beecee

You didn't listen to Sagan in the video I gave did you? As I illustrated earlier, the need for any magical deity has been pushed back to near oblivion. We at one time saw the need for such an impossible being, when we were ignorant of the sciences, and how the Sun and stars came to be, and how we evolved to what we are today. We saw such impractical nonsense in near everything around us before science came along....mountains, rivers, Sun, Moon etc Most of us have moved on now, with the evidence of science.

Let me say again, the mind is a tricky thing, and that would apply particularly when someone is near death. Some people also believe they have been kidnapped by Aliens, believe in ghosts, even Bigfoot. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We have no extraordinary evidence of Bigfoot, ghosts, Aliens or any magical deity that just happens to have been here for eternity. Delusions, illusions and brainwashing plays a big part in what people believe in and what they imagine. Your god and your supposed afterlife may give you a nice cozy warm inner feeling, but that is all it is. No we have no direct evidence for any quantum foam, but we have plenty of evidence for the BB and the universe evolving from a hot dense state, and plenty of evidence for your own scientific ignorance. Again your god of the gaps is just that.

You have proven nothing other then you are totally brainwashed.

You have had these? Illusions, delusions, hallucinations?

The mind is a tricky thing, and that would apply particularly when someone is near death. Some people also believe they have been kidnapped by Aliens, believe in ghosts, even Bigfoot. Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence. We have no extraordinary evidence of Bigfoot, ghosts, Aliens or any magical deity that just happens to have ben here for eternity. Delusions, illusions and brainwashing plays a big part in what people believe in and what they imagine. Your god and your supposed afterlife may give you a nice cozy warm inner feeling, but that is all it is. No we have no direct evidence for any quantum foam, but we have plenty of evidence for the BB and the universe evolving from a hot dense state, and plenty of evidence for your own scientific ignorance. Again your god of the gaps is just that.

We cannot fully understand that probably our universe arose from a fluctuation in the quantum foam. But I prefer that scenario over some magical deity that has existed forever and ever amen.

Or perhaps you are engaging in ignorance? The BB only applies to the observable universe, and also says nothing about before 10-43 seconds.

Because that's what the evidence supports in GR. gravity is simply geometry of spacetime.

And how did this divine intelligence that just happened to create all we see come about? Isn't that unreasonable and brainwashing?

The ancients saw the so called evidence of god all around them...in the Sun, the Moon, Mountains, rivers, etc etc. We know better these days and have shown evidence that these things are simply applications of gravitational collapses, supernovas, abiogenesis, and evolution, and we can take those evidence backed solutions back to 10- 43 seconds after the BB. So you see science has logically and reasonably pushed any need for any god explanation back to near oblivion.

Are you suggesting a "god of the gaps" solution for the areas of science where we have gaps in our knowledge?

A scientific theory is as good as it gets. The goal of science is constructing models that align with evidence of our observations and explains the results of our experiments. We are not able to test GR or any model in any part of the universe or in any and all conditions, we can only test it within a range allowed for by present technology. Theories of course do grow in certainty over time, and as they continue to match the evidence. For that reason/s, any real truth and/or reality is not the scientific goal, if it is at all obtainable.

Yes it is. Even light due to its momentum, warps spacetime ever so slightly.

While I agree with that mostly, I see the acceptance of space and time [spacetime] being real, as reasonable considering that spacetime can be bent, warped, twisted or in some way misshaped from flat, in the presence of mass/energy, and that we interpret as gravity. The philosophical side imo starts when we question whether spacetime, gravity is the underlying reality or truth of the universe. Science models what we see and to explain our experimental results, and any underlying truth or reality, if it at all exists, is not the goal. If though we happen to stumble on that reality or truth, all well and good.

Wise words......as per usual, generally anyway. I would put it this way though in my own language, that any accepted theory has been, as is continually further validated or verified within its zones of applicability. GR as an example has been further validated and verified with the discovery of gravitational waves, but is continually being worked on, and tested everyday. While it continues to pass these tests, it remains our preferred theory of gravity.

Space and time are interconnected, and as Einstein's teacher put it, "The views of space and time which I wish to lay before you have sprung from the soil of experimental physics, and therein lies their strength. They are radical. Henceforth space by itself, and time by itself, are doomed to fade away into mere shadows, and only a kind of union of the two will preserve an independent reality" [from Wiki] . So the warping of space by mass, is the warping of spacetime. The other great proof re the interconnectivness of space and time, is the fact that when we look into space, we are looking back into time.

Neither had I.

Gee that makes a lot of sense...just above me ^ What I don't tolerate...bloody bullies of any kind. When I was in primary school around 9 years of age, there was a craze going round with all the kids in obtaining rather large Coca Cola badges, the old tin kind. I was one of the last to finally get one and was just finishing class at school, when the local bully, ran up cowardly fashion from behind me, and grabbed my badge of my lapel and threw it on the roof. In those days we carried our books and stuff in globite cases around 18 inches by 12 inches by 6 inches or round about. I was so enraged at this bloke, much bigger then me, that I took an almighty swing with the globite school case and hit him fair square on the side of the head. Just happened that the Principal was walking by and grabbed us both by the collar and dragged us into his office. The bully was bleeding and so went to the first aid station, while I told the Principal what happened. This blokes reputation for bullying was well known, and I was spared the rod/cane, and told to get on home, with a friendly pat on the head. I don't believe that bully ever spoke to me again all through our school years. Another bullying incident involved my Son at about 4 years of age. One day he came inside after being out playing, crying and sporting a red cheek. He told us that another boy same age as him, had hit him. My Mrs being a good Christian women, basically told him to turn the other cheek much to my distress. I never interfered until over a period of a couple of weeks, the same thing happened two more times. I also had observed that the other little fella was being egged on by his two older brothers [around 10 and 11 years of age] After the third time I grabbed my boy and told him if it happened again, to hit Andrew back, as hard as he could. Sure enough, it happened again, and my Boy did what I told him, sending the other little bloke running home crying, while I immediatley had a yarn to the two older brothers. The climax of this story is that my Boy and Andrew have remained the best of mates throughout thir lives and been best man at each others weddings. Didn't stop the Mrs from giving me an earful though. I also abhore tailgating and see it as a form of bullying.

https://phys.org/news/2019-07-space-kits-blast-orbit.html Space mining kits blast off for tests in orbit: Astronauts are to test the world's first space mining devices, in an advance that could open up a new frontier in exploring the universe. Prototype kits are being sent to the International Space Station to study how microscopic organisms could be used to recover minerals and metals from space rocks. The groundbreaking study could aid efforts to establish manned settlements on distant worlds by helping develop ways to source minerals essential for survival in space. Tests will reveal how low gravity affects bacteria's natural ability to extract useful materials—such as iron, calcium and magnesium—from rocks, researchers say. Their findings could also help improve the process—known as biomining—which has numerous applications on Earth, including in the recovery of metals from ores. more at link..... Explore further Harnessing the power of microbes for mining in space

The relationship between time and space is obvious, as they can be interchanged depending on one's frame of reference. The following couple of links may explain better then I ever could..... https://einstein.stanford.edu/content/relativity/a10743.html What is the relationship between space and time? Mathematically, and in accordance with relativity, they are in some sense interchangeable, but we do know that they form co-equal parts of a larger 'thing' called space-time, and it is only within space-time that the most complete understanding of the motion and properties of natural objects and phenomena can be rigorously understood by physicists. Space and time are to space-time what arms and legs are to humans. In some sense they are interchangeable, but you cannot understand 10,000 years of human history without including both arms and legs as part of the basic human condition. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: https://www.physicsoftheuniverse.com/topics_relativity_spacetime.html Another corollary of Special Relativity is is that, in effect, one person’s interval of space is another person’s interval of both time and space, and one person’s interval of time is also another person’s interval of both space and time. Thus, space and time are effectively interchangeable, and fundamentally the same thing (or at least two different sides of the same coin), an effect which becomes much more noticeable at relativistic speeds approaching the speed of light. Einstein's former mathematics professor, Hermann Minkowski, was perhaps the first to note this effect (and perhaps understood it even better than Einsteinhimself), and it was he who coined the phrase “space-time” to describe the interchangeability of the four dimensions. In 1908, Minkowski offered a useful analogy to help explain how four-dimensionalspace-time can appear differently to two observers in our normal three-dimensional space. He described two observers viewing a three-dimensional object from different angles, and noting that, for example, the length and width can appear different from the different viewpoints, due to what we call perspective, even though the object is clearly one and the same in three dimensions. The idea perhaps becomes even clearer when we consider that our picture of the Moon is actually what the Moon was like 1¼ seconds ago (the time light takes to reach the Earth from the Moon), our picture of the Sun is actually how it looked 8½ minutes ago, and by the time we see an image of Alpha Centauri, our nearest star system, it is already 4.3 years out of date. We can therefore never know what the universe is like at this very instant, and the universe is clearly not a thing that extends just in space, but in space-time Due to the relativistic effects of previous section can be considered an example of this: whereas the stay-at-home twin’s progress through space-time was wholly through time, the traveling twin’s progress was partly through space, so that his progress through time was less than that of the stay-at-home twin (so that he aged less). Therefore, as Einstein remarked, “For us physicists, the distinction between past, present and future is only an illusion, however persistent”, and these concepts really do not figure at all in Einstein’s justifiably famous formula, E = mc2, which we will look at in the next section.

Terrific!

Perhaps I'm reading too much into the second article/paper? There's still the first request re explanation of first article/paper.

Yep, agreed, but it still seems to be worded wrongly. From what little I know, we know gravity is spacetime curvature and its effects. What we don't know is the actual state of the mass/energy [and for that matter, space and time] at the quantum/Planck level, both at the BH and BB singularities....noting of course that most cosmologists now reject any physical singularity as defined by infinite spacetime curvature and density. The singularity terminology applies to where our laws of physics and GR fail us. At least that's the way I see it. So in effect, there is probably a surface of sorts at or below the quantum/Planck level?

https://arxiv.org/pdf/1504.07627.pdf A New Area Law in General Relativity: "We report a new area law in General Relativity. A future holographic screen is a hypersurface foliated by marginally trapped surfaces. We show that their area increases monotonically along the foliation. Future holographic screens can easily be found in collapsing stars and near a big crunch. Past holographic screens exist in any expanding universe and obey a similar theorem, yielding the first rigorous area law in big bang cosmology. Unlike event horizons, these objects can be identified at finite time and without reference to an asymptotic boundary. The Bousso bound is not used, but it naturally suggests a thermodynamic interpretation of our result". :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: OK, Can someone explain exactly [and simply of course] what this means.... And while we are at it, the highlighted part in the following ...... https://phys.org/news/2019-07-einstein-relativity-theory.html More than 100 years after Albert Einstein published his iconic theory of general relativity, it is beginning to fray at the edges, said Andrea Ghez, UCLA professor of physics and astronomy. Now, in the most comprehensive test of general relativity near the monstrous black hole at the center of our galaxy, Ghez and her research team report July 25 in the journal Science that Einstein's theory of general relativity holds up. absolutely rule out Newton's law of gravity. Our observations are consistent with Einstein's theory of general relativity. However, his theory is definitely showing vulnerability. It cannot fully explain gravity inside a black hole, and at some point we will need to move beyond Einstein's theory to a more comprehensive theory of gravity that explains what a black hole is." ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: My guess is the statement is taken out of context, or poor journalism. What I'm saying is that GR tells us that once the Schwarzchild radius is reached, further collapse is compulsory, and while we will never be able to check inside, and convey our observational results to the outside world, GR isn't such a bad model to fall back on. Or is Andrea Ghez simply referring to conditions at the singularity as defined by the failure of GR at the quantum/Planck region?

It's the so called "fake science" you allude to that is enabling you to take part in the world wide web and talk to people directly on the other side of the world in real time...It's the same "fake science" that put man on the Moon fifty years ago. It has nothing to do with mythical unsupported pseudoscience in relation to star people, Atlantis, Pyramid magic, or any other weird mystical unsupported beliefs you seem hooked on.