The Hubble Ultra Deep Field in 3D

The problem is that most of these things cannot be explained in 500 words or less. Each of your questions requires several courses worth of understanding. want to know why and how the universe is expanding? Take a class on general relativity. At this point you don't understand enough to have this debate. You ask non-sensicle questions like where the big bang happened. If you understood the subject you wouldn't ask this question.

I see none of the phonies that love to pretend they're smarter than me keep evading the questions I raise.

Not that I'm keeping score by they so far have avoided explaining how the universe is expanding, can't explain where original matter or energy came from or what triggered the big bang, where exactly this "big bang" happened or how anything can travel faster than light.

Messing with these dummies is a hoot!

You can't seriously expect people to think how a world famous dictionary defines words is erroneous?

Yeah I guess you do. Lets remember the scientific community is well so much smarter. Like for 80 years they said the universe would stop expanding at some point, not they offer up dark matter and say oops, guess not. Then they demoted Pluto. Oh and how many hoaxes where some joker mixed in human bones with monkey remains and science bought it hook line and sinker? Should I continue?

Actually, they do. the problem is that it's quite complicated and cannot be explained in 500 words. In fact, as is true with many things in science, it probably cannot be explained in a satisfactory way to laymen. I realize that it seems like I'm asking you to blindly trust science, but I'm not. It's perfectly possible for you to actually learn this material and then come back and argue about it. Right now though, you know next to nothing about what you're talking about.

Nassim Haramein has some very interesting theories on how the universe is expanding and contracting at the same time.

@willieofroanoke

Do you see the number of thumbs-downs on your posts? Take a guess why (hint: it's not because they agree with you). How can you expect to be taken seriously when you use WEBSTER'S definitions in a scientific argument? Are you trying to educate us with your Word of the Day?

Let me take a wild guess that you've never taken any post-secondary education..

Cont 2

So see the flaw in the logic?

IF light speed is a constant, yet the universe "expanded" to 47 billion light years in a universe only 13.7 billion years old, science needs to explain HOW such expansion works. They never do, because they can't. It's all illusion and double talk based on assumed observations and certain objects in the universe (certain class of super nova and some white drafts ALWAYS react exactlly the same...just more guess work!

Cont 1

Now back to one of my original questions... EXPLAIN universal expansion. I defy anyone to actually do that. You can search reams of documents, spend weeks on the web and never will you find anything that explains step by step how universe is expanding, instead there are endless examples of what is inferred, but never any actual mechanics. In fact words such as APPARENT expansion are often used as are the factual comments none of the galaxies themselves are really moving at all.

It isn't my job to explain some half-ass contrived bullshit. I'm glad I opened this can of worms because it proves what a load of crap it really is. Practical Relativistic Timing Effects refers to more made up bullshit, time dilation. That is where velocity of motion between two observers in motion is RELATIVE to how close each is to some gravitational mass. So each observer thinks the other observer's clock has slowed down compared to a local clock. Of course in reality this is impossible

@willieofroanoke read some Practical Relativistic Timing Effects and stop talking about things you dont know...