A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Space Science » Space Station
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Random thoughts..



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old October 7th 10, 08:48 AM posted to sci.space.station
Brian Gaff
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,312
Default Random thoughts..

On reading various groups around these parts, there seems not to be one for
speculation on general science things to do with space and cosmology. It
almost seems like there is no way for thinkers who may not be actual
scientists, to put ideas out there which may or may not be considered daft.
It occurred to me that one could actually use things like the station to
check some of the more outlandish stuff out. Mainly its large mass and being
man made and manned make it ideal I'd have thought to probe things like the
nature of mass, so called dark energy etc.

Anyway, I'll stick a few seemingly random thoughts here and see if anyone is
interested..
We cannot see dark matter and dark energy. This is because, in the
dimensions and universe we are in, they are not directly visible, but their
effect is. After all, Gravity is still defying attempts to find its origin.
What if the universe has a kind of non linear bias applied from outside
which makes things the way they are. it would be very hard to detect that
source.

On a more flippant note.
If there were any creatures on mars, far from being little green men, I
spect they would have no green perception, maybe no eyes at all, what would
be the point as they will be living deep underground.

What is there that is green on Mars anyway?

grin

Brian

--
Brian Gaff -
Note:- In order to reduce spam, any email without 'Brian Gaff'
in the display name may be lost.
Blind user, so no pictures please!


  #2  
Old January 27th 11, 06:21 AM posted to sci.space.station
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Random thoughts..

Brian Gaff wrote:
Anyway, I'll stick a few seemingly random thoughts here and see if anyone is
interested..
We cannot see dark matter and dark energy. This is because, in the
dimensions and universe we are in, they are not directly visible, but their
effect is. After all, Gravity is still defying attempts to find its origin.
What if the universe has a kind of non linear bias applied from outside
which makes things the way they are. it would be very hard to detect that
source.


You're hitting on a sore point with me that I've gone into before in a
previous thread in another sci.space. newsgroup (I forget which one at the
moment).

How's this for an outlandish idea? You cannot see dark matter, nor experience
any of its effects directly, even though its abundance supposedly far far far
exceeds that of hydrogen in our universe, for the simple reason that it does
not exist! Want an even MORE radical idea? How's this one; the universal
constant of gravitation "G" is NOT CONSTANT at extremes of space-time taken at
either cosmic or quantum values of space-time? One doesn't like that
speculation? Why not? Why is it so much more radical than massive masses you
cannot see nor detect? To address your point directly, I think you are onto
something when you speculate there are non-linear biases in the universe. But
think of it coming in from the other direction, rather than from outside, from
the inside. Think Planck length [3,4], think positive vacuum energy[5], think
of ramifications of quark decay taken to the extreme[6], THE END will not
happen because of global warming, it will happen because of the relentless and
unrelenting effect of the 2nd Law of Thermodynamics[7], at least until the
structure of space-time breaks down at the extreme. Have you ever wondered
about why we've never considered why commonplace entropy, while taken for
granted by all, ALWAYS wins? I mean without exceptions? Kind of an odd way to
run a universe don't you think? I mean after all, how is it possible to get
something from the preferred state of nothing? Doesn't this strike you at
times as being not only extremely odd but at the same time wonderful in its
ramifications?

Dark energy likewise is a weak explanation for the fact that perhaps we don't
really understand gravitation at the cosmic scale as well as we think we do.
We for sure KNOW we don't understand it at the micro-scale (read quantum
scale). Doesn't it seem odd to presume an understanding at one end of the
scale when we know we don't have a clue at the other?

This whole 'dark' business reminds me so much of another pet theory popular at
the end of the 19th century, now long since abandoned; that of the
"Luminiferous Aether"[1], once considered a given and whose existence was
presumed required for the propagation of electromagnetic radiation. After
Michelson-Morley[2], we got a little more sophisticated in our understanding
of matter and energy.

The same needs (and has yet) to happen with gravitation. We clearly don't
understand it as well as we have assumed. Classical gravitation, sure. But
gravitation at the extremes, not so much. There is so much still to be
learned. The problem will be how to test and experiment when dealing with such
extremes. The kind of experimentation needed to probe and provide helpful
insight will be extremely difficult because of the energies involved. Basing
it all on hypothesis alone, well, might as well get out the bones and rattles
and also consider theories based around interpretive dance.

Dave

[1] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luminiferous_aether
[2] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Michels...ley_experiment
[3] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_length
[4] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_scale
[5] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cosmological_constant
[6] http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu...es/qrkdec.html
[7] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Second_...thermodynamics
  #3  
Old January 27th 11, 06:57 AM posted to sci.space.station
snidely
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,303
Default Random thoughts..

On Jan 26, 9:21*pm, David Spain wrote:

The same needs (and has yet) to happen with gravitation.


Keep an eye on E8. Rumor has it that it is able to account for dark
stuff.

SU(3) is not enough.

/dps
  #4  
Old January 28th 11, 03:17 PM posted to sci.space.station
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Random thoughts..

snidely wrote:
On Jan 26, 9:21 pm, David Spain wrote:

The same needs (and has yet) to happen with gravitation.


Keep an eye on E8. Rumor has it that it is able to account for dark
stuff.


Interesting. Especially if it can predict new bosons with low enough energy
to be found.

SU(3) is not enough.


Agreed.

Dave
  #5  
Old January 28th 11, 06:04 PM posted to sci.space.station
David Spain
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 2,901
Default Random thoughts..

snidely wrote:
On Jan 26, 9:21 pm, David Spain wrote:

The same needs (and has yet) to happen with gravitation.


Keep an eye on E8. Rumor has it that it is able to account for dark
stuff.


For everyone else,

A starting point for E8 and Lie Algebra:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/An_Exce..._of_Everything


Now to just find the appropriate E8 template on my Spirograph(TM).

;-)

Dave
 




Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

vB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Random thoughts on MEMs based robotics [email protected] Policy 1 September 17th 07 11:33 AM
A random universe. [email protected] Misc 14 August 20th 07 07:31 AM
Random URL of the Day OM History 0 February 22nd 05 06:13 AM
Random flares Peter Harding Astronomy Misc 0 June 15th 04 08:39 AM
Alien Review - Random Thoughts To Pere, Darla, and Nician Julian St.Cloud Misc 6 January 13th 04 03:28 PM


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 02:22 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.6.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright ©2004-2024 SpaceBanter.com.
The comments are property of their posters.