Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > sci.physics.relativity > #464497 > unrolled thread

Re: No Explanation for the Sun

Back to article view | Back to sci.physics.relativity

This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.

Contents

  Re: No Explanation for the Sun The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-07-15 15:46 -0700
    Re: No Explanation for the Sun Olin Hayton <toa@nahslao.nh> - 2018-07-16 12:42 +0000
      Re: No Explanation for the Sun The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-07-17 10:15 -0700
        Re: No Explanation for the Sun Otto Snook <uot@wuoluo.uc> - 2018-07-17 17:53 +0000
    Re: No Explanation for the Sun The Starmaker <starmaker@ix.netcom.com> - 2018-07-18 00:31 -0700

#464497 — Re: No Explanation for the Sun

Mark Earnest wrote:
> 
> No way swirling masses of hydrogen formed into a star that would last ten billion
> 
> years.


the universe goes from hot to cold as ice...

before the big bang, it was in the reverse state..
from cold to hot.

Now, our sun takes a little longer to turn to an ice cube.


In other words, women live longer than men.

they are lighter
have squeaky voices
and as cold as ice..
but give a lot more warmth.

i no tink you get the connection...

[toc] | [next] | [standalone]

#464528

The Starmaker wrote:

> Mark Earnest wrote:
>> No way swirling masses of hydrogen formed into a star that would last
>> ten billion years.
>  
> the universe goes from hot to cold as ice... before the big bang, it was
> in the reverse state.. from cold to hot.

I hardly conceive the universe going into existence instantaneously as 
they pretend. However, that the Earth got into existence same way, 4.5e9 
of years ago, still instantaneously, exceeds by far my comprehension 
capabilities.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#464648

Olin Hayton wrote:
> 
> The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> > Mark Earnest wrote:
> >> No way swirling masses of hydrogen formed into a star that would last
> >> ten billion years.
> >
> > the universe goes from hot to cold as ice... before the big bang, it was
> > in the reverse state.. from cold to hot.
> 
> I hardly conceive the universe going into existence instantaneously as
> they pretend. However, that the Earth got into existence same way, 4.5e9
> of years ago, still instantaneously, exceeds by far my comprehension
> capabilities.



you just need to look at 'one' page of google to understand how google
works.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#464662

The Starmaker wrote:

> Olin Hayton wrote:
>> 
>> The Starmaker wrote:
>> 
>> > Mark Earnest wrote:
>> >> No way swirling masses of hydrogen formed into a star that would
>> >> last ten billion years.
>> >
>> > the universe goes from hot to cold as ice... before the big bang, it
>> > was in the reverse state.. from cold to hot.
>> 
>> I hardly conceive the universe going into existence instantaneously as
>> they pretend. However, that the Earth got into existence same way,
>> 4.5e9 of years ago, still instantaneously, exceeds by far my
>> comprehension capabilities.
> 
> you just need to look at 'one' page of google to understand how google
> works.

What has google to do with anything. These guys are thinking google is the 
answer to anything. How about yandex, yandex is cool.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#464771

The Starmaker wrote:
> 
> Mark Earnest wrote:
> >
> > No way swirling masses of hydrogen formed into a star that would last ten billion
> >
> > years.
> 
> the universe goes from hot to cold as ice...
> 
> before the big bang, it was in the reverse state..
> from cold to hot.
> 

like a mirror version...

if the big bang were to look
at itself in the mirror..

it would see..


look at your hands..

now face one hand towards the mirror

if you look at other hand..

they now both match.

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Back to top | Article view | sci.physics.relativity

csiph-web