Jump to content

Dubbelosix

Senior Members
  • Posts

    518
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Dubbelosix

  1. 5 hours ago, Stclaim said:

    We seem to have a lot of 'evidence' of the universe being 13.8 billion years old, with some people believing it could be younger. Are we talking about the age of the matter in the universe, or the age of the Universe.

    When the BB occurred time did not exist. Time began some period after BB but the Universe came into existence as BB occurred.

    If the originating stuff that created(?) BB was spinning then the universe would not be spherical. Possibly like a spiral? Or even donut shaped. Or could it be spherical but with an area of nothingness surrounding the place where the BB originated as all the matter was ejected?

     

    I'm being devils advocate to start discussions. Please don't shoot me down in flames because I am not an expert in the field.

    We are in fact talking about how long radiation has to be smeared over space due to inflation. In my opinion, there is conflicting evidence in cosmology about what all seems to indicate, an age discrepancy. 

  2. On 26/10/2017 at 2:27 PM, dimreepr said:

    A couple of recent threads, I've commented in, suggests the answer to this question is not obvious, so

    Let's discuss... 

    Total inner peace relies on (self-reliance) and (spiritual guidence) ... [only through] a coherent set of beliefs that cause or create a situation in inner peace is justified through the moral act.

     without moral act in an individual, there is no concern about others, let alone yours.

  3. 1 hour ago, Dubbelosix said:

    They are. Give me a situation in relativity that doesn't involve special flat cases where energy or matter does not contribute to space time background distortion?

     

    No such matrix exists. And in fact, to add for flavor, gravity is non-vanishing, no matter what location a physical object exists in. The same situation was found in the weak equivalence principle and indistinguishable situations are simply, non-trivial, if 

    1) the physics has associations with the ascribed model and that

     

    2) Relativity cannot deal with curvature without matter or energy. Give me a situation it can and prove me wrong. 

    This is lighter talk. I like this, we have/..... what is you guys call it, chillaxing?

    Except for one exception... I think there are fundamental reasons why the stress energy tensor should vanish for point particles. I am beginning to wonder whether this is true for a divergence problem solution, that is, infinities could be avoided if (and only if) we reverse the relativistic rules. I noticed correlations: All three theories of physics forbids point particles, they are:

     

     

    1) Phase space does not allow them -  von Neumann showed that points cannot exist definitive, as they would be smeared over space, which early literature called a Planck cell. 

     

    2) They are forbidden by singularities in relativity as well, they would have infinite curvature, this cannot be right. 

     

    3) They are finally even unphysical in classical theory. If you reduce a particles radius to zero, it has infinite energy. 

     

     

    These are good reasons to suggest the gravitational field should vanish in these extremes instead of assuming they take on infinite values in renormalization theory. 

     

     

     

     

     

     

    You could call it, the ''new aged geometry''

    If where infinities show up and are reduced to zero somehow requires

     

    1) a new theory in how to give boundary to the unphysical situations

     

    2) Infinities are actually unphysical, no one has ever measured one. 

  4. 23 hours ago, timeuntotime said:

    Hi,

    I'm a 26 year old mom and I'm going back to school since my children are now at school age. I know that I would like to go into science and am enrolling in online courses. Biology and Physics are the two I'm most interested in.. It's a boon to be able to attend classes online, but obviously it has it's drawbacks. I'm uncertain what courses I should take and interested in any other insight you might want to offer. Thanks!

     

     

    can you get any home tutoring? 

  5. yes, the government was the root of initial conspiracy borne situations, yet those accusations held credible truth as the freedom act came into place.

    The government hid the existence of the countries most advanced base testing only the most updated craft, in total secrecy... also known as area 51 and only in court they had been forced to admit its existence.

     

    There have been contaminaton leaks, there has been an overcrowding of black people vs. white people in the a jail term... I know where america is heading... just the way of the old roman empire. It will fall because of an intrinsic instability, within the next 50 years as my upper limit 

    These black budgets, I have estimated must come to about 20 billion in total. The governmnet has admitted about a fourth of those disappearances, and guess when... a day before the 9/11 attacks RIP. 

    The government has even had secret programs in which they have infected some of their public. To determine whether intentional, is not an issue with me. I know it was. 

    12 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

    Is it "the government", really? Or is it what the uber-wealthy who abuse the process for their gain have done to "the government"? 

    Many governments have fantastic social programs that express how much the represented citizens care about themselves and each other. In Trump's US, it's becoming very clear "they really don't care about us", and are in the process of making themselves wealthier while taking it from the "us" they only claim to care about.

    Repeal and replace with nothing. It's the Trump modus operandi.

    and yet... very well said. I agree with the latter 100%

  6. neither, the idea of supporting rangers or celtic is akin to supporting burning at the stake or beheading the blameless. About time scotland woke up to the real struggle of the victorians. 

     

    but hey back then, you could get a hold of all sorts of drugs, yet today, most of them are banned. Times change, and the world of sports will never go away, but it will mature over the next 100 years or more. 

    Trump would make an excellent football stadium, riddle me why?

    8 minutes ago, John Cuthber said:

    We call ourselves Great- what does that say about us?

    .

    Alexander the great, why was he called such?

    In constrast, why was the first tsar of russia called the ''terrible''

    Conflict the two, with their actions, and come back to me. 

  7. yes. 

    Do you want some examples?

    We are the only country in the world, to be called great. 

    Scotland, where I live, was recently considered the most tolerant place in the world for diversity.

     

    Yet I am English, yet I am british. yet I am roman, scandinavian... where do we stop? :P

     

    Oh and people from my region, are likely to have about 3% unknown correlations to genetic diversity, probably tribes that died out before any historical record.

    my region = yorkshire originally

     

  8. To us mostly, because not trying to be big headed, but many nations look up to our tolerance for the expression of life, while in America, its being slowly taken away, but paradoxically, in an efficient manner. :(

    I was supposed to move to america and I WANTED to become a politician, not to gain power, but whatever power I was landed with, i was going to make use to the people. But, it doesn't seem I will get across the pond this year. 

  9. he claimed he had a ''small loan'' which was actually a million pounds. it's evidence the man has no social understanding of the struggle. He (was) the UK's (almost analogue) of David Cameron who attacked the poor in britain and was documented, to loose many lives under his recent regime through the acts of suicide... people now, into the near thousand catagory. 

    The world is sick to the bone. 

     

    My country has problems, and while the politicians appear mostly right, they are not winning their ultimate agenda... and why? It's because our country does not have a limitation in the law systems like america has and continues to be inflicted by (plus) a faulty and antiquated legal system which appears to be... flexible, despite any fundamental amendments given to the people. 

     

    Either Trump needs challenged, or the government does, for allowing him to violate your constitutional rights, in such a blatant and obvious culture of lawless in utter and upmost impunity. 

  10. 31 minutes ago, Phi for All said:

    I think this is the part that resonates with Trump supporters. It's also where he skews the information he pushes.

    This phrase assumes we weren't negotiating on our own terms to begin with. It assumes the parts the WH disagrees with are more important than what the agreement does for us as a whole. It's a favorite tactic of propaganda called Begging the Question. It's the same way, during his campaign, he forced the spectre of crime on the voters at a time when it was overall as low as it had ever been.

    This administration has given up our seat at the table for a LOT of modern discussion, and it's clear that many countries no longer look to the US for guidance because of it. Trump has made it quite clear that he doesn't look for alliances so much as limited partners who follow his lead in everything. These former friends will find their way with other allies, while Trump aligns us closer to the ruthless ideologies and agendas of Putin and Asaad. 

    Tweeting is entertainment, like the news has become entertainment, all designed to keep you reading/watching/listening. When rational people present rational solutions that will produce better results for everyone, I think their voices are being drowned out because sometimes the smartest thing to do (and actually the most conservative) is boring, unentertaining, and ultimately un-clickworthy. Oh wow, folks are getting along, nobody starving, life better for all, it's all just so... uncontroversial.

    Well said.

    3 minutes ago, Ten oz said:

    I think many Trump supporters have their own individual concept of "our own". I am not under the impression by "our own" they mean U.S. Citizens broadly. That is part of the reason they are so dismissive about Russia's interference in the Election. 

     

     

    The only part most Trump supporters agree on which is their own, is their guns under the pillow or wherever. it's an insipid, psychological disorder of an entire nation, caused not without reason. The government has given plenty citizens to realize, they don't really care about us. We are the cattle, that bring in money, in death do us part. 

  11. 5 hours ago, swansont said:

    No, I am not denying that scattering is scattering. I am denying that refraction is scattering, and I have explained why several times.  When light travels further through a material, you get more scattering. The scattering takes place at a particular point along the path. We do not get blue light from Rayleigh scattering from one place in the sky. We get it from all of the sky.

    Refraction does not behave like that. Do you deny this?

    measuring how scattering is linked to non-commutivity is the way. 

    3 hours ago, Strange said:

    Please stop this ridiculous straw man argument. 

    Best not to answer questions you know are troll bait, act professional show no bias and skip the questions that hold no substance. This way, you defeat them, successfully. 

    I just gave up on another site, just today, because two posters were clearly making stuff up as they went along, even though I gave precious hours out my time to entertain them . 

     

  12. They are. Give me a situation in relativity that doesn't involve special flat cases where energy or matter does not contribute to space time background distortion?

     

    No such matrix exists. And in fact, to add for flavor, gravity is non-vanishing, no matter what location a physical object exists in. The same situation was found in the weak equivalence principle and indistinguishable situations are simply, non-trivial, if 

    1) the physics has associations with the ascribed model and that

     

    2) Relativity cannot deal with curvature without matter or energy. Give me a situation it can and prove me wrong. 

    This is lighter talk. I like this, we have/..... what is you guys call it, chillaxing?

  13. Well, it isn't.

     

    The issue is non-trivial, if you have any quantity of matter or energy, the stress energy tensor has to be non-zero. 

    But this is purely educational and actually, is good. 

    On 06/11/2017 at 6:58 PM, interested said:

    I think Swansont is big enough to answer the question him self, without your assistance.

    Ref quantum fluctuations and citations if you google the subject I dont know which link to post for you so I suggest you google it your self

    Mind you, you are not making things easy on yourself...

     

    ..alas, neither am I, but guess what,  I am in your words, ''big enough'' to answer questions myself. The problem is, you can't... you are not coherent at all and I am struggling my friend. 

  14. 1 hour ago, Strange said:

    Nope. 

    They are.

    There is no difference (again) between the effects of gravity and the presence of matter or energy. This means even for a single particle, must exert a force albeit very small. Any presence of the stress energy tensor, is non-zero when dealing with particles, it does not vanish. All forms of energy affect the vacuum. 

  15. Yes it was aimed at your post, I wondered if you were hinting that time is not an obervable, and I WOULD like to challenge this contention, especially the poster boy Julian Barbour, who is convinced time does not exist and holds that time is not an observable in physics. What he actually fails to tell you it has to be under the treatment of relativity and actually, his timeless universe makes no sense in relativity. 

    In fact, time in relativity is* relative, not absent, from first principles. These laws cannot fundamentally change unless you have a Lorentz symmetry breakdown. 

    is* fixed

     

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.