MJ kihara
-
Posts
226 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Events
Posts posted by MJ kihara
-
-
4 hours ago, AbstractDreamer said:
You're very wrong. Coordinates are sufficient for comparison. 2<3. Two is less than Three. You don't need any units of meters, seconds, degrees or apples, square roots or coloured pixels.
Wrong again. The number of coloured pixels are the same in both, even if you use a metric of number of coloured pixels. Count them. There are 4 pixels in both.
The difference between the pixels in both vertical and horiztonal direction are also the same. There are two pixels in the vertical direction for both, and 2 pixels in the horizontal directions for both.
Your mistake is assuming the grid lines have significance. They dont. Only the numbers on the axes have meaning.
Labelling with units is irrelevant. Which number is bigger? The number 2 or the number 3?
You have to establish common ground for arguments...i.e which number base are you using when comparing 2 and 3.
0 -
On 8/25/2023 at 6:46 PM, AbstractDreamer said:
Here's a neat trick. Which green polygon has greater volume?
What about the scale factor?
If the green polygon represent the universe,then they are two different universes..with different metrics...meaning you are making wrong volume comparison.
0 -
On 8/12/2023 at 12:53 AM, Genady said:
Here is how the masters explained it, from Misner, Thorne, Wheeler, Gravitation, p. 823.
For clarification, r=0 is the BH center, r=2M is the BH event horizon.
I think we need to re-axamine nature of time...the issue of time reversal should not be completely concluded on observations based on observable universe alone,it's known dark matter and dark energy make the largest part of the universe.
Fundamental understanding of time,what it is and it's origin should be clarified before using time as the reason to claim 'not anything' can escape from a blackhole.
0 -
4 hours ago, tmdarkmatter said:
I also still do not understand why the image of the light coming from this galaxy far away would not be more similar to a galaxy at a distance of 2.8 billion light years or even closer, because this light never was 13.5 billion light years away from us
Quantum of light is photon...the object in the image is perceived as of when that object emitted, reflected e.t.c those photons..you see the sun as when those photons in sunlight were emitted roughly 8 minutes ago therefore,if you see a galaxy that is 7 billion years older it mean the photons your detecting were emitted or came from the galaxy 7 billion years ago...in those 7 billion years where you are present( the position in the universe) in our galaxy was much closer to that galaxy position.As the photons were moving from that galaxy to your present position the space was expanding and since the speed of light(photon) is constant,therefore,it had to cover a larger distance to reach your present position,to cover or move a certain distance it's work done,therefore,those photons became less energetic i.e red shifted..at the same time the space within the photons wavelength is expanding,therefore,also contributing to red shift phenomenon.
If the universe was static those photon could have passed your position long time ago...meaning perceiving the past could have been much difficult,since we can't be able to chase after the light 'nothing moves faster than speed of light'.
0 -
2 hours ago, Genady said:
What happens is, the geometry of the space changes.
As the geometry changes does the geometry of an atom change?
Assuming we measured hydrogen geometry 7 billion years ago is it similar to today's hydrogen geometry?
Are atoms part of space?
2 hours ago, Genady said:Space does not have "size", to start with. Also, space does not have identity to be "the same" or not.
What is that that doesn't have identity or size?...I thought when you are referring to size their is aspects of dimensions and when their is dimensions there is geometry.
0 -
On 6/22/2023 at 4:46 AM, Mordred said:
encountered the following paper while doing research on Big Bang nucleosynthesis. I was looking at how the PMNS mixing matrix was developed when I came across the following
this article seems to imply that leptogenesis and subsequently Baryogenesis can be explained via the Higgs seesaw via the Right hand neutrino mixing angles. I question the accuracy of this claim so will be examining it further but felt posting here may interest other members as well.
Allow me...'alternative/other idea'...the claim has substance...consider this,neutrino to be it's own anti-particle therefore, antineutrino in this case will be right hand neutrino which turns to heavy right hand neutrino that immediately decays to an electron...How? What about not detecting neutrinoless double beta decay? This is possible because of quantum fluctuations (local anisotropies), therefore,as neutrino are formed, given they are their own anti-particle, they fail to annihilate themselves since local anisotropies cause them to oscillate away from initial mass...meaning that also antineutrino formed(which is also it's own anti particle i.e it is neutrino) will oscillate away from it's intial mass state....the rate of oscillation in this case will be different because local anisotropies (quantum fluctuations) it's profound in every direction.
Assuming during leptogenesis epoch local anisotropies (quantum fluctuations) of large magnitudes were dominant.Therefore,we have a situation whereby majorana neutrino gain Dirac mass term through quantum fluctuations... However it become difficult today to detect neutrinoless double decay because the magnitude of local anisotropies (quantum fluctuations) has significantly reduced due to expansion of the universe.
0 -
3 hours ago, zapatos said:
So when someone says "Even light cannot escape!", I think "WOW! That is AMAZING!!" Light ALWAYS escapes!! (in my experience) "The amount of gravity in a black hole must be something really extreme. And as an afterthought, I guess that is why it is called 'black'."
That was exactly what I thought when i first came across that expression...it gave me the urge to understand more...up to now...I had to spend seven year to go through internet materials to the level of coming up with a theory that someone of nature...layman...when he reads it to spend much less time to internalize the issues of gravity....and I think it works,since when I start short conversations with my friends(you know if am a layman...then they are strawmen) here about it and afterwards they start asking interesting questions some at par with question I see across... reasonable than from crackpots.
3 hours ago, md65536 said:I think it's useful for beginners to understand that BHs involve spacetime curvature, and I think it's unlikely that anyone who already understands is going to be misled by the word "even".
Curvature-from my perspective come with geometric explanations that can be difficult to relate to initially to nature, for beginners.for instance relating right triangles with spacetime intervals,yet when i look at the skies(space) i don't see triangles...and further complicating things when it come to time dilation and length contraction....the beginner heads(of course depending on how hard it is) start spinning alot...I was once in such situations esp with just introductory elementary physics background...and it feels embarrassing sometimes to know they are critical issues of nature and universe that someone can't comprehend and yet it seem obvious to others(physicist).
3 hours ago, Genady said:Anyway, I think this phrase is just a popular cliché. I've conducted a little experiment five minutes ago. I've asked ChatGPT for a short description of black hole. Of course, its answer represents common patterns in these descriptions. And the first sentence is,
What does it says about about spacetime curvature?
0 -
26 minutes ago, StringJunky said:
He's asking about a particular word usage, not the subject itself.
got it.
50 minutes ago, MJ kihara said:2 hours ago, exchemist said:Experience: people that can't communicate coherently often can't think coherently, I have found.
What's your area of expertise? If your a doctor I would want to know about that from you...having attitudes and stereotyping is not thinking coherently....you haven't talked anything substantial about light escaping from blackhole or are you coming up with a new way to communicate concept of relativity that am not deciphering...I need help here pliz...😂.
This was a follow up for-exchemist comment.
28 minutes ago, Genady said:As I said here, https://www.scienceforums.net/topic/132131-why-even-light/?do=findComment&comment=1246405,
"A powered spacecraft, a ladder, a tower, a rope hanging from an orbiting spacecraft, etc."
In such a case does the Blackhole in question have a singularity?
0 -
1 hour ago, exchemist said:
Experience: people that can't communicate coherently often can't think coherently, I have found.
What's your area of expertise? If your a doctor I would want to know about that from you...having attitudes and stereotyping is not thinking coherently....you haven't talked anything substantial about light escaping from blackhole or are you coming up with a new way to communicate concept of relativity that am not deciphering...I need help here pliz...😂.
6 hours ago, Genady said:If this is the case, then the comparison to light is simply wrong, because one does not need a high velocity to escape a Newtonian BH. One could just crawl out of it.
How is it possible to crawl out of a Blackhole...of course Newtonian BH?
0 -
2 minutes ago, exchemist said:
😀You are not thinking clearly here. "Even light" says nothing whatsoever about the permanence or otherwise of black holes. Or, if you think it does, you need to explain why you think it says that, since it is far from obvious.
Lots of misunderstanding,it like you are fighting invisible enemy.
6 minutes ago, exchemist said:A good tip for clear thinking and expression is to communicate in complete sentences, not in half sentences trailing off with "........... ". That way lies slack thinking and, if you're not jolly careful, pet theories.😀
When you see that ' ...' '....' associate it with me..🤗 its the way my neurons are firing. This one "........." for slack thinking you should tell me/us how you came up with it.
Otherwise brain do the thinking... communication and sentences don't think, saying communication and sentence think is bad science (BS).
0 -
2 minutes ago, exchemist said:
Thinking straight involves well-defined ideas, that can be clearly expressed, and which are connected in a coherent way.
At every phase in history there seems to be a well defined coherent way of thinking for the majority of people at that particular phase of history only later to be realised that there were hidden layers of ideas within those coherence.
7 hours ago, Danijel Gorupec said:Hmm... I was supposing that 'not even light' is simply used to explain why it is called a 'black' hole. Most of the time, however, I guess, the phrase is just repeated without much thinking.... maybe we should not overthink it either.
I tried to overthink about that phrase when I came across it to understand it, it lead me to alot of things... sometimes even ambiguous phrases can lead to deeper meaning when you try to search for clarity out of those phrases...to me 'even light' seemed to emphasize the indestructible nature of Blackhole to say the least,this gave me the urge to over think about it to go beyond the established facts.
0 -
6 hours ago, exchemist said:
Are you saying people who can’t think straight may end up with pet theories?
What is thinking straight? It depend on the range of thinking,the narrower the range it is,the straighter it appears,that is what I think.
3 hours ago, Genady said:How about "nothing gets out ..."?
I totally agree with this.... yeah atleast nothing gets out.
0 -
3 minutes ago, Genady said:
It is clear.
It can be clearly understood by a layman.
Therefore, there is no such a room.
I do.
I know why it doesn't escape.
It is simple and consistent.
There are no ambiguities.
This is what has happened in your case, I assume.
Talking past each other...we are not in speculation section I could have asked you further questions and provided my arguments to clarify...of which so far am not near...am not intending to hijack the thread... personally am not a fun of pets but I will learn to...so that I learn how to dress them to be presentable.
On 7/31/2023 at 11:30 PM, Genady said:as if light is expected to escape from everything and everywhere?
What is the difference between escaping and emission..in your context?
0 -
On 7/31/2023 at 11:30 PM, Genady said:
What is it about light that if IT cannot escape then NOTHING can? (I am not asking about the physics of it,
When the science behind the reasons is not clear esp in a form that can also be clearly understood by a layman it creates a room for ambiguous terms and phrases to be used.
If you have the science behind it you would really know why it doesn't escape...which on itself will really lead you to something wonderful,that is,what escape from the Blackhole..... simplicity and consistency in scientific explanations leads to reduction in ambiguities....sometime when you try to bring clarity you end up with a pet theory.0 -
Massive graviton decays to massless spin 2 spacetime particles which are 'virtual', that form gravitational waves as they move at the speed of light causing disturbances in spacetime fabric and forming it.
You don't get graviton in gravitation waves nor do you get it in tides...tides are good example to study effect of gravitation.
Want to detect graviton go to super massive bodies e.g blackholes,neutrons stars or produce microblackoles.
I think there is confusion between gravitons and spacetime particles that majority here will say don't exist.
0 -
The idea of 'tired light' I happen to get along with it and i think it's deeper than it appears/sounds since it requires re-evaluation of photon properties and the concept of electromagnetism.... However the issue of replacing cosmological constant with a constant accounting for evolution of coupling constants does not appear to be clearer to me.
0 -
32 minutes ago, Z.10.46 said:
Yes, I know that. I didn't write x+1~x or x^3+x^2+x+1x^3~x^3.
I wrote x+2=1/c-v=1/c-c. You notice that I have two different notations, x and c.
Why am I choosing ~?
It's like saying I have f(x)=g(y)=1/c-c=1/0=a*1/0 with a in R+*.
Is it true that 1/(c-v) = 1/(c-c) = 1/0 = a/1/0 with a in R*+ when v=c?
If it is true, then I would set x+2=1/c-c=1/0=a/0 with a>0. Therefore, x+2 would not have any unit because even if I change the value of c, I would still have x+2=1/c-c=1/0=a/0, and thus x+2 would not have any unit.
Where did +2 come from....did you just fixed it to suit your arguments?
0 -
Clarification pliz line 3 to line 4 where is denominator c^2 going?
0 -
Where there is smoke...their is fire ....keep following the smoke...when did you start developing this concept?
0 -
In the words of Dirac:[55]
The light-quantum has the peculiarity that it apparently ceases to exist when it is in one of its stationary states, namely, the zero state, in which its momentum and therefore also its energy, are zero. When a light-quantum is absorbed it can be considered to jump into this zero state, and when one is emitted it can be considered to jump from the zero state to one in which it is physically in evidence, so that it appears to have been created. Since there is no limit to the number of light-quanta that may be created in this way, we must suppose that there are an infinite number of light quanta in the zero state...
......an infinite number of light quanta in zero state.
0 -
I
4 hours ago, Mordred said:The answer to that will depend on if the conservation laws of thermodynamics applies to the Universe. Under the LCDM (BB) model the universe is treated as conserved and expansion under thermodynamics is treated as an isentropic and adiabatic expansion. In essence a closed system.
So under the LCDM model of the BB the photons become redshifted the density decreases but the total number of photons remain constant.
A neat trick results from this mathematically. One can estimate the blackbody temperature at any given value of Z by using the inverse of the scale factor
When calculating the number of photons...is zero point energy and dark energy taken into consideration?
0 -
4 hours ago, Mordred said:
Using the Bose Einstein statistics that equates to roughly the equivalent to 10^90 photons squeezed into a single Planckian volume.
Does the number of photon varies as the universe expand?
0 -
16 minutes ago, Mordred said:
However a symmetric sphere won't regardless of how fast it spins.
Is there anything like a purely symmetric sphere in the universe? given π=3.14.....to infinitiy...and given that it's used in derivation of 10^-43, at such a point, we can say that gravitational waves were present.... maybe they were infinitely strong such that their wave length were infinitely small..that is, what led to expansion rate varying in other local place during inflation...we can say that anisotropy in this case begins with π not terminating,as long as, it's presently known...hope my thinking on this is not mistaken.
0 -
15 hours ago, Mordred said:
I should add gravity waves only result from anisotropic conditions.
What are the least possible requirements of such conditions?
0
Space Expansion, wavelength and energy density
in Astronomy and Cosmology
Posted
?????? We need EM concept reloaded to make wave-particles nature of a photon more clearer.