >>>>>>>>> direction so
> >>>>>>>>> the former would place us at exactly the center of the universe.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Do you still not understand that we are in the exact centre of
> >>>>>>>> the observable universe?
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> He doesn't understand yet the relatitivity of the centre of the
> >>>>>>> universe
> >> ;)
> >>>>>>> (even at big bang an infinite universe is still a possibility)
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Here is Piet Hein's take on it
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> THE CENTRAL POINT
> >>>>>> A philosophistry
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I am the Universe's Centre.
> >>>>>> No subtle sceptics can confound me;
> >>>>>> for how can other viewpoints enter,
> >>>>>> when all the rest is all around me?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Hard to argue with that,
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Jan
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "I know a girl called Trampoline, ...".
> >>>>>
> >>>>> is a line from a song with these lines:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "When I was three /
> >>>>> I thought the world revolved around me /
> >>>>> I was wrong."
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Infant
> >>>>
> >>>> Piet Hein is never wrong,
> >>>>
> >>>> Jan
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> In his own little world
> >>
> >> That is not an answer.
> >> (except perhaps in your little world)
> >>
> >>> Us stronger mathematical platonists have
> >>> a bit more thorough grounding where
> >>> we're all right.
> >>>
> >>> And not "not even wrong".
> >>
> >> Platonism has no relation with reality.
> >> If it has, it is no longer Platonism,
> >
> > JJ locuta! Causa finita!
> >
> >
> >
> 
> "Amicus Plato, finito"
> 
> 
> A strong mathematical platonism, that the
> objects of mathematics are quite real,
> and a stronger logicist positivism,
> that we have a science about it,
> combines the best of both the idealistic
> and the analytic traditions.

Great. Now derive the Theory of Everything,
without using empirical input of course,

Jan