Community > Forum > The Spaceflight Cafe > The Big Bang ?

The Big Bang ?

Posted by: johnrox2 - Sun Mar 17, 2013 10:36 am
Post new topic Reply to topic
 [ 34 posts ] 
The Big Bang ? 
Author Message
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:15 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Columbus, GA USA
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Sun Apr 07, 2013 11:39 pm
It appears to be a common mistake...


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 9:47 pm
Posts: 821
Location: Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) - capital of Israel!
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Mon Apr 08, 2013 10:48 pm
Lourens wrote:
The Big Band Theory of the universe? Is that the one where Louis Armstrong landed on the Moon? :lol:


LOL.

_________________
“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return.”
-Anonymous


Back to top
Profile WWW
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
avatar
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 7:44 am
Posts: 707
Location: Haarlem, The Netherlands
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Tue Apr 09, 2013 4:57 pm
And then of course there is the Big Scam theory of the universe, in which inflation was caused by steroid abuse and Lance Armstrong landed on the moon...

Ok, I'll stop now 8)

_________________
Say, can you feel the thunder in the air? Just like the moment ’fore it hits – then it’s everywhere
What is this spell we’re under, do you care? The might to rise above it is now within your sphere
Machinae Supremacy – Sid Icarus


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
avatar
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 7:44 am
Posts: 707
Location: Haarlem, The Netherlands
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:33 am
Back on topic, if Prof. Erik Verlinde is correct and gravity does not exist then there can't have been a Big Bang either... (Note: Verlinde is a serious and well-respected physicist, not some crackpot.)

_________________
Say, can you feel the thunder in the air? Just like the moment ’fore it hits – then it’s everywhere
What is this spell we’re under, do you care? The might to rise above it is now within your sphere
Machinae Supremacy – Sid Icarus


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:15 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Columbus, GA USA
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Thu Apr 11, 2013 12:50 pm
I hate it when "The Big Bang" (or Band if you like :wink: ) is described using the grade school metaphor of an "explosion". You would think that a physics would know better...

General Relativity does hint and imply that gravity isn't just the attraction of matter to each other. So this isn't that much of leap of deduction.

I do like that there is serious questioning of the "Standard Model" going on. It is getting rather frayed around the edges.


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
avatar
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 7:44 am
Posts: 707
Location: Haarlem, The Netherlands
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Thu Apr 11, 2013 1:59 pm
Well, that's what he's saying right, that it's the wrong metaphor. If I understand correctly, his main contribution seems to be that he can derive Einstein's space-time curvature from differences in entropy, i.e. stuff is heavy because it contains lots of information. Johannes Koelman gives some interesting explanations on his blog.

_________________
Say, can you feel the thunder in the air? Just like the moment ’fore it hits – then it’s everywhere
What is this spell we’re under, do you care? The might to rise above it is now within your sphere
Machinae Supremacy – Sid Icarus


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:15 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Columbus, GA USA
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Thu Apr 11, 2013 2:55 pm
I don't buy that analogy either. Mathematics is a model and means of describing how the physical world functions, but it's not literally the way it does so.

Theoretical physicists have a tendency to get so wrapped up in their equations that they forget this.


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 9:47 pm
Posts: 821
Location: Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) - capital of Israel!
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Thu Apr 11, 2013 5:42 pm
JamesG wrote:
I don't buy that analogy either. Mathematics is a model and means of describing how the physical world functions, but it's not literally the way it does so.

Theoretical physicists have a tendency to get so wrapped up in their equations that they forget this.


Yes, you don't need mathematics to explain physics, necessarily. You could use colors, for example, or directions, or whether or not a particle has a sense of humor . . .

_________________
“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return.”
-Anonymous


Back to top
Profile WWW
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:15 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Columbus, GA USA
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Thu Apr 11, 2013 5:51 pm
I don't know about the sense of humor, but color and spin direction are used to describe particles. :P


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 9:47 pm
Posts: 821
Location: Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) - capital of Israel!
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Thu Apr 11, 2013 6:11 pm
yeah, there isn't a funny quark. I should have written, "how they taste".

_________________
“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return.”
-Anonymous


Back to top
Profile WWW
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:15 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Columbus, GA USA
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Thu Apr 11, 2013 6:43 pm
Neutrinos have "flavors". :lol:


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
avatar
Joined: Thu Oct 27, 2005 7:44 am
Posts: 707
Location: Haarlem, The Netherlands
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Thu Apr 11, 2013 6:49 pm
JamesG wrote:
I don't buy that analogy either. Mathematics is a model and means of describing how the physical world functions, but it's not literally the way it does so.


I'm not so sure about that. Quantum computing has been shown to be equivalent to quantum mechanics, so we can say just as well that reality is being computed as that it plays out according to the laws of physics. Similarly, the concepts of thermodynamic entropy and information entropy have been found to be closely interlinked in the study of black holes and the holographic principle, which is what Verlinde's ideas are based on. The jury is still out of course, but I'm not betting against an information-based Theory Of Everything.

If you're making a metaphysical point, as in the controversy surrounding the interpretation of quantum mechanics, well, that's a philosophical debate that I don't think will ever be resolved...

Incidentally, there are strange and charm quarks, so social behaviour is apparently also fair game for physicists to model :-).

Edit: fixed quote; urls without quotation marks, quotes with...

_________________
Say, can you feel the thunder in the air? Just like the moment ’fore it hits – then it’s everywhere
What is this spell we’re under, do you care? The might to rise above it is now within your sphere
Machinae Supremacy – Sid Icarus


Last edited by Lourens on Fri Apr 12, 2013 10:24 am, edited 1 time in total.



Back to top
Profile
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon Dec 18, 2006 11:15 pm
Posts: 916
Location: Columbus, GA USA
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Thu Apr 11, 2013 7:56 pm
Lourens wrote:

If you're making a metaphysical point, as in the controversy surrounding the interpretation of quantum mechanics, well, that's a philosophical debate that I don't think will ever be resolved...


I am. Maths do serve as an adequate definition for the physical, even quantum physics (which is simply the math of probabilities and unknown states, not reality). But much like human languages define and shape our ways of thinking, so too may our concept of mathematics.


Back to top
Profile
Space Station Member
Space Station Member
User avatar
Joined: Sun Jan 17, 2010 2:21 pm
Posts: 457
Location: B.O.A. UK
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Thu Apr 11, 2013 8:17 pm
JamesG wrote:
Lourens wrote:

If you're making a metaphysical point, as in the controversy surrounding the interpretation of quantum mechanics, well, that's a philosophical debate that I don't think will ever be resolved...


I am. Maths do serve as an adequate definition for the physical, even quantum physics (which is simply the math of probabilities and unknown states, not reality). But much like human languages define and shape our ways of thinking, so too may our concept of mathematics.


I think elsewhere on this forum i have posted my thoughts that belief in DarkMatter maybe partly a pure maths error and not taking into account that the universe is still expanding. but the idea that a pure maths view of the world can differ from real world is easily shown with my old squaring the circle joke quoted below from where i think i first posted it. on the thudgame.com forum


Quote:
Dibbler wrote:

All that stuff really WAS heavy, couldn't bear to read it all...

Not really this topic, but today during physics I managed to prove that pi aproximatly equals pi. I then proceeded to feel really stupid Rolling Eyes

It went this way:

I tried to calculate the area in a circle ( S ), the radius is R. I divided it into perfect polygons ( n of them), calculated the area of each one, and multyplied by n. Then I did lim n-->infinity. It turned out to be this:

A = (R^2 * sin (2*pi/n) / 2) * n = pi* R^2 - divide by R^2
sin (2 * pi / n ) * n / 2 = pi - now I use the approximation " sin x = x " that holds when x is small
2 * pi / n * n / 2 ~ pi - divide by stuff
pi ~ pi.
-_-

SANEAlex wrote:
Actually i think you could be correct in saying that pi is only approximately equal to pi as if you believe we live in a quantised Universe with Planck's length being the smallest unit of length then pi would depend on the size of the circle as the closest thing to a circle in a quantised Universe would be polygons with sides of Planck's length with the smallest circle being a triangle and the second smallest being a square thus making the square a second rate circle :twisted:

_________________
Someone has to tilt at windmills.
So that we know what to do when the real giants come!!!!


Back to top
Profile WWW
Space Station Commander
Space Station Commander
User avatar
Joined: Mon May 31, 2004 9:47 pm
Posts: 821
Location: Yerushalayim (Jerusalem) - capital of Israel!
Post Re: The Big Bang ?   Posted on: Thu Apr 11, 2013 11:24 pm
Perhaps not on topic, but unlike as is taught in high school, heavier objects do fall faster (because they pull the Earth with a greater gravitational pull). Also, is it possible to figure out the half-life of a cat?

_________________
“Once you have tasted flight, you will forever walk the earth with your eyes turned skyward, for there you have been, and there you will always long to return.”
-Anonymous


Back to top
Profile WWW
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 34 posts ] 
 

Who is online 

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests


cron
© 2014 The International Space Fellowship, developed by Gabitasoft Interactive. All Rights Reserved.  Privacy Policy | Terms of Use