|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
Quantum 'graphity' challenges Big Bang theory
I'd be more inclined to believe their theory, if they didn't use such a
cutesy name for it. Yousuf Khan Big Bang theory under threat from quantum graphity breakthrough | Herald Sun http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/nat...-1226454428502 "Their research rests on a school of thought that has emerged recently to suggest space is made of indivisible building blocks, like atoms, that can be thought of as similar to pixels that make up images on a computer screen." |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
Quantum 'graphity' challenges Big Bang theory
Yousuf Khan wrote:
I'd be more inclined to believe their theory, if they didn't use such a cutesy name for it. Yousuf Khan Big Bang theory under threat from quantum graphity breakthrough | Herald Sun http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/nat...-under-threat- from-quantum-graphity-breakthrough/story-fncynkc6-1226454428502 "Their research rests on a school of thought that has emerged recently to suggest space is made of indivisible building blocks, like atoms, that can be thought of as similar to pixels that make up images on a computer screen." If graphity has weight, it would weigh meellions and beellions of tons and the pressure here would be formidable. Also its effect on light may be risky to predict because we can see clearly through 13.5 billions light years thickness of this material without loosing photons. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
Quantum 'graphity' challenges Big Bang theory
On 8/20/12 11:07 AM, Yousuf Khan wrote:
I'd be more inclined to believe their theory, if they didn't use such a cutesy name for it. Yousuf Khan Big Bang theory under threat from quantum graphity breakthrough | Herald Sun http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/nat...-1226454428502 "Their research rests on a school of thought that has emerged recently to suggest space is made of indivisible building blocks, like atoms, that can be thought of as similar to pixels that make up images on a computer screen." I wonder how the new theory accounts for the CMB spectrum. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
Quantum 'graphity' challenges Big Bang theory
Dear Yousuf Khan:
On Monday, August 20, 2012 9:07:57 AM UTC-7, Yousuf Khan wrote: I'd be more inclined to believe their theory, if they didn't use such a cutesy name for it. Big Bang theory under threat from quantum graphity breakthrough | Herald Sun http://arxiv.org/abs/1203.5367 Give them plenty of rope... David A. Smith |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
Quantum 'graphity' challenges Big Bang theory
On 20/08/2012 12:53 PM, Sam Wormley wrote:
On 8/20/12 11:07 AM, Yousuf Khan wrote: I'd be more inclined to believe their theory, if they didn't use such a cutesy name for it. Yousuf Khan Big Bang theory under threat from quantum graphity breakthrough | Herald Sun http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/nat...-1226454428502 "Their research rests on a school of thought that has emerged recently to suggest space is made of indivisible building blocks, like atoms, that can be thought of as similar to pixels that make up images on a computer screen." I wonder how the new theory accounts for the CMB spectrum. I'd like to know something more basic, if the universe is just a bunch of ice crystallizing from water, then why is it expanding? When most things crystallize into a solid they contract. Yousuf Khan |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
Quantum 'graphity' challenges Big Bang theory
Dear Yousuf Khan:
On Monday, August 20, 2012 10:12:12 PM UTC-7, Yousuf Khan wrote: .... I'd like to know something more basic, if the universe is just a bunch of ice crystallizing from water, then why is it expanding? When most things crystallize into a solid they contract. Ice and most rock don't, they get less dense. Else we'd be standing on molten lava now, and the Titanic would have made it to port safely. However, if you consider "Universal expansion" can be exactly duplicated by simply speeding up clocks everywhere *now*, then the Universe is not expanding... we are all shrinking to the tune of a constant c. David A. Smith |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
Quantum 'graphity' challenges Big Bang theory
On Aug 20, 9:32*am, 7
email_at_www_at_enemygadgets_dot_...@enemygadgets .com wrote: Yousuf Khan wrote: I'd be more inclined to believe their theory, if they didn't use such a cutesy name for it. Yousuf Khan Big Bang theory under threat from quantum graphity breakthrough | Herald Sun http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/nat...-under-threat- from-quantum-graphity-breakthrough/story-fncynkc6-1226454428502 "Their research rests on a school of thought that has emerged recently to suggest space is made of indivisible building blocks, like atoms, that can be thought of as similar to pixels that make up images on a computer screen." If graphity has weight, it would weigh meellions and beellions of tons and the pressure here would be formidable. Also its effect on light may be risky to predict because we can see clearly through 13.5 billions light years thickness of this material without loosing photons. Exactly, it's seriously weird stuff. Something is allowing the propagation or relay of light without any loss of its energy, which as an individual photon may not actually have to move. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
Quantum 'graphity' challenges Big Bang theory
On Aug 20, 10:12*pm, Yousuf Khan wrote:
On 20/08/2012 12:53 PM, Sam Wormley wrote: On 8/20/12 11:07 AM, Yousuf Khan wrote: I'd be more inclined to believe their theory, if they didn't use such a cutesy name for it. Yousuf Khan Big Bang theory under threat from quantum graphity breakthrough | Herald Sun http://www.heraldsun.com.au/news/nat...ry-under-threa.... "Their research rests on a school of thought that has emerged recently to suggest space is made of indivisible building blocks, like atoms, that can be thought of as similar to pixels that make up images on a computer screen." I wonder how the new theory accounts for the CMB spectrum. I'd like to know something more basic, if the universe is just a bunch of ice crystallizing from water, then why is it expanding? When most things crystallize into a solid they contract. * * * * Yousuf Khan Most of what makes up our universe is diamagnetic, and otherwise the growing volume of helium doesn't bind with anything. |
#9
|
|||
|
|||
Quantum 'graphity' challenges Big Bang theory
On 21/08/2012 9:49 AM, dlzc wrote:
Dear Yousuf Khan: On Monday, August 20, 2012 10:12:12 PM UTC-7, Yousuf Khan wrote: ... I'd like to know something more basic, if the universe is just a bunch of ice crystallizing from water, then why is it expanding? When most things crystallize into a solid they contract. Ice and most rock don't, they get less dense. Else we'd be standing on molten lava now, and the Titanic would have made it to port safely. Although ice has this weird property, where the solid form is lighter than the liquid form. In the case of rock, solid crustal rock is usually floating on top of a denser liquid mantle rock of different composition. However, if you consider "Universal expansion" can be exactly duplicated by simply speeding up clocks everywhere *now*, then the Universe is not expanding... we are all shrinking to the tune of a constant c. So you're saying that the liquid form of the universe in which all of the crystallized form is floating is starting to slow down and crystallize too? Yousuf Khan |
#10
|
|||
|
|||
Quantum 'graphity' challenges Big Bang theory
Dear Yousuf Khan:
On Thursday, August 23, 2012 8:23:14 AM UTC-7, Yousuf Khan wrote: On 21/08/2012 9:49 AM, dlzc wrote: On Monday, August 20, 2012 10:12:12 PM UTC-7, Yousuf Khan wrote: ... I'd like to know something more basic, if the universe is just a bunch of ice crystallizing from water, then why is it expanding? When most things crystallize into a solid they contract. Ice and most rock don't, they get less dense. Else we'd be standing on molten lava now, and the Titanic would have made it to port safely. Although ice has this weird property, where the solid form is lighter than the liquid form. In the case of rock, solid crustal rock is usually floating on top of a denser liquid mantle rock of different composition. Except that lava flows harden on the outside, and even if you cool a small chunk to a hard state, the hard chunk floats, not sinks. If this is just dissolved gases that cannot make it out of the solid matrix, fine. However, if you consider "Universal expansion" can be exactly duplicated by simply speeding up clocks everywhere *now*, then the Universe is not expanding... we are all shrinking to the tune of a constant c. So you're saying that the liquid form of the universe in which all of the crystallized form is floating is starting to slow down and crystallize too? No, I'm simply saying that this one premise is not quite as flawed as you had indicated. I don't get how they start out claiming "emergent properties" (which I agree with), yet end up with "a continuum with granularity" (which sounds like BS). That is where I see a flaw. It appears like they beat the problem statement into a mathematical statement they knew how to solve. David A. Smith |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
5th ed. book, Chapt.1 What is this Theory? ; #6; ATOM TOTALITY (AtomUniverse) replaces Big Bang theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 5 | September 26th 11 07:35 AM |
Chapt. 3; shadow-effect threatens the Big Bang theory #311 AtomTotality theory | Archimedes Plutonium[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 10 | December 22nd 10 07:46 AM |
Magnetar challenges stellar black hole theory | Yousuf Khan[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 0 | August 19th 10 09:35 PM |
Redshift and Microwave radiation favor Atom Totality and disfavorBig Bang #9; ATOM TOTALITY (Atom Universe) theory; replaces Big Bang theory | Net-Teams, | Astronomy Misc | 1 | May 31st 10 05:19 PM |
Question about quantum fluctuation and the big bang | Gautam Majumdar[_2_] | Astronomy Misc | 1 | June 7th 08 01:33 AM |