beecee

I believe it describes a state that is probably finite, but also humongously big and in realty beyond human measuring capabilities. I have been taken to task over it before, but I also believe the definition I gave, would be obvious to most people.

A valid question of course, but one could ask if that will necessarily will always be the case. I'm not sure.

That's simply adding speculation. Logically one can ask, so where did this entitiy originate? The only reasonable correct answer is that we know nothing about the true nature of things before 10-43 seconds. Perhaps again, our definition of nothing needs reappraisal. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ag6fH8cU-MU

Don't get me wrong, I'm not overly critical of the US, [other then what I have stated and their present leadership] at least no more than my own country and how shabbily it treated the indigenous original inhabitants. Realistically the US, Australia, New Zealand, the UK and Canada, are all developed Western cultures that are generally regarded as sharing certain fundamental political scenarios, including those of democracy, the rule of law, human rights, development, and basic equality. We could also include many European countries in that group and also Japan. That in general, makes them desirable for living a reasonable comfortable life. Australia has much to thank the British for, and also the USA who we did turn to for our defence in WW2, particularly with the Battle of the Coral sea. The advantages of Australia imo though is that we share our borders with no other...We are one continent divided into six states and a territory, around the same size as mainland USA and a population of 25 million.

I believe it describes a state that is probably finite, but also humongously big and in realty beyond human measuring capabilities. I have been taken to task over it before, but I also believe the definition I gave, would be obvious to most people.

The near infinite extent and content, plus the time and distance are the barriers that will most likely inhibit any contact between species within the foreseeable future. Although I certainly hope [and many scientists now believe] that some convincing extraordinary evidence will be forthcoming to show ETL does exist, somewhere, sometime and before I kick the bucket. Fermi, I'm near certain was wrong.

Hard to accept in a country that has no viable health care system for all its citizens. And of course it all depends on what one chooses as reasons for making a country a candidate for best country in the world...financial wealth, longevity of life, gender equality, education, adequate welfare system, and of course its health care system. Australia ranks high in all those qualities and has the best beaches in the world, mild winters, hot Summers, easy going relaxed people, rich in necessary mineral and other resources and a stable Westminster style government. We also have a rich diversified cultural mix. We also have needed to defend our country during the second world war along with the help of the US and have never baulked at playing our part in other areas of hostility throughout the world. On the other side of the coin, like the USA, after European settlement, the indigenous population were treated poorly and in many cases with cruelty and absolutely no consideration of their culture. Thankfully in recent times that has changed and some repatriation has and is taken place. Best country in the world?? While many could fit that bill, I'll stick to the land down under at this time.

The best one can say is that the Universe is at least near infinite in extent and content.

In Australia, along with New Zealand, we commemorate our war dead on the 25th April every year, and which we call ANZAC DAY, Australian and New Zealand Army Corps. Some see it as a glorification of war. I believe they are wrong. I was born towards the end of WW2 and missed the lottery for conscription for the Vietnam war by 12 months. I have never experienced any war or war like actions in my whole life, luckily. I do not really know how I would react with bullets flying over my head, or under a bombardment...I hope I would do what my country expects and asks. So I truly respect all those that have lost their lives in war, on all sides, and believe each nation has a right to respect and honour their war dead, and that each and every nation can learn from the many terrible consequences of any war and the price that any nation irrespective of who is right or who is wrong, must pay. The first thing a nation should learn from commemorating its war dead, is to do all in its power to avoid any more war. I truly believe science can help in that regard, and that a world wide International effort to put man on Mars, and achieve and benefit from all space exploration has to offer is one way more International co-operation could be achievable.

No problems. In your OP you said, As others have explained, spacetime is not really nothing. What the BB does is explain the evolution of spacetime from 10-43 seconds after the initial event. Note at that epoch in time there was no matter...our first fundamentals came a short time later. I would also say at this stage, the closer to that t+10-43 seconds we go, the less certain and the less practical verifiable knowledge we have. In saying that, we do have reasonably logical explanations as to what happened in those early times and it has been proposed that at and just after the BB, all the four known forces were combined into one superforce due to the extremes of temperatures and pressures. As spacetime expanded, the Superforce started to decouple into the four familiar forces we know today, gravity being first. This decoupling created phase transitions and our first fundamentals were born, perhaps strings. While string theory, LQG and such are mathematically beautiful and consistent hypotheticals, we do not as yet have the technology to view at such levels. Perhaps the LHC may one day tell us more. http://www.ctc.cam.ac.uk/outreach/origins/cosmic_structures_one Another interesting point is the scientific speculative notions re the BB itself and where and how that came to be. The following two links may help.......https://www.astrosociety.org/publications/a-universe-from-nothing/ and https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-EilZ4VY5Vs As you can probably see, one's definition of "nothing" becomes important here..... hope that helps anyway.

Firstly congrats for at least realising that your idea is purely speculative. I say that because there are many unqualified people that come to a science forum to tell everyone participating, how mainstream science has got it wrong, and they have the answer! [Particularly in the fields of astrophysics/cosmology and astronomy]. Secondly while there certainly is still much that needs to be explained, there is also much that has been explained. Afterall we can now give a reasonable picture of the evolution of spacetime from 10-43 seconds after the BB event, up to the present day and even predict into the future. Thirdly Cosmology and other relevant sciences, are in my opinion anyway, the most awe inspiring, interesting, and fulfilling sciences there are. So why not read up with a few reputable books, or attend a course. That way you will most certainly realize then how much we do know. I'm speaking from experience matey as I'm a rank amateur lay person on this myself,

Bingo! As I have said a few times now to our self appraised "online experts" Science is a discipline in eternal progress. These self appraised online experts have plenty of "what ifs" "perhaps" and "maybes" and totally lacking in facts and evidence,

As I said previously, "Ignorance more frequently begets confidence then does knowledge" is something you really need to consider. We observe the many different aspects of curvature and the geometry of spacetime in many different ways...gravitational lensing, Lense Thirring effect, and gravitational waves just to name three, and of course the Eddington eclipse confirmation. Spacetime curvature in its many forms are fact. Denying that in the face of overwhelming evidence and denying it many times, on a forum open to anyone, really means nothing. Einstein did not show Newton's laws to be incorrect, rather they showed them as limited, just as GR itself is limited. Newton's laws of gravity are suffice to explain everyday Earth based mechanics and most space endeavours in our solar system. GR gives the same results with far more accuracy, but also far more complicated mathematical structure, which simply is not needed for those efforts. Newton's laws are correct within their zone of applicability. Einstein's GR extends that zone of applicability. Einstein's GR certainly follows that quote, and at this stage of proceedings, is still recognised as the overwhelming model of gravity that best describes what we observe and continues to make predictions that are substantiated.

We do not have a full theory of QM. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maxwell's_equations_in_curved_spacetime "In physics, Maxwell's equations in curved spacetime govern the dynamics of the electromagnetic field in curved spacetime (where the metric may not be the Minkowski metric) or where one uses an arbitrary (not necessarily Cartesian) coordinate system. These equations can be viewed as a generalization of the vacuum Maxwell's equations which are normally formulated in the local coordinates of flat spacetime. But because general relativity dictates that the presence of electromagnetic fields (or energy/matter in general) induce curvature in spacetime,[1] Maxwell's equations in flat spacetime should be viewed as a convenient approximation. When working in the presence of bulk matter, it is preferable to distinguish between free and bound electric charges. Without that distinction, the vacuum Maxwell's equations are called the "microscopic" Maxwell's equations. When the distinction is made, they are called the macroscopic Maxwell's equations. The electromagnetic field also admits a coordinate-independent geometric description, and Maxwell's equations expressed in terms of these geometric objects are the same in any spacetime, curved or not. Also, the same modifications are made to the equations of flat Minkowski space when using local coordinates that are not Cartesian. For example, the equations in this article can be used to write Maxwell's equations in spherical coordinates. For these reasons, it may be useful to think of Maxwell's equations in Minkowski space as a special case, rather than Maxwell's equations in curved spacetimes as a generalization." >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> As I suggested previously, making certified definite claims, opposing mainstream science on a science forum, open to any Tom, Dick or Harry, most likely reflects on your ignorance of the incumbent theory you are trying to suppress or over throw. The status quo stands.

Again, you show your ignorance of science and scientific theories. Quickly glancing through this thread, all your questions and ramblings have been answered and shown to be invalid at best and speculative nonsense at worst. Again, as you have been informed, nothing is really "proven" in science. A scientific theory best describes a set of observations and makes successful predictions as per GR. As those theories continue to make successful predictions and as they continue to describe accurately our observations, they grow in certainty over time. Theories such as the BB, SR, GR, Evolution are very near certain. Theories are never quite 100% proven...But it only takes one observation or experiment that contradicts the theory, to show it is wrong.

I made the comment previously....."Ignorance more frequently begets confidence then does knowledge" At times your posts [to me at least] seem to be a conglomeration of ramblings, without too much thought and an ignorance in that which you appear to be criticising. Let me count the ways....You often refer to space, when you should be referring to spacetime...You seem unaware of what a scientific theory actually is....you see the need to want to "prove" and what science does not prove, is impetus for your philosophical ramblings and baseless assumptions...Your ignorance seems to encompass the expansion of spacetime, noting that the expansion is observed over large scales, while at smaller scales such as our local group of galaxies, and other similar local groups, that expansion is overcome by the effects of gravity...you confuse and mix the products of GR with quantum theory...and finally you dismiss the importance of maths, the language of physics and the foundation stone of all validated scientific theories. My suggestion from one lay person to another, is to research deeply that which you are criticising, and be aware that your philosophical musings and other baseless hypothesising are just that.....no more, no less.

Ignorance more frequently begets confidence then does knowledge:

Statistical calculus??? Thanks a lot!!

While that may be true for planet Earth, perhaps some more advanced civilisation may have realized the futility of war and aggression. And who says modern humans are intelligent when compared to any possible space-faring civilisation?And like I said, what would any space-faring civilisation really need on Earth, when it can all be found throughout the universe? Then as mentioned we have the time and distance factor. Or perhaps I'm being too optimistic in this case?

Gravitational radiation from the BB itself?

Other then the technological know how and advancements of observing at those scales, what other indication then would see one as a stand out, or at least some other equal valid point to see at least some acceptance of a bonefide TOE with any of them.

https://www.preposterousuniverse.com/blog/ A Response to “On the time lags of the LIGO signals” (Guest Post) Posted on June 18, 2017 by Sean Carroll This is a special guest post by Ian Harry, postdoctoral physicist at the Max Planck Institute for Gravitational Physics, Potsdam-Golm. You may have seen stories about a paper that recently appeared, which called into question whether the LIGO gravitational-wave observatory had actually detected signals from inspiralling black holes, as they had claimed. Ian’s post is an informal response to these claims, on behalf of the LIGO Scientific Collaboration. He argues that there are data-analysis issues that render the new paper, by James Creswell et al., incorrect. Happily, there are sufficient online tools that this is a question that interested parties can investigate for themselves. Here’s Ian: more at link......

http://www.virgo-gw.eu/docs/AdV_joins_O2_en.pdf VIRGO joins LIGO for the “Observation Run 2” (O2) data-taking period Today, Tuesday August 1st 2017, the VIRGO detector based in Europe has officially joined “Observation Run 2” (O2) and is now taking data alongside the American-based twin LIGO detectors. This major step forward for the VIRGO Collaboration is the outcome of a multi-year upgrade program, whose primary goal was to significantly improve the detector performance in terms of sensitivity. “The last months have been spent on commissioning VIRGO, and this went very well. We are eager to start our first science run, joining LIGO at this exciting time for our field” says Jo van den Brand of Nikhef and VU University Amsterdam, the spokesperson of the VIRGO collaboration. Although the VIRGO sensitivity is, for the time being, at a lower level of those of the LIGO interferometers, it is adequate for confirming a potential detection with LIGO and would allow locating sources of gravitational waves in the sky with greater accuracy. The current VIRGO sensitivity significantly exceeds the previous VIRGO record sensitivity, achieved in 2011 before dismantling the detector to start its upgrade. VIRGO is now a brand new instrument comprising several new components, which have been made work together in less than one year, during the so-called commissioning phase. “It took many years of intense and innovative work to realize the ambitious objectives of the VIRGO upgrade. I wish to recognize the dedication of the members of the VIRGO Collaboration, of the EGO staff and of the participating labs” says Federico Ferrini, the director of the European Gravitational Observatory (EGO).

Save starting a new thread...some more welcome news on gravitational wave detectors..... http://www.virgo-gw.eu/docs/AdV_joins_O2_en.pdf VIRGO joins LIGO for the “Observation Run 2” (O2) data-taking period Today, "Tuesday August 1st 2017, the VIRGO detector based in Europe has officially joined “Observation Run 2” (O2) and is now taking data alongside the American-based twin LIGO detectors. This major step forward for the VIRGO Collaboration is the outcome of a multi-year upgrade program, whose primary goal was to significantly improve the detector performance in terms of sensitivity. “The last months have been spent on commissioning VIRGO, and this went very well. We are eager to start our first science run, joining LIGO at this exciting time for our field” says Jo van den Brand of Nikhef and VU University Amsterdam, the spokesperson of the VIRGO collaboration. Although the VIRGO sensitivity is, for the time being, at a lower level of those of the LIGO interferometers, it is adequate for confirming a potential detection with LIGO and would allow locating sources of gravitational waves in the sky with greater accuracy. The current VIRGO sensitivity significantly exceeds the previous VIRGO record sensitivity, achieved in 2011 before dismantling the detector to start its upgrade. VIRGO is now a brand new instrument comprising several new components, which have been made work together in less than one year, during the so-called commissioning phase. “It took many years of intense and innovative work to realize the ambitious objectives of the VIRGO upgrade. I wish to recognize the dedication of the members of the VIRGO Collaboration, of the EGO staff and of the participating labs” says Federico Ferrini, the director of the European Gravitational Observatory (EGO). >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> and here...... https://www.ligo.caltech.edu/WA/news/ligo20170801