Interesting Physics

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Interesting Physics
Message board moderation

To post messages, you must log in.

Previous · 1 . . . 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 . . . 19 · Next

AuthorMessage
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 34041
Credit: 18,883,157
RAC: 18
Belgium
Message 1752405 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 9:54:23 UTC - in response to Message 1752291.  

The universe is putatively expanding but it is not expanding into "something" There is no other "something", only what is currently existing. Think of a spherical balloon surface. This is 2 dimensional--assume a 2 dimensional world --it expands as it is being inflated by creating more 2-dimensional surface area. There is no 3rd dimension in a 2-dimensional world just as there is no 4th dimension in a 3 dimensional world.

I say the universe is finite and unbounded. The fact that we have not seen any curvature is probably due to the fact that we cannot establish a long enough base line that is not itself affected by the curvature due to what we call "gravity"


How about the supposed 11 dimensions that exist in the universe? I strongly believe there are multiple universes, each are isolated systems, who answer to completely different laws of fizyx. I also believe that black holes would be the portals to those other universes.
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1752405 · Report as offensive
KLiK
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 31 Mar 14
Posts: 1304
Credit: 22,994,597
RAC: 60
Croatia
Message 1752407 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 9:57:49 UTC - in response to Message 1752291.  
Last modified: 30 Dec 2015, 9:59:07 UTC

The universe is putatively expanding but it is not expanding into "something" There is no other "something", only what is currently existing. Think of a spherical balloon surface. This is 2 dimensional--assume a 2 dimensional world --it expands as it is being inflated by creating more 2-dimensional surface area. There is no 3rd dimension in a 2-dimensional world just as there is no 4th dimension in a 3 dimensional world.

I say the universe is finite and unbounded. The fact that we have not seen any curvature is probably due to the fact that we cannot establish a long enough base line that is not itself affected by the curvature due to what we call "gravity"

well, we don't know that certain...there might be:
1. pan-Universe...a non established set of rules, without some established matter, but with some definite energy...in which our Universe expands! (think of it like a bubble in a detergent water)
2. we are more certain that our Universe is leaned on to other Universe with different set of rules...which our Universe might engulf & eat... (like a bubble to a bubble)

so there must be sthg out there! ;)


non-profit org. Play4Life in Zagreb, Croatia, EU
ID: 1752407 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1752415 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 10:54:46 UTC
Last modified: 30 Dec 2015, 10:57:51 UTC

In "Nature Physics" of 29 December there is an article about a meeting held on 7-9 December at Ludwig-Maximilians University in Munchen, Germany, in which the debating point was whether theories such as strings theory and multiuniverse with no experimental support can be considered as science or instead philosophy. A physicist I know by his writings and speeches on Italian and Swiss radios, Carlo Rovelli who works at Nice, maintained that while strings theory might find some experimental evidence (none so far at LHC even at higher energy), the multiuniverse theory cannot have any experimental support and must be taken as mere philosophy.
I tend to agree with him.
Tullio
ID: 1752415 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 34041
Credit: 18,883,157
RAC: 18
Belgium
Message 1752422 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 12:15:10 UTC - in response to Message 1752415.  
Last modified: 30 Dec 2015, 12:17:04 UTC

In "Nature Physics" of 29 December there is an article about a meeting held on 7-9 December at Ludwig-Maximilians University in Munchen, Germany, in which the debating point was whether theories such as strings theory and multiuniverse with no experimental support can be considered as science or instead philosophy. A physicist I know by his writings and speeches on Italian and Swiss radios, Carlo Rovelli who works at Nice, maintained that while strings theory might find some experimental evidence (none so far at LHC even at higher energy), the multiuniverse theory cannot have any experimental support and must be taken as mere philosophy.
I tend to agree with him.
Tullio


Agreed. We have no empirical proof whatsoever. The same counts for other theories like dark energy or even dark matter, neutrinos, gravitons and so on..

It is with great joy though I noticed scientists are trying to prove our collective consciousness through quantum physics. (quantum entanglement through teleportation)
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1752422 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1752428 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 13:30:16 UTC - in response to Message 1752422.  

Neutrinos are seen in detectors. Gravitons have not yet been observed, but the CMS experiment at LHC was looking for them and found a bump at 750 GeV which may be, or may be not, evidence of a possible graviton. LHC will restart in April.
Tullio
ID: 1752428 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 34041
Credit: 18,883,157
RAC: 18
Belgium
Message 1752429 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 13:32:15 UTC - in response to Message 1752423.  
Last modified: 30 Dec 2015, 13:33:47 UTC

It is with great joy though I noticed scientists are trying to prove our collective consciousness through quantum physics. (quantum entanglement through teleportation)

I'll take a rain check on that ...



This is an excerpt from the work I have been reading:


rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1752429 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1752430 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 13:38:35 UTC

In 1995 I had sent prof. Roger Penrose at Oxford University an unpublished text of mine, titled "The coherent brain", written in 1980 and never updated. He replied with a letter, which I have conserved, saying that my text was "highly interesting" and advicing me to read his recent book, 'Shadows of the mind". Encouraged by this, I typed my text into a file and sent it to two Italian physicists, who knew me personally. None of them ever bothered to reply, even by saying "you are mad". So I ceased any effort to spread my ideas.
Tullio
ID: 1752430 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 34041
Credit: 18,883,157
RAC: 18
Belgium
Message 1752441 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 14:46:44 UTC - in response to Message 1752430.  

In 1995 I had sent prof. Roger Penrose at Oxford University an unpublished text of mine, titled "The coherent brain", written in 1980 and never updated. He replied with a letter, which I have conserved, saying that my text was "highly interesting" and advicing me to read his recent book, 'Shadows of the mind". Encouraged by this, I typed my text into a file and sent it to two Italian physicists, who knew me personally. None of them ever bothered to reply, even by saying "you are mad". So I ceased any effort to spread my ideas.
Tullio


That's such a shame :( I never received an answer from Dr. Hawking either.
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1752441 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 0
Sweden
Message 1752457 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 15:33:37 UTC - in response to Message 1752291.  

The universe is putatively expanding but it is not expanding into "something" There is no other "something", only what is currently existing. Think of a spherical balloon surface. This is 2 dimensional--assume a 2 dimensional world --it expands as it is being inflated by creating more 2-dimensional surface area. There is no 3rd dimension in a 2-dimensional world just as there is no 4th dimension in a 3 dimensional world.

I say the universe is finite and unbounded. The fact that we have not seen any curvature is probably due to the fact that we cannot establish a long enough base line that is not itself affected by the curvature due to what we call "gravity"

Perhaps I should say that our universe expands from nothing in to nothing:)
Comparing different dimensional worlds is always a problem and giving paradoxes.
Consider this.
The function 1/x from x=1 to eternity (Galileo horn).
Rotate it and calculate what volume and surface it has.
Yes, you will get a finite volume but an infinite surface.
That means that you can fill the horn with paint but you cannot paint it!
ID: 1752457 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3756
Credit: 1,999,735
RAC: 4
United States
Message 1752460 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 15:41:46 UTC - in response to Message 1752429.  

julie,

If such a field exists then it should be detectable--not just imagined.
ID: 1752460 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1752462 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 15:43:40 UTC - in response to Message 1752441.  


That's such a shame :( I never received an answer from Dr. Hawking either.

Hawking is a "visible scientist" and probably has a lot of people writing to him. Penrose, although his equal in scientific value, is not a "visible scirntist" and can afford to reply to a letter by an unknonw person. But I must say that my text was read also by Roberto Battiston, now head of the Italian Space Agency, and he liked it too. Now he has no longer time.
Tullio
ID: 1752462 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3756
Credit: 1,999,735
RAC: 4
United States
Message 1752464 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 15:48:05 UTC - in response to Message 1752457.  
Last modified: 30 Dec 2015, 15:48:44 UTC

jan,

Yes you are right about infinite surface but finite volume; As I have said before --at the very small our mathematics may be inadequate as evidenced by perceived quantum weirdness

To wit:,

The function 1/x from x=1 to eternity (Galileo horn).


As you approach infinity you are in danger of dividing by zero which throws off our mathematics. If you allow division by zero to produce real world results then i can prove to you that 2 is equal to 1 Which I can assure you is not true in reality.
ID: 1752464 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 34041
Credit: 18,883,157
RAC: 18
Belgium
Message 1752471 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 16:02:37 UTC - in response to Message 1752460.  
Last modified: 30 Dec 2015, 16:04:47 UTC

julie,

If such a field exists then it should be detectable--not just imagined.


Tell me William, What would we have been without the imagination of some great minds in our era?


rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1752471 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 34041
Credit: 18,883,157
RAC: 18
Belgium
Message 1752476 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 16:10:20 UTC - in response to Message 1752462.  


That's such a shame :( I never received an answer from Dr. Hawking either.

Hawking is a "visible scientist" and probably has a lot of people writing to him. Penrose, although his equal in scientific value, is not a "visible scirntist" and can afford to reply to a letter by an unknonw person. But I must say that my text was read also by Roberto Battiston, now head of the Italian Space Agency, and he liked it too. Now he has no longer time.
Tullio


Maybe he thinks too much of himself to provide you with an answer Tullio.
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1752476 · Report as offensive
Profile tullio
Volunteer tester

Send message
Joined: 9 Apr 04
Posts: 8797
Credit: 2,930,782
RAC: 1
Italy
Message 1752507 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 18:17:01 UTC - in response to Message 1752476.  
Last modified: 30 Dec 2015, 18:17:38 UTC

No, Roberto has mailed his answer to me. But he no longer writes on his blog on "Le Scienze" online magazine. I used to have interesting discussions with him, also on entanglement. Now he has to manage rocket launches such as the one which put Lisa Pathfinder on its route to the L1 Lagrange point on its search for gravitational waves.
Tullio
ID: 1752507 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 0
Sweden
Message 1752508 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 18:29:35 UTC - in response to Message 1752464.  

If you allow division by zero to produce real world results then i can prove to you that 2 is equal to 1 Which I can assure you is not true in reality.

Thats very true.
That also means that a Black Hole cannot exist in a singularity.
Newton's law of gravity says in that case the gravitational force would be infinite.
ID: 1752508 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 34041
Credit: 18,883,157
RAC: 18
Belgium
Message 1752510 - Posted: 30 Dec 2015, 18:31:24 UTC - in response to Message 1752507.  

No, Roberto has mailed his answer to me. But he no longer writes on his blog on "Le Scienze" online magazine. I used to have interesting discussions with him, also on entanglement. Now he has to manage rocket launches such as the one which put Lisa Pathfinder on its route to the L1 Lagrange point on its search for gravitational waves.
Tullio


That's very philanthropic of him :)
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1752510 · Report as offensive
Profile William Rothamel
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 25 Oct 06
Posts: 3756
Credit: 1,999,735
RAC: 4
United States
Message 1752586 - Posted: 31 Dec 2015, 1:05:39 UTC - in response to Message 1752471.  

What would we have been without the imagination of some great minds in our era?


We would be nowhere without verification of well worked-out theories.
ID: 1752586 · Report as offensive
Profile Julie
Volunteer moderator
Volunteer tester
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 28 Oct 09
Posts: 34041
Credit: 18,883,157
RAC: 18
Belgium
Message 1752623 - Posted: 31 Dec 2015, 7:19:49 UTC - in response to Message 1752586.  

What would we have been without the imagination of some great minds in our era?


We would be nowhere without verification of well worked-out theories.


Proof is very important, that's a fact.
rOZZ
Music
Pictures
ID: 1752623 · Report as offensive
Profile janneseti
Avatar

Send message
Joined: 14 Oct 09
Posts: 14106
Credit: 655,366
RAC: 0
Sweden
Message 1752651 - Posted: 31 Dec 2015, 11:49:15 UTC - in response to Message 1752641.  

I think we can blame Heisenberg for his finding that there is no thing as certainty in our universe.
ID: 1752651 · Report as offensive
Previous · 1 . . . 10 · 11 · 12 · 13 · 14 · 15 · 16 . . . 19 · Next

Message boards : Science (non-SETI) : Interesting Physics


 
©2024 University of California
 
SETI@home and Astropulse are funded by grants from the National Science Foundation, NASA, and donations from SETI@home volunteers. AstroPulse is funded in part by the NSF through grant AST-0307956.