Jump to content


  • Posts

  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by Serena2003

  1. Until a more testable 'theory of everything' can be attained, 'nothing' as a causation remains as the answer, despite its dissatisfaction. String Theory suggests that it may have been a clash of two brane slices, but no one knows if these branes really exist. The Big Bang was an explosion with the 'stretch' as the main emphasis of that explosion. How all the matter, radiation and so forth for the early formation of the universe could emerge out of nowhere is beyond me, it seems to be a more scientific way of saying God did it, but this is the theory many scientists like to stick with as the expansion of the universe is enough supportive evidence.

  2. Science is a branch of philosophy. That's why science degrees are called "PhD," which means doctor of philosophy.


    Many scientists even with a doctorate would beg to differ because science deals with facts as philosophy deals with untestable concepts and subjective views. Science would include knowledge while philosophy would question if knowledge can be attained. It is considered useless to science and technology. But science had a different perception during the Middle Ages when the earliest Ph.D was bestowed, even theology was considered a science then. They do award doctorates of science, but they are probably not as standard as the traditional Ph.D.

  3. Although it may not be entirely impossible, it is incredibly difficult to determine as the infinite string of causation may be just be a closed circulation, constantly repeating the same patterns of cause and effect. But as stated, if prior causes can no longer be detected or testable, it is becomes philosophy and no longer science. But even occurrences at random still have a cause whether or not that cause contains any reason, expectancy or pattern.

  4. no, it does cover how species originate. what it does NOT cover is the origin of life. one of the assumptions of the theory of evolution is that life exists.


    Right, that is what I was saying by not entirely, as it explains how we became, not how we originally emerged. It is easy to say life exists from observation, but not to assume it it always existed or came from 'nothing.' Or at least it is easier said than known. Whether a creation myth is used, or scientific rationality, we have to compromise with a sufficient conjecture of origin which may not be logically induced.

  5. It is true that evolution is not entirely the 'origin of species.' We may never have the satisfaction of knowing what came first, but at least we can compromise with what came next, at least there is supporting evidence for that. But we a stuck within a cloud of infinite causation, maybe not meant to know the truth. But it is not necessarily impossible to eventually stumble upon it.

  6. The Big Bang is a theory that I have been wanting to subscribe to, but it is its origin that I have difficulty grasping. It claims to occur out of 'nothing,' but to me that sounds like a more scientific explanation that could metaphorically equate to God's creation. Was the Big Bang the beginning of space as well? It seems space would have had to already be there in order for all this matter to spread out in. Or was space born within the explosion with matter already born inside of it? I suppose it would make sense that the universe would have to expand from a particle, but it seems that there would of have to be space there for that particle to emerge in and even time would have to measure the period of 'nothing.' Evidently there is something I am not grasping correctly here, but to me it sounds like it equates to the answer that God created himself.

  7. An object deeper in a gravitational well will feel more dilation. It's not the strength of the field.


    Yes it is, the deeper an object is to a larger gravitational mass, by the greater gravitational potential and acceleration. In accordance to general relativity in particular, any kind of g-load contributes to gravitational time dilation.

  8. I don't really see how that answers my question - is it a "no"? Note that I was not asking what time dilatation is.

    Btw.: I think the time dilatation effect is stronger when deeper inside a gravitational field, not weaker.


    The location of which time passes is affected by the strength of a gravitational field, when weaker it is more dilated because of the relative speed or rate of two moving objects to two observers as well as their location near a gravitational mass. Space and time become inseparable due an object's velocity or strength of a gravitational field relative to an observer. I am not sure how to make it anymore clearer....:unsure:

  9. Nitpick questions like "what is the 'intensity of strength'? " aside: your point is that time and space cannot be separated (whatever that may mean) because the passing of time depends on the location?


    Time dilation is a result of an area's particular gravitational strength and dependent on an object's velocity and the rate of which time passes in accordance to general relativity, which is why you would age quicker when stationed on the ground and age much slower when higher in the atmosphere or flying at high speeds. It is the constancy of the speed of light that would keep them intertwined.

  10. They are intertwined which is typically the nature of spacetime and what relativity represents. The observed rate at which time passes depends on an object's velocity in relation to an observer as well as the intensity of strength of the gravitational field causing time to pass slower. Because of this, time cannot be separated by the three dimensions of space.

  11. Hello all,

    I'm trying to decide on a thesis topic in the feild of theoretical astrophysics. My courses are mostly online and all my texts and lectures say to "bounce around ideas" with your fellow students and the scientific community, so lacking in that area i was hoping to get a bit of brainstorming here.

    My main areas of research are dark matter/energy and solar-terrestrial interactions.

    feel free to ask me any questions you want to, i'm not looking for somone to hand me an answer. i'd rather discuss it back and forth.

    Thanks in advance,



    Perhaps something along the lines of how dark matter may affect solar terrestrial interactions?

  12. Wow where to begin?


    War and Peace-Tolstoy

    A History of English Speaking Peoples(series)-Churchill

    The Odyssey-Homer

    Decent of Man-Darwin

    Chronicles of Narnia-Lewis

    David Copperfield-Dickens

    Oliver Twist-Dickens-Complete Sherlock Homes-Doyle

    Uncle Tom's Cabin-Stowe


    A Christmas Carol-Dickens

    Lord of the Rings Trilogy-Tolkin

    The Canterbury Tales-Chancer

    The Adventures of Tom Sawyer-Twain

    The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn-Twain


    Interpretation of Dreams-Freud

    Animal Fam-Orwell


    Complete Essays-Orwell

    A Treatise of Human Nature-Hume


    Beyond Good and Evil-Nietzsche

    Island of Dr. Monreau-Wells

    Alice in Wonder Land/Through the Looking Glass-Carroll

    The Wonderful Wizard of Oz-Baum

    Anything by Shakespeare

    The Second World War-Churchill



    The list goes on and on.....

  13. The paradox is suppose to exemplify that one twin has undergone acceleration and deceleration while the other is stationed in an inertial environment which differentiates both cases. It may not make much sense, but hence why it is called a paradox. But the paradox has been used to accurately measure clocks in airplanes.


    Like Darwin who was not the first to speculate evolution, Einstein may not have been the first to speculate relativity. However, he is considered to be the one who proved it. Whether or not the credit for his works was just stimulated by the media is beyond me, but as far as we know it was not. The truth is something we would all like a piece of, but even after all we have accomplished and discovered, we are still no where near it.

  14. Two assumptions considered in special relativity:


    -Laws of Physics remain the same for all observers


    -Speed of light is constant regardless of the motions of light source and observer.



    When considering two observers in an environment without acceleration and deceleration, all gravity, mechanics and the speed of light would be experienced the same. Two events may look concurrent to one observer, but to the other, the measure of time may feel completely stretched or enduring. When two observers are in relative motion together, the peculiar effect is called "relativity of simultaneity." This may seem insignificant in reality, but depending on an object relative speed, it becomes more evident. Clocks in accordance to "time dilation" may be measured more slowly than and observer's stationary clock.


    E=MC2 pertains to the mass-energy equivalence which means nothing can move faster than the speed of light. Both energy and mass are interchangeable and conserved energy would increase an object's mass. Time is dependent on the relative motion of the observer who is measuring time.


    General relativity is meant to define the topology of spacetime and the inertia of objects with a metric theory of gravitation. It measures the effects an object's movements without any force pushed upon it in which the acceleration and gravitational field are the same. "Gravitational time dilation" is a consequence of slowed time when gravity is more dense.


    An understanding of the appropriate level of math may give you a more accurate understanding, but really it is all about the intimate relationship between time and space and that they can be stretched, warped and exchanged.

  • 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.