Sri Lumpa said:
You are the one claiming it exists, the burden of proof is on you. You don't have to prove the theory, just that it exists. If Hydrogen and Nitrogen collide you get ammonia. Sure, you could then use that ammonia as a feedstock to create a bomb but it is not the kind of bang the big bang theory talks about. The problem about that theory and especially with claiming it to be a big bang theory is that the big bang theory is about the early stages of the universe whereas that theory talks about what would have been before this universe. Even if we were to find out that the universe would eventually stop expanding and start contracting in a reverse big bang (a big crunch) which would eventually explode again it still would have nothing to do with hydrogen and nitrogen atoms but would be due to the gravitational force. |
burden,you make this sound like a war?
i gave it as of the reasons,never said its the correct one.
alrite,i would agree.never said you were wrong.
