point particle vs particle with structure
in [Physics]
|
Prev: Properties of a preferred frame, an inertial frame in SR and
Next: Quantum Gravity 402.4: One-Way Entanglement in Expansion-Contraction
From: BURT on 21 Jul 2010 21:45 On Jul 21, 6:39 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > On Jul 21, 9:14 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > > > > On Jul 21, 5:25 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 21, 8:03 pm, Jacko <jackokr...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On 22 July, 00:49, Jacko <jackokr...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Definite volume relating to what? How is the measurement done? > > > > > > The radius of the space warp singularity. Surrounded by orbital light. > > > > > > The definite volume would be the volume contained in the singularity > > > > > radius, measured from the outside. > > > > > > As light would appear to be the only thing affected by a crouton, > > > > > light bending would have to be detected. I'll have a think. > > > > > If the dark energy force is the non mass of dark matter which warps > > > > but does not have mass, then the relative concentrations of matter, > > > > dark matter and the dark energy effect measurements should be able to > > > > infer an estimate of the avarage dark matter cruton radius, or a > > > > radius based on the expected splitting into cruton numbers. > > > > Dark energy is a change in state of dark matter. Three dimensional > > > space consists of dark matter and matter. It is dark matter which > > > warps. The physical effects associated with the warping is energy. > > > > > Would this then be applied to the upper radiation frequency bound > > > > expected for 'a big bang' absorbtion of all above frequencies ... umm > > > > I'll think some more. > > > > It's not the Big Bang. It's the Big Ongoing.- Hide quoted text - > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > There is an absolute beginning of the universe/hypersphere. > > > Mitch Raemsch > > You choose to have faith in that because you are first and foremost a > child of God. No buster. I am God. > > In the physics of nature, nature and what occurs physically in nature, > is foremost. > > In the physics of nature, it is not the Big Bang, it is the Big > Ongoing.- Hide quoted text - > > - Show quoted text -
From: mpc755 on 21 Jul 2010 21:48 On Jul 21, 9:45 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > On Jul 21, 6:39 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 21, 9:14 pm, BURT <macromi...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > > > > On Jul 21, 5:25 pm, mpc755 <mpc...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > On Jul 21, 8:03 pm, Jacko <jackokr...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > On 22 July, 00:49, Jacko <jackokr...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > Definite volume relating to what? How is the measurement done? > > > > > > > The radius of the space warp singularity. Surrounded by orbital light. > > > > > > > The definite volume would be the volume contained in the singularity > > > > > > radius, measured from the outside. > > > > > > > As light would appear to be the only thing affected by a crouton, > > > > > > light bending would have to be detected. I'll have a think. > > > > > > If the dark energy force is the non mass of dark matter which warps > > > > > but does not have mass, then the relative concentrations of matter, > > > > > dark matter and the dark energy effect measurements should be able to > > > > > infer an estimate of the avarage dark matter cruton radius, or a > > > > > radius based on the expected splitting into cruton numbers. > > > > > Dark energy is a change in state of dark matter. Three dimensional > > > > space consists of dark matter and matter. It is dark matter which > > > > warps. The physical effects associated with the warping is energy. > > > > > > Would this then be applied to the upper radiation frequency bound > > > > > expected for 'a big bang' absorbtion of all above frequencies ... umm > > > > > I'll think some more. > > > > > It's not the Big Bang. It's the Big Ongoing.- Hide quoted text - > > > > > - Show quoted text - > > > > There is an absolute beginning of the universe/hypersphere. > > > > Mitch Raemsch > > > You choose to have faith in that because you are first and foremost a > > child of God. > > No buster. I am God. > We are all god. The universe is god. Get over yourself. > > > > In the physics of nature, nature and what occurs physically in nature, > > is foremost. > > > In the physics of nature, it is not the Big Bang, it is the Big > > Ongoing.- Hide quoted text - > > > - Show quoted text - > >
From: Jacko on 21 Jul 2010 21:51 Our universe probly went nova from the outside at some instant in time. The question of if this was just an expansion, of a time eternal singularity, within a singularity is debatable.
From: Jacko on 21 Jul 2010 21:53 > We are all god. The universe is god. Get over yourself. There is only one true unity of all, one universe and one singularity. God the infinite, god the infinitesimal and god the nothing.
From: mpc755 on 21 Jul 2010 21:54
On Jul 21, 9:51 pm, Jacko <jackokr...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Our universe probly went nova from the outside at some instant in > time. The question of if this was just an expansion, of a time eternal > singularity, within a singularity is debatable. It is not the Big Bang, it is the Big Ongoing. |