Big Bang
in [Relativity]
|
From: oriel36 on 14 Jul 2010 12:18 On Jul 14, 4:23 pm, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: > oriel36 schrieb: > > > > > On Jul 14, 7:23 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: > >> Hi Ng > > >> Please, have a look at this Wikipedia page:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Big_Bang > >> You see this picture:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Universe_expansion2.png > > >> What is missing there? > > > Absolutely nothing is missing there,it is fine if you like the 'no > > center/no circumference' ideology of 'big bang' where you agree to > > believe that every-valid-point-is-the-center of the Universe,it > > mightn't be particularly sane and a few might wonder where the hell it > > comes from but I can spare you the suspense and tell you that it is > > basically a logical conclusion of stellar circumpolar motion,sidereal > > time reasoning or inertial frames as relativists like to call it.Even > > if you haven't a clue what I am saying,you probably can see something > > familiar in the words of Archbishop Cusa who was one of the first to > > encourage Copernicus in finding a resolution to apparent observations > > - > > If the universe seems to have an origin in a singularity for us, moving > along our wordline, to other observers this should be the same > experience, but not the same bang. > This is why I think that theory is wrong, because the validity of the > big-bang-theory would -of course- require only one of such events. > > > Thereupon you will see-- through the intellect..that the world and its > > motion and shape cannot be apprehended. For the world/universe will > > appear as a wheel in a wheel and a sphere in a sphere-- having its > > center and circumference nowhere. . . " Nicolas of Cusa 16th century > > Well, this seems to be a good description for what I call a fractal > behavior. Where things evolve at a spiral form, moving 'outwards', while > the inverse is contracting at the same time. > > TH Cusa was describing stellar circumpolar motion and more to the point, so are you - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QwSlkJG8gTU A reasonably intelligent person would be horrified if they knew what happened and why,not so much the early 20th century but in the late 17th century when the process of interpretation turned into speculative modelling.Even the expression 'big bang' is apt if not a crude description of sidereal time reasoning or what amounts to the same thing - a 'no center/no circumference' ideology.
From: Thomas Heger on 14 Jul 2010 12:34 mpc755 schrieb: > On Jul 14, 12:12 pm, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: >> mpc755 schrieb: >> >> >> >>> On Jul 14, 11:47 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: >>>> mpc755 schrieb: >>>>> What is described as dark energy is a change in the state of dark >>>>> matter. >>>> For dark matter I think about as opposite to 'usual' matter. What do you >>>> think about the 'negative' to matter? Something like the thing left >>>> behind, if we take all the particles away. >>>> TH >>> I think of dark matter as a frictionless superfluid one-something. The >>> analogy for gravity is placing a bowling ball into a tank of water. >>> The bowling ball displaces the water. The water exerts pressure >>> towards the bowling ball. The pressure exerted by dark matter towards >>> matter is gravity. >>> The analogy for the expanding universe is a hose. The dark matter is >>> emitted into the jet stream of the Universe similar to water expanding >>> out of a hose. >> The question about what that 'really' is, I tried to avoid. You may call >> it 'eather', 'spacetime', 'frictionless fluid' or whatever. I personally >> think, there would be no material background at all and we could say >> 'nothing' as well. But - as said- I would prefer to circumvent that >> question, but instead research the behavior of this 'whatever'. >> >> TH > > With 'nothing' there is no gravity. > > Pressure exerted by displaced dark matter towards matter is gravity. In the s.p. research forum someone explained a laser. I quote a bit here: "Imagine if you will a microwave cavity. Inside it, there are E and H fields generated by the resonance. If we raise the frequency and adjust the geometry, we can create a situation where those fields are confined to just the center of the cavity. In that case you can remove the cavity walls and it makes no difference. These are the "modes" of a laser resonator consisting of two mirrors. They can be calculated by EM theory. Hence the laser beam is self- confining both inside and outside the laser resonator." And now we need only to raise the frequency and come to atoms, what could be in fact self-confining resonances. TH
From: mpc755 on 14 Jul 2010 12:55 On Jul 14, 12:34 pm, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: > mpc755 schrieb: > > > > > On Jul 14, 12:12 pm, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: > >> mpc755 schrieb: > > >>> On Jul 14, 11:47 am, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: > >>>> mpc755 schrieb: > >>>>> What is described as dark energy is a change in the state of dark > >>>>> matter. > >>>> For dark matter I think about as opposite to 'usual' matter. What do you > >>>> think about the 'negative' to matter? Something like the thing left > >>>> behind, if we take all the particles away. > >>>> TH > >>> I think of dark matter as a frictionless superfluid one-something. The > >>> analogy for gravity is placing a bowling ball into a tank of water. > >>> The bowling ball displaces the water. The water exerts pressure > >>> towards the bowling ball. The pressure exerted by dark matter towards > >>> matter is gravity. > >>> The analogy for the expanding universe is a hose. The dark matter is > >>> emitted into the jet stream of the Universe similar to water expanding > >>> out of a hose. > >> The question about what that 'really' is, I tried to avoid. You may call > >> it 'eather', 'spacetime', 'frictionless fluid' or whatever. I personally > >> think, there would be no material background at all and we could say > >> 'nothing' as well. But - as said- I would prefer to circumvent that > >> question, but instead research the behavior of this 'whatever'. > > >> TH > > > With 'nothing' there is no gravity. > > > Pressure exerted by displaced dark matter towards matter is gravity. > > In the s.p. research forum someone explained a laser. I quote a bit here: > "Imagine if you will a microwave cavity. Inside > it, there are E and H fields generated by the resonance. If we raise > the frequency and adjust the geometry, we can create a situation where > those fields are confined to just the center of the cavity. In that > case you can remove the cavity walls and it makes no difference. These > are the "modes" of a laser resonator consisting of two mirrors. They > can be calculated by EM theory. Hence the laser beam is self- > confining both inside and outside the laser resonator." > > And now we need only to raise the frequency and come to atoms, what > could be in fact self-confining resonances. > > TH Self-confining resonances is compressed dark matter.
From: Thomas Heger on 14 Jul 2010 13:09 mpc755 schrieb: > On Jul 14, 12:34 pm, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: >> mpc755 schrieb: >> ... >>> With 'nothing' there is no gravity. >>> Pressure exerted by displaced dark matter towards matter is gravity. >> In the s.p. research forum someone explained a laser. I quote a bit here: >> "Imagine if you will a microwave cavity. Inside >> it, there are E and H fields generated by the resonance. If we raise >> the frequency and adjust the geometry, we can create a situation where >> those fields are confined to just the center of the cavity. In that >> case you can remove the cavity walls and it makes no difference. These >> are the "modes" of a laser resonator consisting of two mirrors. They >> can be calculated by EM theory. Hence the laser beam is self- >> confining both inside and outside the laser resonator." >> >> And now we need only to raise the frequency and come to atoms, what >> could be in fact self-confining resonances. >> >> TH > > Self-confining resonances is compressed dark matter. He wrote: "..there are E and H fields .." (alone). So maybe we could describe matter with E and H fields alone, too (compressed though). TH
From: mpc755 on 14 Jul 2010 13:13 On Jul 14, 1:09 pm, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: > mpc755 schrieb: > > > > > On Jul 14, 12:34 pm, Thomas Heger <ttt_...(a)web.de> wrote: > >> mpc755 schrieb: > > .. > >>> With 'nothing' there is no gravity. > >>> Pressure exerted by displaced dark matter towards matter is gravity. > >> In the s.p. research forum someone explained a laser. I quote a bit here: > >> "Imagine if you will a microwave cavity. Inside > >> it, there are E and H fields generated by the resonance. If we raise > >> the frequency and adjust the geometry, we can create a situation where > >> those fields are confined to just the center of the cavity. In that > >> case you can remove the cavity walls and it makes no difference. These > >> are the "modes" of a laser resonator consisting of two mirrors. They > >> can be calculated by EM theory. Hence the laser beam is self- > >> confining both inside and outside the laser resonator." > > >> And now we need only to raise the frequency and come to atoms, what > >> could be in fact self-confining resonances. > > >> TH > > > Self-confining resonances is compressed dark matter. > He wrote: "..there are E and H fields .." (alone). > > So maybe we could describe matter with E and H fields alone, too > (compressed though). > > TH 'Fields' do not have mass. You need mass. Dark matter has mass. Instead of E and H fields alone, E and H 'fields' should be described as states of dark matter.
First
|
Prev
|
Next
|
Last
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 Prev: Verlinde Floats Off Earth! Next: Question about relativity |