|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#91
|
|||
|
|||
Facts against BB Theory
On 6/16/14, 1:43 AM, Phillip Helbig---undress to reply wrote:
There was also a numerical coincidence between this and the Pioneer anomaly, but the latter was shown to have an origin on the spacecraft. Such a definitive statement on the Pioneer anomaly is unwarranted. http://arxiv.org/pdf/1204.2507v1.pdf assumes the decay for Pioneer acceleration aP daP/dt = -k*aP model one This fits the assumption that all aP components are tied to the RTG half life with aP decay approaching zero with time. A better fit to stochastic data is: daP/dt = -k*(aP - aPinfinity) model two Initially, the thermal emission overwhelms the anomalous acceleration (aPinfinity) but diminishes with time(model one) with aP decay approaching aPinfinity with time (model two). The Pioneers probes may be sensing an acceleration in space as they approach the interstellar region that may indeed be linked to space expansion and galactic rotation. |
#92
|
|||
|
|||
Facts against BB Theory
Op dinsdag 17 juni 2014 08:13:56 UTC+2 schreef Jos Bergervoet:
On 6/15/2014 3:21 PM, Nicolaas Vroom wrote: IMO all what is written about multiverses, parallel universes, bubbles is unfalsifiable. Some things, like 2x2=4, are unfalsifiable, since they are "trivially correct". Concepts like our numbering systems 1,2,3 ets and concepts like 2*2=4 belong to our "mathematical tool box". Concepts we all agree upon. As such they are "true" by definition But surely, Nicolaas, you don't mean to apply that to all three concepts you mention?! They are in a certain sense neither falsifiable nor unfalsifiable. The biggest problem is the clear definition of each (about something we all agree....) of the three concepts. "Bubbles" are things that happen in phase transitions, we all agree on that. Bubbles happen when you boil water, to describe the behaviour of lava, but that is not what we are discusssing here. Bubbles as described in the previous text, like: " multiverse with an infinite number of bubbles, in which the " cosmic and physical properties vary from bubble to bubble. are descriptions of physical phenomena which are completely unclear to me. IMO this whole subject is speculation if it is something outside Our Universe. If the energy differences are big between the phases then the metric of space must be affected, as GR tells us and we all agree on that. I doubt if GR describes anything that happens outside our Universe. If .... that is the subject In some of those cases the metric gives us a child universe (with just an evaporating black hole left in the parent universe) since that's what the Einstein equations tell us. It's as 2x2=4. What is a child universe ? Is it falsifiable? Surely, if the fields don't include phase transitions with sufficient effect on space-time metric, then the above does not happen! We may not now be able to probe the necessary energies, but we surely are studying quantum fields (currently the quark-gluon plasma, including bubbles, droplets etc.) So in principle, at appropriately higher energies the same can be done. If anything of these processes happen as part of the evolution of our Universe (after the Big Bang) than it makes sense to discuss them. If not than you should clearly indicate that. If you are interested I have written comments about the book "The Mathematical Universe" by Max Tegmark http://users.telenet.be/nicvroom/Max.Tegmark.htm Nicolaas Vroom http://users.pandora.be/nicvroom/ |
#93
|
|||
|
|||
Facts against BB Theory
In article , Nicolaas Vroom
writes: IMO all what is written about multiverses, parallel universes, bubbles is unfalsifiable. Some things, like 2x2=4, are unfalsifiable, since they are "trivially correct". Concepts like our numbering systems 1,2,3 ets and concepts like 2*2=4 belong to our "mathematical tool box". Concepts we all agree upon. As such they are "true" by definition But surely, Nicolaas, you don't mean to apply that to all three concepts you mention?! They are in a certain sense neither falsifiable nor unfalsifiable. The biggest problem is the clear definition of each (about something we all agree....) of the three concepts. "Bubbles" are things that happen in phase transitions, we all agree on that. Bubbles happen when you boil water, to describe the behaviour of lava, but that is not what we are discusssing here. Bubbles as described in the previous text, like: " multiverse with an infinite number of bubbles, in which the " cosmic and physical properties vary from bubble to bubble. are descriptions of physical phenomena which are completely unclear to me. IMO this whole subject is speculation if it is something outside Our Universe. If the energy differences are big between the phases then the metric of space must be affected, as GR tells us and we all agree on that. I doubt if GR describes anything that happens outside our Universe. If .... that is the subject In some of those cases the metric gives us a child universe (with just an evaporating black hole left in the parent universe) since that's what the Einstein equations tell us. It's as 2x2=4. What is a child universe ? Is it falsifiable? Surely, if the fields don't include phase transitions with sufficient effect on space-time metric, then the above does not happen! We may not now be able to probe the necessary energies, but we surely are studying quantum fields (currently the quark-gluon plasma, including bubbles, droplets etc.) So in principle, at appropriately higher energies the same can be done. If anything of these processes happen as part of the evolution of our Universe (after the Big Bang) than it makes sense to discuss them. If not than you should clearly indicate that. I have quoted all of the above post because I was going to point the OP to a book which answers most or all of his questions... If you are interested I have written comments about the book "The Mathematical Universe" by Max Tegmark http://users.telenet.be/nicvroom/Max.Tegmark.htm .....but apparently he has already read it. If so, I suggest reading it again, as it really does answer all of these questions. Yes, some of it is speculative and non-mainstream, but Max is careful to point out what is consensus and what is not. Here is my review of the book, which appeared in the June 2014 issue of The Observatory: http://www.astro.multivax.de:8000/he..._universe.html |
#94
|
|||
|
|||
Facts against BB Theory
Op zaterdag 28 juni 2014 12:45:24 UTC+2 schreef Phillip Helbig:
In article , Nicolaas Vroom writes: IMO all what is written about multiverses, parallel universes, bubbles is unfalsifiable. " multiverse with an infinite number of bubbles, in which the " cosmic and physical properties vary from bubble to bubble. What is a child universe ? I have quoted all of the above post because I was going to point the OP to a book which answers most or all of his questions... If you are interested I have written comments about the book "The Mathematical Universe" by Max Tegmark http://users.telenet.be/nicvroom/Max.Tegmark.htm I have updated this document around page 120. ....but apparently he has already read it. If so, I suggest reading it again, as it really does answer all of these questions. Sorry it does not. That does not mean I do not like the book. The book is very good as a challenge for a critical mind... The books discusses clearly many possibilities, but it does show which, from all these posiblities, is right or wrong. The problem discussed is mentioned in the message by Jos Bergervoet 17 June and my reply: IMO all what is written about multiverses, parallel universes, bubbles is unfalsifiable. (or falsifiable) The biggest problem is the clear definition of each (about something we all agree....) The book does not solve these issues. Yes, some of it is speculative and non-mainstream, but Max is careful to point out what is consensus and what is not. That is correct but what does that bring you in detail? Here is my review of the book, which appeared in the June 2014 issue of The Observatory: http://www.astro.multivax.de:8000/he..._universe.html To discuss your review is a whole different discussion. Nicolaas Vroom http://users.pandora.be/nicvroom/ |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Chapt1 What is this theory #11 Atom Totality Theory replacing BigBang theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 3 | September 29th 11 08:38 PM |
How do you shut up Hagar and Sgall over Healthcare? Just the facts,nothing but the facts......... | vtcapo[_2_] | Misc | 0 | November 12th 09 12:29 PM |
MECO theory to replace black-hole theory #41 ;3rd edition book: ATOMTOTALITY (Atom Universe) THEORY | [email protected] | Astronomy Misc | 8 | May 20th 09 01:17 AM |
Farm Theory, Also Called, Spring Theory, Yard Theory And TheEvolution Of Our Universe | [email protected] | Amateur Astronomy | 3 | September 29th 08 01:11 PM |
Facts of the Universe vs the BB theory | Ralph Hertle | Misc | 3 | November 4th 07 10:37 PM |