Speakeasy forum: Zero broken. physics

Here's all from the series for Alan Guth. A very far seer, IMO.

http://www.closertotruth.com/search_results?search=alan+guth&x=32&y=8

Non zero is a mystery. A mystery is not nessassaraly a problem. It's just a mystery. He's got a lot more on YouTube.

I know you have an intrest in Dark Energy.

http://www.closertotruth.com/video-profile/How-does-Dark-Energy-Drive-the-Universe-Alan-Guth-/857

Somewhere in there is a discusion about what it would take to create a bubble universe like ours. The answer is a liner accellerator 7 light years long. And about a milligram of prexisting, non-zero mass. Sounds a whole lot like the Sea-Monkey adds from the back of the Superman comics. Only on a different scale.

(Where's my spellchecker?)

Thanks Ziks.

to the speed of light time slows down. At the speed of light, time stops. All photons travel at the speed of light.. Without the time factor, distance has no meaning. Therefore, an atom emiting a photon from it's over-charged valence orbital in an ultimatly distant galaxy is still in a very real sense still connected, with no time delay or distance, to the atom destined to absorbe it.

I'm no mathmatition either. But I get some of the ideas. Like multiplying by zero and such.

Something from nothing is such an unthinkable thing. But following the regression argument, at some point you bump into it. So what's on the other side? Being here, can we ever know?

I think dark energy is one of those things that we'll have to figure into an ultimate zero sum, to be satisfying. The least we can do is to try and see creation from the point of view of each of it's constituant parts. That's why I keep bringing up photons, and their seeing things with no dimension of time. (Speed of light, time dilation, no time. No time, no distance.) That's what the math says. Just one interesting, but undenyable, perspective.

As an e-coli in the belly of the beast, how can we devine the beast it's self? As Holms said: eliminate the impossible.

The only equation that ever sunk in was the state of the universe. Basically that is [0 < universe > 1].
If the sum total is less than 1, we have a collapsing universe, if more than 1 we have an expanding universe, and if at 1, we have a stagnate universe. So far, it seems to point to a expanding universe when relying on the Hubble factor. While that seems solid to rely on I can always find someone stating that maybe at "one time" is almost stopped or at least slowed down and then sped-up due to dark energy. Dark energy wasn't part of the picture until much later, I believe in late '70's or '80's, then something had to be thrown in to explain how it got to the state the universe is now. dark matter was used to explain things during the '30's or what was yet unexplained process at work that galaxies didn't behave as one suppose to using current thinking from Euclid math and/or Newton principles basically "very large scale" objects or similar.

BTW- Sometimes reading one book offered to me a better explanation of some process or principle brought on by reading yet another book. Which is why I started to read more because the "nuggets of knowledge" were strewn haphazard it seems, too much reading for the details. I got the bigger picture roughly after reading 5-6 books and then it seemed to kick-in. Details, details, it seems more about explaining their logic rather offering the proof of pudding, IMHO. -----Willy

It sounds like too much ego. To me the cat is either dead or not. It doesn't matter whether I see the cat or not.

Is that like believing three impossible things before breakfast.

Diana

but taken down.

Dam you Foxx!!!

Thank you! It's all so obvious now! 42 is the answer! (I like the little dark haired girl in the pink sweats!) Or business school.

"Therefore, by process of elemination, the proton must taste like grapeade."

and predictably that comes from the work of a Mathematician, Charles Dodgson (pronounced Dodson) best known as Lewis Carroll. Douglas Adams sneaks a reference to that into The Hitch Hiker's Guide to the Galaxy or H^2G^2.

Rob

of Heisenberg's Uncertainty Principle, that observation is not a passive state, but can change the outcome of the experiment. I asked a real Physicist (Nathan Isgur) about Schrodinger's Cat, and he explained it to me and I swear it took me three years to accept the two states as equally valid and equally true.

Wish I could remember which of the great names (probably Richard Feynman) said, "if it makes sense it's wrong." You read enough Feynman and get a faint grasp of Feynman diagrams, and then somebody throws the Penguin diagram at you, and you're crazy for the next 3 weeks.

My late friend Nathan Isgur, and his wife Karin Bergsagel were there on the night of the famous darts match at Cern in Switzerland that created, as a result, "The next paper you write has to have the word Penguin in it." The weird thing is that the penguin diagram actually fits the energy flows they're trying to explain. This is all checkable on Wikipedia, though as a bystander Nathan is not mentioned. But the consumption of non-legal herbs is.

Rob

When I was in training/schooling for my military MOS, we went through various classes. A good one that was fun the use of special tools or instruments that we would eventually use. The one I liked was the wave or sound generator. This was a very old item and during the days of tubes and us Marines didn't have the fancy goodies to play with. The point being, tap on the side of the box, you get the sound variation, use various items or pass-throughs got some interesting audio effects. Test an item and see what the effect it would produce, like a carrot, cake or anything handy. It was an easy class. -----Willy

Nope, nothing of the sort at least that was not part of the learning.

As for the two slot experiment, that always seems to be brought up in the physics books. While, I understand the idea of particle and wave(or field) effects which is now understood to be the process happening, it's both. Further, the mere act of observation or measurement will in itself interfere or somehow become what is being observed, as understood now of quantum physics or the mechanics of same. So, what is a physicist to do, repeat and repeat again until some avg. becomes shown, which is what the left or right spin of particles and all the names of found particles and maybe their waves(fields) represent their nature as best as possible. ----Willy

all deaths were in limbo until humans showed up to observe the deaths?

Diana

If a tree falls in the woods and no one is around, does it still make a sound?

Diana