A Space & astronomy forum. SpaceBanter.com

Go Back   Home » SpaceBanter.com forum » Astronomy and Astrophysics » Astronomy Misc
Site Map Home Authors List Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read Web Partners

Quantum 'graphity' challenges Big Bang theory



 
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old August 20th 12, 05:07 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.astro
Yousuf Khan[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,692
Default 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  
Old August 20th 12, 05:32 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.astro
7[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 54
Default 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  
Old August 20th 12, 05:53 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.astro
Sam Wormley[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 3,966
Default 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  
Old August 20th 12, 07:49 PM posted to sci.astro
dlzc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,426
Default 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  
Old August 21st 12, 06:12 AM posted to sci.physics,sci.astro
Yousuf Khan[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,692
Default 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  
Old August 21st 12, 02:49 PM posted to sci.astro
dlzc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,426
Default 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  
Old August 21st 12, 03:02 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.astro
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default 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  
Old August 21st 12, 03:04 PM posted to sci.physics,sci.astro
Brad Guth[_3_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 15,175
Default 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  
Old August 23rd 12, 04:23 PM posted to sci.astro
Yousuf Khan[_2_]
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,692
Default 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  
Old August 23rd 12, 05:38 PM posted to sci.astro
dlzc
external usenet poster
 
Posts: 1,426
Default 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

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
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


All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:45 AM.


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.