Right Handed Spiral Galaxies are Preferred

Discussion in 'Astronomy, Exobiology, & Cosmology' started by danshawen, Nov 8, 2015.

  1. OnlyMe Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,914
    I think the point might have been, that directing them at me.., based on the preceding discussion was a stretch.
     
  2. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  3. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    The whole universe should have a net zero angular momentum, if the origin of universe is from BB with zero angular momentum. The handedness bias apart, a system can still have null angular momentum even if independent bodies are spinning in either direction with a bias (depending on the part size and spin).

    My idea is somewhat different. What is the net angular moementum of Hydrogen (1e + 1p system)? I am not aware, if it is non-zero, then we should have a bias in that direction.


    First part (before OR) is the cause effect reversed. The second part is in direct conflict with conservation of energy. (Keep in mind that Physics behind moving away is expansion of spacetime)


    This entire business of dark matter and dark energy is too speculative in the present form, with full of holes.


    It depends how an object is captured by an existing Gravitational System. If it is some kind of supernova explosion, then the resultant debris spin has to be same as original object, if an object is acquired later on by such system, thenthe object will come with its own spin and rotate in the direction of system. I suggest you should look at Lagrangian points (no gravity) of a gravitational system.[/QUOTE]
     
  4. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  5. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    Your point is well taken, the reference suggests that 48% - 52% appears to have been caused by bias only.
     
  6. Google AdSense Guest Advertisement



    to hide all adverts.
  7. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    On a serious note, in your opinion, how QGT will tell us about preferred direction or preferred reference?
     
  8. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    As usual what you think is neither here nor there, and as usual just another insulting accusation which reflects on your own dishonesty, which I have highlighted so often under this handle and your old one.
     
  9. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Firstly I don't believe your question is serious, considering the online clowning you chose to involve yourself in at your own admission.
    But anyway.....Most mainstream scientists as distinct from known cranks, know that a QGT should reveal conditions at the first Planck/quantum instant after the BB, as most would realize. What that will tell us we are not exactly sure. But yes, if there is/was any original angular momentum, that could be revealed.
     
  10. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    All aspect of cosmology are important and worth consideration.
    My thoughts are as I have expressed.
    Another point that has not as yet been raised is how any universe angular momentum could relate to Inflation.
    And another thought...how does any supposed angular momentum and whatever it is in relation to, relate to GR itself.
    How would gravitational radiation figure in a universe with angular velocity?
     
    Last edited: Nov 9, 2015
  11. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    No where near as speculative as some of the nonsense you have pushed in these threads.
    Evidence of DM is pretty strong now......
    http://chandra.harvard.edu/press/06_releases/press_082106.html

    NASA Finds Direct Proof of Dark Matter
    For Release: August 21, 2006

    NASA RELEASE 06-297

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    X-ray/Optical Composite of 1E 0657-56
    Press Image and Caption
    Dark matter and normal matter have been wrenched apart by the tremendous collision of two large clusters of galaxies. The discovery, using NASA's Chandra X-ray Observatory and other telescopes, gives direct evidence for the existence of dark matter.

    "This is the most energetic cosmic event, besides the Big Bang, which we know about," said team member Maxim Markevitch of the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics in Cambridge, Mass.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!


    Gravitational Lensing Explanation
    These observations provide the strongest evidence yet that most of the matter in the universe is dark. Despite considerable evidence for dark matter, some scientists have proposed alternative theories for gravity where it is stronger on intergalactic scales than predicted by Newton and Einstein, removing the need for dark matter. However, such theories cannot explain the observed effects of this collision.

    "A universe that's dominated by dark stuff seems preposterous, so we wanted to test whether there were any basic flaws in our thinking," said Doug Clowe of the University of Arizona at Tucson, and leader of the study. "These results are direct proof that dark matter exists."
    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
    änd this
    http://www.nature.com/nphys/journal/v11/n3/full/nphys3237.html
    """"""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""""
    http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/astro/dareng.html

    Of course we all wait for your next paper on your version of 20th/21st century cosmology to be demolished. Should be fun.

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

     
  12. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,003
    More accurate would be that you accept the preferred direction only after it is accepted by the mainstream, not?

    There is a quite simple symmetry argument from the SM in favour of a preferred direction. One problem with spinors is that they do not fit into the usual rotational symmetry pattern, you have to rotate them twice to return them into their original state. This is different for a pair of spinors. Spinors exist only in electroweak pairs. And for such a pair exists not only a spin operator, but also an operator named isospin. And spin + isospin is already an operator with the same symmetry group as usual rotations.

    This makes it natural to think that a rotation is, in fact, represented on the fundamental level by the operator spin + isospin. And that the fundamental rotational symmetry is broken, similar to the rotational symmetry of a ferromagnetic material. This preferred direction defines a preferred isospin operator, the one which distinguishes leptons from neutrinos and up-quarks from down-quarks.
     
  13. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,003
    Sorry, but there is no such thing as what a theory which has not been found yet should reveal. Given that it is simply a quantization of an existing theory with singularities, it may appear to be a theory with the same singularities or even worse ones. This is at least what we know from EM theory, which is harmless and unproblematic classically but has infinities, even if renormalizable ones, in the quantum case. As a consequence, QED is only an effective theory. Even if it is unknown at which distance it fails, one can be sufficiently sure that it fails. Correspondingly, a hope that the GR singularities simply disappear by quantization alone is nothing but wishful thinking.
     
  14. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Sign of a genuine crank at best, or a liar at worst, taking a statement out of context to highlight your own agenda...do better Schmelzer.
    What I said.......
     
  15. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    http://www.einstein-online.info/elementary/quantum/border_regions


    http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/quantum-gravity/

    Quantum Gravity, broadly construed, is a physical theory (still ‘under construction’) incorporating both the principles of general relativity and quantum theory. Such a theory is expected to be able to provide a satisfactory description of the microstructure of spacetime at the so-called Planck scale, at which all fundamental constants of the ingredient theories, c (the velocity of light in vacuo), ℏ (the reduced Planck's constant), and G (Newton's constant), come together to form units of mass, length, and time. This scale is so remote from current experimental capabilities that the empirical testing of quantum gravity proposals along standard lines is rendered near-impossible.

    In most, though not all, theories of quantum gravity, the gravitational field itself is also quantized. Since the contemporary theory of gravity, general relativity, describes gravitation as the curvature of spacetime by matter and energy, a quantization of gravity seemingly implies some sort of quantization of spacetime geometry: quantum spacetime. Insofar as all extant physical theories rely on a classical (non-quantum) spacetime background, this presents not only extreme technical difficulties, but also profound methodological and ontological challenges for the philosopher and the physicist. Though quantum gravity has been the subject of investigation by physicists for almost a century, philosophers have only just begun to investigate its philosophical implications.
     
  16. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Most certainly, as opposed to some crank that takes statements out of context to highlight some long discarded cosmology that he still clings to and that languishes in cyber space without any attention to date.
    I predict a barrage of excuses and semantic bullshit now Schmelzer, just as you so readily use in the political sections.
     
  17. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,003
    Typical aggressive speech of somebody without arguments about the content. The statement I have quoted remains as stupid as it was, no evidence was added that justifies it, and even if we forget that "own agenda", if it would be true, would be an irrelevant ad hominem too, there is not even any evidence for this.

    And, I see, further attacks added:
    What I propose about cosmology is, first of all, quite close to the actual mainstream cosmology, with the difference mainly one of interpretation. Second, it has never been discarded, except in your own fantasies. Last but not least, my posting was not at all about my personal ideas about cosmology, so that this remark is completely off-topic.

    And, as usual, no answer at all about the content, the argument related with isospin about a preferred direction in our universe.
     
  18. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    This is your stuff?

    What is first quantum instant? Is it from t = 0 to t = Planck's time or from r = 0 to r = Planck's Length or you have a feeling that both these happened at the same instant?

    As far as I can understand, QGT can still come even if we fail to resolve the origin issue (BB), so your linking QGT with BB is as vague as anything.
     
  19. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Aggressive?? You took a statement out of context quite dishonestly, as so often occurs with would be's if they could be's alternative cranks.
    And just as obviously you have an agenda, that languishes without any citations in cyber space.

    I'll attack all that take statements out of context to push an agenda as you and "the god"so often do.
    Try being honest and try for once in your life, being man enough to admit to indiscretions.
    You are misrepresenting again. The two issues since you dived in head first, are your dishonesty in taking what I said out of context and your agenda for doing so.
    If you want to discuss cosmology, then stick to mainstream in the mainstream cosmology sections as I do.
    In that regard of course we have either at best another misunderstanding, or at worst another lie. Nothing I have said is a fantasy, including my claims re yourself.
    If you can't stand the heat, stay out of the kitchen.
     
  20. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Therein lies your problem...Understanding.
    Please check out the links.
     
  21. paddoboy Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    27,543
    Correct on the off topic remark, but I was answering a "serious

    Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

    question" from the god. You dove in head first trying to be a pedantic smart arse but came undone....totally.
    And I have given my thoughts on the OP topic in a couple of threads.
     
  22. The God Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    3,546
    You must be joking; Can he comment on that? Every time don't expect the enthusiastic fellow to rush to google, get something and then copy-paste it without understanding an iota about it. Most of the time his posts are abuses only for two reasons, 1.He has nothing else to offer, and 2. He is tired for the day to google further.
     
  23. Schmelzer Valued Senior Member

    Messages:
    5,003
    Self-commenting. BTW, that's not heat, it is the usual frustration of a loser which shows that he has no arguments.
     

Share This Page