Boy Genius Sets Out to Disprove Big Bang Theory

MRPRO03

http://www.thenewamerican.com/index.php/tech-mainmenu-30/space/6874-boy-genius-sets-out-to-disprove-big-bang-theory

Jacob explained his rationale to the Indianapolis Star. "There are two different types of when stars end," Jacob said. "When the little stars die, it’s just like a small poof. They just turn into a planetary nebula. But the big ones, above 1.4 solar masses, blow up in one giant explosion, a supernova. What it does, is, in larger stars there is a larger mass, and it can fuse higher elements because it’s more dense."

Jacob continued:

So you get all the elements, all the different materials, from those bigger stars. The little stars, they just make hydrogen and helium, and when they blow up, all the carbon that remains in them is just in the white dwarf; it never really comes off.

So, um, in the big-bang theory, what they do is, there is this big explosion and there is all this temperature going off and the temperature decreases really rapidly because it’s really big. The other day I calculated, they have this period where they suppose the hydrogen and helium were created, and, um, I don’t care about the hydrogen and helium, but I thought, wouldn’t there have to be some sort of carbon?

Otherwise, the carbon would have to be coming out of the stars and hence the Earth, made mostly of carbon, we wouldn’t be here. So I calculated, the time it would take to create 2 percent of the carbon in the universe, it would actually have to be several micro-seconds. Or a couple of nano-seconds, or something like that. An extremely small period of time. Like faster than a snap. That isn’t gonna happen.

Because of that, that means that the world would have never been created because none of the carbon would have been given 7 billion years to fuse together. We’d have to be 21 billion years old ... and that would just screw everything up.

NoQuarter

Do I detect hints of Theism in that article???

AlmightyCushion

it would actually have to be several micro-seconds. Or a couple of nano-seconds, or something like that. An extremely small period of time. Like faster than a snap.

I'm not great with the auld physics but statements like that don't really fill me with confidence.

Rubecula

I am cringing after reading that. Seriously, I am really cringing.

So, um, in the big-bang theory, what they do is, there is this big explosion

Who let him out?

challengemaster

Did they alter the definition of genius lately or what?

syklops

challengemaster wrote: »

Did they alter the definition of genius lately or what?

"Arrogant, thinks-he-knows-best teen gets his name in the paper" more like. He cant be a genius because he talks like Britney Spears.

It gets worse:

Similarly, evolutionist Paul Davies asserts that the Big Bang Theory “differs greatly in detail from the biblical version.”

Gee, who'd a thunk it? :rolleyes:

Lazy journalism.

EDIT:

Call me a cynic but I think this is the real reason boy genius is put up with:

In fact, the University is so impressed with Jacob that members of the school are seeking grant funding so that Jacob may “get all of those creative juices in a certain direction.”

The school is seeking extra funding to help boy wonder buy more chalk and a bigger blackboard.

Helix

syklops wrote: »

The school is seeking extra funding to help boy wonder buy more chalk and a bigger blackboard.

id have thought its coz he's slightly autistic that'd theyd need the extra help

DOC09UNAM

The other day I calculated, they have this period where they suppose the hydrogen and helium were created, and, um, I don’t care about the hydrogen and helium, but I thought, wouldn’t there have to be some sort of carbon?

Otherwise, the carbon would have to be coming out of the stars and hence the Earth, made mostly of carbon, we wouldn’t be here. So I calculated, the time it would take to create 2 percent of the carbon in the universe, it would actually have to be several micro-seconds. Or a couple of nano-seconds, or something like that.

Could any of the smart-asses here questioning his intelligence please show me how to work this out?

I presume those that know enough to say he's not a genius know how it's calculated?

Rubecula

In current theory all the heavier elements were produced by larger stars going supernova or even hypernova.

I can't see a problem in this. So what is his point? That he doesn't beleive it existed at the big bang? Well nobody has ever claimed it did as far as I know. Primeval matter was mostly hydrogen that eventually became stars and other forms of matter evolved from that.

I never questioned his intelligence, just the fact that he is claimed to be a genius.

Even a fool can ask a question that a brilliant man can not answer.

If he has made up his own mathematical equations to work out the amount of substances in the universe he is doing well. He would need more knowledge to fill them out though.


And I really look forward to seeing his 'calculation' After all if he knows how much of the universe makes up 2% of the carbon content he is a long way ahead of anything I have ever heard of. And what he uses as a constant for the production of this 2% is totally beyond me.

He is not only of genius material he has a hotline to stuff I have no idea on.

Zubeneschamali

DOC09UNAM wrote: »

Could any of the smart-asses here questioning his intelligence please show me how to work this out?

I'm not going to read a whole article of this gibberish, but just taking the bit you quote:

wouldn’t there have to be some sort of carbon?

No.

Otherwise, the carbon would have to be coming out of the stars

Yes.

and hence the Earth, made mostly of carbon,

No, way less than 1% of the Earth is Carbon.

we wouldn’t be here

Hey, he accidentally said something interesting! Fred Hoyle actually deduced things previously unknown about the physics of Carbon using the anthropic principle: if Carbon did not have very specific properties, it would not be formed in stars and so we wouldn't exist. Based on the fact that we do exist, Carbon must have these properties.

Sure enough, when the experiments were done, Carbon does have the properties Hoyle predicted.

So I calculated, the time it would take to create 2 percent of the carbon in the universe, it would actually have to be several micro-seconds. Or a couple of nano-seconds, or something like that.

Two numbers which are different by three orders of magnitude! This guy is spouting nonsense.

AlmightyCushion

Zubeneschamali wrote: »

Two numbers which are different by three orders of magnitude! This guy is spouting nonsense.

Don't forget the snap as well. How many nano-seconds are in a snap?

randylonghorn

In fact, the University is so impressed with Jacob that members of the school are seeking grant funding so that Jacob may “get all of those creative juices in a certain direction.”

Wait, there's university grant funding for fap-mags for young teen boys these days?!

I feel we were discriminated against now!!


In fairness, though, he's a 12 year old boy with Asberger's, no matter how bright he potentially is, he's not going to have the vocabulary to even make sense of the ideas which are churning around in his brain, whether they prove to have any validity or not, let alone to communicate them to a journo from the local newspaper.

Tbh, I think the university is doing him (and themselves) a great disservice by exposing him to journalists or the public view in any form at that age. For that matter, I would question his parents' role in all of this: normal social interaction is normally difficult enough for those with Asbergers, without being dumped into a university environment at the age of 12 and deprived of a normal childhood / teenage period.

He obviously needs stimulation and challenge for his brain, and if he tested out of high school algebra, geometry, trig and calculus at 12 that's not going to happen in a normal high school, but surely there should be a better option for a gifted 12 year old *child* than a university dept. of physics?

im invisible

AlmightyCushion wrote: »

Don't forget the snap as well. How many nano-seconds are in a snap?

he's got that wrong anyway.

from wikipedia
jounce or snap is the fourth derivative of the position vector with respect to time, with the first, second, and third derivatives being velocity, acceleration, and jerk, respectively

charlemont

Its people like him that will make a success out of his career/life, but if he had the misfortune to live in Ireland, he would be just laughed at and never achieve anything..Unless he emigrated of course.

RichieC

I think it's pretty obvious the current standard model has its problems.

I like the analogue to the concentric circles prior to kelpers discovery of the elliptic orbits re: dark plugins

Doubt anyone is ever going to prove anything about the beginning of the universe though...

RichieC

NoQuarter wrote: »

Do I detect hints of Theism in that article???

Detect? that website is published by the john birch society.