|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#1
|
|||
|
|||
A steady-state model of the universe by Albert Einstein
For a copy of this document select this:
http://arxiv.org/abs/1402.0132 IMO the most interesting part are the following sentences: In the final part of the manuscript, Einstein proposes a mechanism to allow the density of matter remain constant in a universe of expanding radius - namely, the continuous formation of matter from empty space: " If one considers a physically bounded volume, particles of matter will be continually leaving it. For the density to remain constant, new particles of matter must be continually formed in the volume from space." IMO this is a physical difficult problem. The problem implies that constantly particles of the periodic table are created out of nothing such that the density at large remains constant. This is specific problematic because the density at smaller scales could be fluctuating. I specific write physical problem because I think this is not a mathematical problem. The issue at large is the evolution of the universe. How did it start (if there is a start) and how will it end (if there is an end) and which are the processes in between. All of this is physics. This morning I observed ducks landing in a pond. When a duck lands it generates roughly 5 waves with a distance of roughly 2 meters. The waves propagete outwards and the distance increases to 10 meters and the height deminishes. (all estimates). The issue is that this physical phenomena is "identical" as the lightsignals received from identical supernova's which "duration" is a function of distance. The point is the this increased "duration" is explained as expansion of space (which also requires a more physical explanation) All phylosophical thoughts... Nicolaas Vroom. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
A steady-state model of the universe by Albert Einstein
In article , Nicolaas Vroom
writes: http://arxiv.org/abs/1402.0132 Interesting. In the final part of the manuscript, Einstein proposes a mechanism to allow the density of matter remain constant in a universe of expanding radius - namely, the continuous formation of matter from empty space: " If one considers a physically bounded volume, particles of matter will be continually leaving it. For the density to remain constant, new particles of matter must be continually formed in the volume from space." IMO this is a physical difficult problem. The problem implies that constantly particles of the periodic table are created out of nothing such that the density at large remains constant. Allow me to say that this of course has been debated in the context of the steady-state theory of Bondi, Gold and Hoyle. The steady-state theory has been ruled out for other reasons. (It was a good theory in that it made testable predictions different from those of other theories.) However, as Hoyle pointed out, continuous creation is in principle something which could be understood based on study of the current universe and is perhaps a priori less implausible than creating the entire universe at once in the big bang. |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
A steady-state model of the universe by Albert Einstein
On 3/12/14, 5:02 PM, Phillip Helbig---undress to reply wrote:
Allow me to say that this of course has been debated in the context of the steady-state theory of Bondi, Gold and Hoyle. The steady-state theory has been ruled out for other reasons. (It was a good theory in that it made testable predictions different from those of other theories.) However, as Hoyle pointed out, continuous creation is in principle something which could be understood based on study of the current universe and is perhaps a priori less implausible than creating the entire universe at once in the big bang. 'less implausible' but current thinking appears to be locked into 'creating the entire universe at once in the big bang' in the context of inflationary theory apparently substantiated by related gravitational B fields perturbing the First Light CMBR as presented in: March 17th Press Conference on Major Discovery at Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics It is remarkable how scientists are driven by philosophical inclinations a la Einstein and Lemaitre. |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
A steady-state model of the universe by Albert Einstein
In article , "Richard D. Saam"
writes: On 3/12/14, 5:02 PM, Phillip Helbig---undress to reply wrote: Allow me to say that this of course has been debated in the context of the steady-state theory of Bondi, Gold and Hoyle. The steady-state theory has been ruled out for other reasons. (It was a good theory in that it made testable predictions different from those of other theories.) However, as Hoyle pointed out, continuous creation is in principle something which could be understood based on study of the current universe and is perhaps a priori less implausible than creating the entire universe at once in the big bang. 'less implausible' but current thinking appears to be locked into 'creating the entire universe at once in the big bang' in the context of inflationary theory apparently substantiated by related gravitational B fields perturbing the First Light CMBR as presented in: March 17th Press Conference on Major Discovery at Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics It is remarkable how scientists are driven by philosophical inclinations a la Einstein and Lemaitre. There are few, if any, cosmologists who are "locked into" some mode of thinking and are thus not able to see the "truth". This characterization is so wrong one can't even call it a caricature. What has changed in the last couple of decades in cosmology is that it is now a data-driven science. 60 years ago, it was easy to come up with an arm-chair theory which agreed with all the known observations in cosmology, since there were only a couple. That is no longer the case today. Any theories still alive match ALL the observational data, which is a HUGE requirement. The burden of proof is on the critic to come up with a theory at least as powerful. The primordial B-mode polarization you are referring to is in fact a prediction of inflation. A good theory should make predictions, ideally of things which won't be observable until some time in the future. If the predictions are confirmed, then the theory looks more plausible. A HUGE amount of work went into the detection of the primordial B-mode polarization. It is really an insult to the dedication and hard work of these people to claim that they are "locked in". No, quite the opposite: they checked and double checked to make sure that the data really say what they appear to say. There can be no question of them being "locked in". |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
A steady-state model of the universe by Albert Einstein
In article , Phillip
Helbig---undress to reply writes: The primordial B-mode polarization you are referring to is in fact a prediction of inflation. A good theory should make predictions, ideally of things which won't be observable until some time in the future. If the predictions are confirmed, then the theory looks more plausible. A HUGE amount of work went into the detection of the primordial B-mode polarization. It is really an insult to the dedication and hard work of these people to claim that they are "locked in". No, quite the opposite: they checked and double checked to make sure that the data really say what they appear to say. There can be no question of them being "locked in". Just to clarify he BICEP2 measured R (tensor-to-scalar ratio) to be about 0.2, with a reasonably small error bar. Planck (though keep in mind that all the Planck data, especially the polarization data, haven't been released yet) has an upper limit of (IIRC) 0.11. All other measurements, and there are many, are upper limits. So, if anything the expectation of the BICEP2 folks was to get an upper limit, though perhaps the best one yet. The result was thus not expected---quite the opposite, it was something of a surprise. (The theoretical expectation was to detect R 0 at some point, but no-one knew what the precise value would be.) As Sagan said, extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence, so you can be sure this result was checked even more than is usually the case (which is a lot). |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
A steady-state model of the universe by Albert Einstein
On 3/31/14, 2:21 AM, Phillip Helbig---undress to reply wrote:
A HUGE amount of work went into the detection of the primordial B-mode polarization. It is really an insult to the dedication and hard work of these people to claim that they are "locked in". No, quite the opposite: they checked and double checked to make sure that the data really say what they appear to say. There can be no question of them being "locked in". I watched the March 17th Press Conference on Major Discovery at Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics There is no doubt in the 'the dedication and hard work of these people' in obtaining the 'primordial B-mode polarization'. But the team made it clear to await the results of many other concurrent studies. After the presentation, Guth from the front row did some 'arm-chairing' in speculating this data referred to a multiverse concept. A "locked in" impression was given. Yes, the data indicates that a universe proceeding from a small high energy state to present is confirmed but it is too early to 'a priori' negate in toto 'continuous creation' as Hoyle pointed out. The next 5 year dark energy survey may provide additional science. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
A steady-state model of the universe by Albert Einstein
In article , "Richard D. Saam"
writes: I watched the March 17th Press Conference on Major Discovery at Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics Keep in mind that press conferences are kabuki theatre. :-) There is no doubt in the 'the dedication and hard work of these people' in obtaining the 'primordial B-mode polarization'. But the team made it clear to await the results of many other concurrent studies. Of course. That's the opposite of being locked in to some interpretation. Rather, they want to see if other observations will confirm their results or disagree with them. After the presentation, Guth from the front row did some 'arm-chairing' in speculating this data referred to a multiverse concept. A "locked in" impression was given. One has to see the chain of logic. The primordial B-mode polarization is a fairly robust prediction of inflation. Linde, and later Guth, realized that inflation is more easily realized, if not only possible, in the form of "eternal inflation", which more or less implies a multiverse. So, assuming the second statement is true (it has been consensus for a long time---and no, "consensus" doesn't mean "locked in"), then the first statement (detection) implies the multiverse, albeit via the intermediary of eternal inflation. Yes, the data indicates that a universe proceeding from a small high energy state to present is confirmed but it is too early to 'a priori' negate in toto 'continuous creation' as Hoyle pointed out. I don't see what you're getting at. In many respects, the inflationary phase is quite similar to the steady-state theory. I just read Martin Harwit's new book, where he quotes from Lightman's book of interviews. Dennis Sciama recalls lunch with Guth and remarks that Guth's inflation is essentially the steady-state theory, and Guth says "What's the steady-state theory?" |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
THE ALBERT EINSTEIN INSTITUTE REFUTES ALBERT EINSTEIN | Tonico | Astronomy Misc | 0 | April 1st 12 01:21 PM |
state university model import model management model minority modeltrain shows mom | cutielittle | Astronomy Misc | 0 | November 16th 08 10:56 PM |
Some parts of a Steady State Universe may still be true. | The Flavored Coffee Guy | Misc | 13 | January 13th 08 11:23 PM |
OBIT: Hermann Bondi, father of the "Steady-State Universe", dead at 85 | OM | History | 13 | September 22nd 05 08:19 AM |