Author Topic: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse  (Read 17495 times)

Buttsuck

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2189
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #75 on: October 22, 2006, 10:01:31 PM »
So energy is always here? Energy cannot be lost?

gcb

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
  • you suffer, why?
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #76 on: October 22, 2006, 10:20:45 PM »
that's right energy can't be lost, but it can dissipate which makes it hard to collect again

Buttsuck

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2189
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #77 on: October 22, 2006, 10:54:07 PM »
Alrighty i watched the vid deity but you have yet to explain how all this energy got there to begin with. In philosophy when you try to make proof of God you can only get so far and then there is that gap of lost knowledge. It is what is called a leap of faith. To believe God doesn't exists leaves me with a lonely cold feeling.

Max_Rep

  • Max Rep
  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3980
  • It’s about how hard you can GET hit...
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #78 on: October 22, 2006, 11:17:36 PM »
It is from Stay Hungry and you didn't miss much by sutting this one out.

Wrong. It is from an episode of "The Streets of San Francisco" in 1977 which stared Karl Malden (with the big nose) and Michael Douglas. The episode was called "Dead Lift". I remember watching it.
and keep moving!

gcb

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2283
  • you suffer, why?
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #79 on: October 22, 2006, 11:19:32 PM »
Alrighty i watched the vid deity but you have yet to explain how all this energy got there to begin with. In philosophy when you try to make proof of God you can only get so far and then there is that gap of lost knowledge. It is what is called a leap of faith. To believe God doesn't exists leaves me with a lonely cold feeling.

You've got your fellow human beings to keep you warm in this cold, cold world.

Tapeworm

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 29183
  • Hold Fast
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #80 on: October 23, 2006, 12:42:04 AM »
Wrong. It is from an episode of "The Streets of San Francisco" in 1977 which stared Karl Malden (with the big nose) and Michael Douglas. The episode was called "Dead Lift". I remember watching it.

"If you're going to San Francisco,
you're gonna meet some gentle people there."

1. She had it coming
2. God is a creation of man
3. Soilent Green is made from people
4. The CIA killed JFK
5. The Ultimate Warrior would be victorious in a battle royale but is the least historically significant person.

Buttsuck

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2189
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #81 on: October 23, 2006, 09:40:10 AM »
You've got your fellow human beings to keep you warm in this cold, cold world.

Looking for warmth among a sea of cold hearts equates to finding a needle in a hay stack. Faith gives me no fear of dying. Also Max_Rep, i do believe the CIA killed JFK lol.

The True Adonis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 50229
  • Fear is proof of a degenerate mind.
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #82 on: October 23, 2006, 11:00:43 AM »
Weak minds believe in a god.

God is the biggest bullshit story,sham ever created and is responsible for millions dying even today out of fear and hate as well as from stagnating medical technology and scientific progress.


It is laughable that 44 percent of people in the United States think that Jesus Christ will arise in the next 50 years.


It is pathetic to think that the world is only 6000 years old and that Dinosaurs were on Noah`s Ark.
It is even more rediculous to even think a boat could be built to sustain differing climates for tropical animals and arctic animals alike, in a non-climate controlled wooden boat.  Simply an obvious impossibility that idiots want to cling to.

Defying reason and logic is what Religions do best.

Hitler had the right idea about eradicating ALL Religions.  He just carried it out the wrong way. haha.

I do not care if someone believes in a God, but I DO care if they make it beyond their own personal conviction.


The True Adonis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 50229
  • Fear is proof of a degenerate mind.
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #83 on: October 23, 2006, 11:04:09 AM »
Alrighty i watched the vid deity but you have yet to explain how all this energy got there to begin with. In philosophy when you try to make proof of God you can only get so far and then there is that gap of lost knowledge. It is what is called a leap of faith. To believe God doesn't exists leaves me with a lonely cold feeling.

Energy is neither created nor destroyed. 

Energy is infinite.  To best explain infinity, start counting numbers until you get to the last one.

The True Adonis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 50229
  • Fear is proof of a degenerate mind.
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #84 on: October 23, 2006, 11:06:43 AM »
Conservation of energy states that the total amount of energy (often expressed as the sum of kinetic energy and potential energy) in an isolated system remains constant. In other words, energy can be converted from one form to another, but it cannot be created or destroyed. In modern physics, all forms of energy exhibit mass and all mass is a form of energy.

In thermodynamics, the first law of thermodynamics is a statement of the conservation of energy for thermodynamic systems.

The energy conservation law is a mathematical consequence of the shift symmetry of time; energy conservation is implied by the empirical fact that physical laws remain the same over time.

Contents [hide]
1 Historical development
2 Modern physics
2.1 Noether's Theorem
2.2 Relativity
2.3 Quantum theory
3 The first law of thermodynamics
4 Notes
5 See also
6 References
6.1 Modern accounts
6.2 History of ideas
6.3 Classic accounts
7 External links
 


[edit] Historical development
 To understand the significance of the conservation of energy in the context of the development of thermodynamics, see Thermodynamics timeline Edit
Ancient philosophers as far back as Thales of Miletus had inklings of the conservation of some underlying substance of which everything is made. However, there is no particular reason to identify this with what we know today as "mass-energy" (for example, Thales thought it was water). In 1638, Galileo published his analysis of several situations -- including the celebrated "interrupted pendulum" -- which can be described (in modernized language) as conservatively converting potential energy to kinetic energy and back again. However, Galileo did not state the process in modern terms and again cannot be credited with the crucial insight. It was the German Gottfried Wilhelm Leibniz during 1676-1689 who first attempted a mathematical formulation of the kind of energy which is connected with motion (kinetic energy). Leibniz noticed that in many mechanical systems (of several masses, mi each with velocity vi ),

 
was conserved so long as the masses did not interact. He called this quantity the vis viva or living force of the system. The principle represents an accurate statement of the approximate conservation of kinetic energy in situations where there is no friction. However, many physicists were influenced by the prestige of Sir Isaac Newton in England and of René Descartes in France, both of whom had set great store by the conservation of momentum (which holds even in systems with friction), as a guiding principle. Thus the momentum:

 
was held by the rival camp to be the conserved vis viva. It was largely engineers such as John Smeaton, Peter Ewart, Karl Hotzmann, Gustave-Adolphe Hirn and Marc Seguin who objected that conservation of momentum alone was not adequate for practical calculation and who made use of Leibniz's principle. The principle was also championed by some chemists such as William Hyde Wollaston.

Members of the academic establishment such as John Playfair were quick to point out that kinetic energy is clearly not conserved. This is obvious to a modern analysis based on the second law of thermodynamics but in the 18th and 19th centuries, the fate of the lost energy was still unknown. Gradually it came to be suspected that the heat inevitably generated by motion under friction, was another form of vis viva. In 1783, Antoine Lavoisier and Pierre-Simon Laplace reviewed the two competing theories of vis viva and caloric[1]. Count Rumford's 1798 observations of heat generation during the boring of cannons added more weight to the view that mechanical motion could be converted into heat, and (as importantly) that the conversion was quantitative and could be predicted (allowing for a universal conversion constant between kinetic energy and heat). Vis viva now started to be known as energy, after the term was first used in that sense by Thomas Young in 1807.

The recalibration of vis viva to

 
which can be understood as finding the exact value for the kinetic energy to work conversion constant, was largely the result of the work of Gaspard-Gustave Coriolis and Jean-Victor Poncelet over the period 1819-1839. The former called the quantity quantité de travail (quantity of work) and the latter, travail mécanique (mechanical work), and both championed its use in engineering calculation.

In a paper Über die Natur der Wärme, published in the Zeitschrift für Physik in 1837, Karl Friedrich Mohr gave one of the earliest general statements of the doctrine of the conservation of energy in the words: "besides the 54 known chemical elements there is in the physical world one agent only, and this is called Kraft [energy or work]. It may appear, according to circumstances, as motion, chemical affinity, cohesion, electricity, light and magnetism; and from any one of these forms it can be transformed into any of the others."

A key stage in the development of the modern conservation principle was the demonstration of the mechanical equivalent of heat. The caloric theory maintained that heat could neither be created nor destroyed but conservation of energy entails the contrary principle that heat and mechanical work are interchangeable.

The mechanical equivalence principle was first stated in its modern form by the German surgeon Julius Robert von Mayer.[2] Mayer reached his conclusion on a voyage to the Dutch East Indies, where he found that his patients' blood was a deeper red because they were consuming less oxygen, and therefore less energy, to maintain their body temperature in the hotter climate. He had discovered that heat and mechanical work were both forms of energy, and later, after improving his knowledge of physics, he calculated a quantitative relationship between them.

 
Joule's apparatus for measuring the mechanical equivalent of heat. A descending weight attached to a string causes a paddle immersed in water to rotate.Meanwhile, in 1843 James Prescott Joule independently discovered the mechanical equivalent in a series of experiments. In the most famous, now called the "Joule apparatus", a descending weight attached to a string caused a paddle immersed in water to rotate. He showed that the gravitational potential energy lost by the weight in descending was equal to the thermal energy (heat) gained by the water by friction with the paddle.

Over the period 1840-1843, similar work was carried out by engineer Ludwig A. Colding though it was little-known outside his native Denmark.

Both Joule's and Mayer's work suffered from resistance and neglect but it was Joule's that, perhaps unjustly, eventually drew the wider recognition.

For the dispute between Joule and Mayer over priority, see Mechanical equivalent of heat: Priority
Drawing on the earlier work of Joule, Sadi Carnot and Émile Clapeyron, in 1847, Hermann von Helmholtz postulated a relationship between mechanics, heat, light, electricity and magnetism by treating them all as manifestations of a single force (energy in modern terms). He published his theories in his book Über die Erhaltung der Kraft (On the Conservation of Force, 1847). The general modern acceptance of the principle stems from this publication.

In 1877, Peter Guthrie Tait claimed that the principle originated with Sir Isaac Newton, based on a creative reading of propositions 40 and 41 of the Philosophiae Naturalis Principia Mathematica. This is now generally regarded as nothing more than an example of Whig history.


[edit] Modern physics

[edit] Noether's Theorem
The conservation of energy is a common feature in many physical theories. It is understood as a consequence of Noether's theorem, which states every symmetry of a physical theory has an associated conserved quantity; if the theory's symmetry is time invariance then the conserved quantity is called "energy". In other words, if the theory is invariant under the continuous symmetry of time translation then its energy is conserved. Conversely, theories which are not invariant under shifts in time (for example, systems with time dependent potential energy) do not exhibit conservation of energy -- unless we consider them to be exchanging energy with another, external system so that the theory of the enlarged system becomes time invariant again. Since any time-varying theory can be embedded within a time-invariant meta-theory energy conservation can always be recovered by a suitable re-definition of what energy is. Thus conservation of energy is valid in all modern physical theories, such as relativity and quantum theory.


[edit] Relativity
With the discovery of special relativity by Albert Einstein, it was found that energy is one component of an energy-momentum 4-vector. Each of the four components (one of energy and three of momentum) of this vector is separately conserved, as well as the vector length (Minkowski norm). The latter is associated with invariant mass and rest mass. The relativistic energy of a single massive particle contains a term related to its rest mass in addition to its kinetic energy of motion. In the limit of zero kinetic energy (or equivalently in the rest frame of the massive particle, or the center-of-momentum frame for objects or systems), the total energy of particle or object (including internal kinetic energy in systems) is related to its rest mass via the famous equation E = mc2. Thus, the rule of conservation of energy in special relativity was shown to be a special case of a more general rule, alternatively called the conservation of mass and energy, the conservation of mass-energy, the conservation of energy-momentum, the conservation of invariant mass or now usually just referred to as conservation of energy.

In general relativity conservation of energy-momentum is expressed with the aid of a stress-energy-momentum pseudotensor.


[edit] Quantum theory
In quantum mechanics, energy is defined as proportional to the time derivative of the wave function. Lack of commutation of the time derivative operator with the time operator itself mathematically results in an uncertainty principle for time and energy: the longer the period of time, the more precisely energy can be defined (energy and time become a conjugate Fourier pair). However quantum theory in general, and the uncertainty principle specifically, do not violate energy conservation (as laymen or philosophers often imply).


[edit] The first law of thermodynamics
Laws of thermodynamics
Zeroth law of thermodynamics
First law of thermodynamics
Second law of thermodynamics
Third law of thermodynamics
edit
Main article: First law of thermodynamics
For a thermodynamic system with a fixed number of particles, the first law of thermodynamics may be stated as:

, or equivalently, ,
where δQ is the amount of energy added to the system by a heating process, δW is the amount of energy lost by the system due to work done by the system on its surroundings and dU is the increase in the internal energy of the system.

The δ's before the heat and work terms are used to indicate that they describe an increment of energy which is to be interpreted somewhat differently than the dU increment of internal energy. Work and heat are processes which add or subtract energy, while the internal energy U is a particular form of energy associated with the system. Thus the term "heat energy" for δQ means "that amount of energy added as the result of heating" rather than referring to a particular form of energy. Likewise, the term "work energy" for δW means "that amount of energy lost as the result of work". The most significant result of this distinction is the fact that one can clearly state the amount of internal energy possessed by a thermodynamic system, but one cannot tell how much energy has flowed into or out of the system as a result of its being heated or cooled, nor as the result of work being performed on or by the system.

The first law can be written exclusively in terms of system variables. For a simple compressible system, the work performed by the system may be written

,
where P is the pressure and dV is a small change in the volume of the system, each of which are system variables. The heat energy may be written

,
where T is the temperature and dS is a small change in the entropy of the system. Temperature and entropy are also system variables.


[edit] Notes
^ Lavoisier, A.L. & Laplace, P.S. (1780) "Memoir on Heat", Académie Royal des Sciences pp4-355
^ von Mayer, J.R. (1842) "Remarks on the forces of inorganic nature" in Annalen der Chemie und Pharmacie, 43, 233

alexxx

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 10129
  • Don't hate..
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #85 on: October 23, 2006, 11:09:08 AM »
Weak minds believe in a god.

God is the biggest bullshit story,sham ever created and is responsible for millions dying even today out of fear and hate as well as from stagnating medical technology and scientific progress.


It is laughable that 44 percent of people in the United States think that Jesus Christ will arise in the next 50 years.


It is pathetic to think that the world is only 6000 years old and that Dinosaurs were on Noah`s Ark.
It is even more rediculous to even think a boat could be built to sustain differing climates for tropical animals and arctic animals alike, in a non-climate controlled wooden boat.  Simply an obvious impossibility that idiots want to cling to.

Defying reason and logic is what Religions do best.

Hitler had the right idea about eradicating ALL Religions.  He just carried it out the wrong way. haha.

I do not care if someone believes in a God, but I DO care if they make it beyond their own personal conviction.



Your logic is flawed.
just push some weight!

The True Adonis

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 50229
  • Fear is proof of a degenerate mind.
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #86 on: October 23, 2006, 11:18:10 AM »
Your logic is flawed.

Your intelligence is extremely low.  Perhaps you should educate yourself more so you will not fall into the category of the dumb.

Statistics indicate a high correlation of low intelligence and the belief in a god.

alexxx

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 10129
  • Don't hate..
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #87 on: October 23, 2006, 11:20:46 AM »
Your intelligence is extremely low.  Perhaps you should educate yourself more so you will not fall into the category of the dumb.

Statistics indicate a high correlation of low intelligence and the belief in a god.

Work on your punctuation little rascal.
just push some weight!

Slick Vic

  • Guest
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #88 on: October 23, 2006, 11:30:55 AM »
What the hell flick was that taken from? Hahaha!

From the 1970's television show called The Streets of San Fransisco in an episode called: Dead Lift.

mrsirjojo

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 187
  • Si vis pacem, Para bellum.
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #89 on: October 23, 2006, 11:59:56 AM »
So did Epicurus Is God willing to prevent evil, but not able?  Then he is not omnipotent.
Is he able, but not willing?  Then he is malevolent.
Is he both able and willing? Then whence cometh evil?
Is he neither able nor willing? Then why call him God?


Evil is a by-product of free will. No free will, no evil. No evil, no free will.

mrsirjojo

  • Getbig II
  • **
  • Posts: 187
  • Si vis pacem, Para bellum.
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #90 on: October 23, 2006, 12:05:09 PM »
Look... i have theories how the universe works. At one time we were a solid ball of condensed matter. This matter some how exploded creating the universe. The universe as we know is still expanding but in time it will stop. Suns will burn out and become black holes sucking everything back into the center. As the unvierse shrinks IN THEORY time is suppose to go backwards. We will condense into a solid ball of mass and explode once again. What i don't understnad is the lost matter that occurs in a nuclear explosion. Where does it go?

Not all suns become black holes, just the really big ones. Ours will not.
The universe may continue expanding forever, it may begin to contract. Science is still not sure which. Even if the universe does contract, time will not go backwards.
The mass becomes energy. This is was E=MC(2) is all about.

Buttsuck

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 2189
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #91 on: October 23, 2006, 12:35:56 PM »
Weak minds believe in a god.

God is the biggest bullshit story,sham ever created and is responsible for millions dying even today out of fear and hate as well as from stagnating medical technology and scientific progress.


It is laughable that 44 percent of people in the United States think that Jesus Christ will arise in the next 50 years.


It is pathetic to think that the world is only 6000 years old and that Dinosaurs were on Noah`s Ark.
It is even more rediculous to even think a boat could be built to sustain differing climates for tropical animals and arctic animals alike, in a non-climate controlled wooden boat.  Simply an obvious impossibility that idiots want to cling to.

Defying reason and logic is what Religions do best.

Hitler had the right idea about eradicating ALL Religions.  He just carried it out the wrong way. haha.

I do not care if someone believes in a God, but I DO care if they make it beyond their own personal conviction.


Adonis, i see where you are coming from. Voltaire was once quoted as saying "[Christianity] is assuredly the most ridiculous, the most absurd and the most bloody religion which has ever infected this world". I believe organized religion is evil in many cases and causes more harm the good. Catholics probably being the most guilty and responsible for murder and corruption but do you not find it strange that the sharpest minds of human history had belief of God? Voltaire, Einstein, and Aristotle? As Voltaire once said if God doesn't exist then it is neccesary we create him.

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 80168
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #92 on: October 23, 2006, 02:44:14 PM »
Alrighty i watched the vid deity but you have yet to explain how all this energy got there to begin with. In philosophy when you try to make proof of God you can only get so far and then there is that gap of lost knowledge. It is what is called a leap of faith. To believe God doesn't exists leaves me with a lonely cold feeling.

The energy has always been , matter can't be created or destroyed its always been in one form or another and always will be ! Faith it was once said is the lack of evidence . for me personally I don't have a feeling of loneliness without a belief in God , if anything it makes me accpreciate life even more , once you learn of how the universe came into its current state and how long it took for the formation of everything in it and how life started to evolve and how rare it is on a time scale that we are even conscious at all for any lenght of time is mindblowing to me its more midblowing than anything religion can offer up .

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 80168
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #93 on: October 23, 2006, 02:48:41 PM »
Wrong. It is from an episode of "The Streets of San Francisco" in 1977 which stared Karl Malden (with the big nose) and Michael Douglas. The episode was called "Dead Lift". I remember watching it.

Okay my mistake I seen what I think is Sally Feilds and put two and two together !

El Guapo

  • Getbig III
  • ***
  • Posts: 497
  • Don't hate me cause I'm beautiful
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #94 on: October 23, 2006, 02:51:13 PM »
buttsuck is adonis.

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 80168
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #95 on: October 23, 2006, 02:54:36 PM »
Evil is a by-product of free will. No free will, no evil. No evil, no free will.

Evil is Gods creation period , God made men with free will so he made evil by proxy either way it all translates back to the creator .

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 80168
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #96 on: October 23, 2006, 02:59:20 PM »
Adonis, i see where you are coming from. Voltaire was once quoted as saying "[Christianity] is assuredly the most ridiculous, the most absurd and the most bloody religion which has ever infected this world". I believe organized religion is evil in many cases and causes more harm the good. Catholics probably being the most guilty and responsible for murder and corruption but do you not find it strange that the sharpest minds of human history had belief of God? Voltaire, Einstein, and Aristotle? As Voltaire once said if God doesn't exist then it is neccesary we create him.

Einstein NEVER believe in a personal God , one of the Judeo/Christian belief . and some of the smartest people who ever graced the planet all have been atheists , agnostics and freethinkers , I could post names but there are so many.

doison

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3448
  • Rum Ham
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #97 on: October 23, 2006, 03:04:56 PM »
Matter can be made, and matter can be destroyed.  We don't have the means to understand this concept yet.  
The problem with science, is that people take theories as fact.  And when millions of non-facts are all cojoined as fact, there is an immense room for error, which is what we're dealing with now.  

The big bang theory is actually in reverse.  It isn't a big bang, of separating objects.  
It's a big implosion of those same objects, moving in a direction that appears as if they are moving away from the big bang.  When in truth, they are moving towards the place of the theorized big bang.  

The big bang is still based around man's unshakable belief in a finite universe.  We believe the universe is infinite, but base our theories so that if they are true, they must exist in a finite universe?  

Assuming a true infinite universe, everything is actually moving towards the point of the big bang, however the movement appears to be in the opposite direction.  Understanding this tells us that the big bang is actually a big implosion.  
Y

doison

  • Getbig IV
  • ****
  • Posts: 3448
  • Rum Ham
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #98 on: October 23, 2006, 03:10:03 PM »
Weak minds believe in a god.



Weak minds feel the need to disprove god. 

Many of the stongest minds in history can fathom a single deity that could be godlike. 

You are assuming god is a man. 


Y

NarcissisticDeity

  • Getbig V
  • *****
  • Posts: 80168
  • Go back to making jewelry and cakes with your girl
Re: AHhhnold Spousal Abuse
« Reply #99 on: October 23, 2006, 03:10:35 PM »
Matter can be made, and matter can be destroyed.  We don't have the means to understand this concept yet. 
The problem with science, is that people take theories as fact.  And when millions of non-facts are all cojoined as fact, there is an immense room for error, which is what we're dealing with now. 

The big bang theory is actually in reverse.  It isn't a big bang, of separating objects. 
It's a big implosion of those same objects, moving in a direction that appears as if they are moving away from the big bang.  When in truth, they are moving towards the place of the theorized big bang. 

The big bang is still based around man's unshakable belief in a finite universe.  We believe the universe is infinite, but base our theories so that if they are true, they must exist in a finite universe? 

Assuming a true infinite universe, everything is actually moving towards the point of the big bang, however the movement appears to be in the opposite direction.  Understanding this tells us that the big bang is actually a big implosion. 

Where did you get this from? there is a theory called the Big Crunch which states that the universe will reach a point where it will begin to contract to the point of where it started again the big bang , scientists theorize that this might be the first of an infinite number of expanasions and contractions or it may be just another in the series of billions , but we don't have to worry about that seeing our Sun will run out of fuel long before this supposedly  happens.