The Story of the Universe: : Tutorial :

Sure you didn't

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

If you knew anything about scientific theories, you would know as I have already told you many times, that it is always an ongoing concern.
Gravitational waves confirmation is in the first instant a prediction of GR and Inflation and was further confirmation of that.

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

They didn't confirm gravitational waves. When they do, it will be confirmation of something. Until then, it is just a prediction.



---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Log in or Sign up to hide all adverts.

Here is video of some scientists who don't believe in the big bang. One of them is Edwin Hubble! He never believed in it.





---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Paddoboy,

Anyone who would have seen your song and dance on that volume/radius/diameter and your clear inability to calculate surface area & volume of a sphere when radius is given, would instantly know that you lack formal education in Maths & Physics...

 

Very true !

Now lets us see for argument sake, don't jump to conclusion, that in this ongoing concern what if

1. BB is knocked off.
2. GR is knocked off.

Then what? Can you imagine how many hypos, theories, misadventures will crumble with that...to name a few Inflation will go away; your best pal BH will go away; white holes will go away; this ripple in spacetime will go away; gravitational lensing in present form will go away; HR...no, it will not go away. Think loud, then you will understand the beauty of scientific exploration..

& let me tell you, both will be knocked off, very soon. This is my speculation.

 

True. Paddoboy only has a forum education in song and dance.



---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

You mean my approximated remarks about squeezing the Sun into a volume of around 5kms? and your questions re "Schwarzchild diameter "which we all know is not generally referred to as that...Schwarzchild radius is what is used.

I stand by all those claims as does my tutorial, and unlike you and rajesh, I'm certainly not embarrassed or in any other way disappointed about my lack of formal education. Unlike you I can learn and have no inflated ego to bruise, or any demolished scientific paper to brood over.
Not knocking formal education at all, it certainly benefits most people quite well, but it also leaves self appraised, delusional, ego inflated monsters like yourself and rajesh still as ignorant as ever....that is if either of you did have any formal education as you both claimed. Or are you claiming the the learning required for changing a light bulb requires formal education?

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Dream on my Son.......
Both the BB and GR will probably be still standing as near perfect, overwhelmingly supported models when you are long dead and buried.
Even if and when we finally formulate a validated QGT, I would see it as also encompassing both the BB and GR, much as GR encompassed Newtonian, which we still use every day.

In the meantime, I would presume that your present pseudo cosmological aspects will certainly faded into obscurity.
You see my dear god [

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

] what you rant and rave about with regards to your personal cosmological beliefs, are confined to this forum, and perhaps other similar science forums that you have not been banned from.
What I'm trying to say in as friendly way as possible, is that you and your other alternative hypothesis pushers that infest forums such as this, are making no difference to accepted, evidenced backed mainstream cosmology.

 

While your own "formal education"is in silly economic doomsday scenarios, and half baked videos on cosmology, where you are unable to pin point anything said to support your claims.
Now please show me where Laurence Krauss or Edwin Hubble disown or reject the BB.
Or are you just flapping your gums as you did when confronted with reality in your economic doomsday thread.

 

Watch Neil DeGrasse Tyson Explain the History of the Universe in 8 Minutes

Expert mind-blower, Pluto-hater and all-around explainer Neil DeGrasse Tyson has now proved he can explain everything in the universe by explaining literally everything in the universe.

On MinutePhysics, the famed astrophysicist draws from his book “Origins: Fourteen Billion Years of Cosmic Evolution.” He starts with the beginning of time about 13.7 billion years ago, when “all the space, and all the matter, and all the energy of the known universe was contained in a volume less than one-trillionth the size of the point of a pin.” He ends with homosapiens, who are enabled “to deduce the origin and the evolution of the universe,” like Tyson just did.


http://time.com/3971472/neil-degrasse-tyson-explains-universe/

 

Ha ha. Dude. I won that one slam dunk.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

That argument centered on open system thermodynamics, which you know absolutely nothing about. Here is the Entropy Rate Balance Equation for Control Volumes, from which the Etp function is derived:

\(\frac{dS_{CV}}{dt} =\sum_j\frac{\dot{Q}_{j}}{T_{j}} +\sum_i\dot{m}_{i}s_{i} -\sum_e\dot{m}_{e}s_{e} +\dot{\sigma}_{cv}\)

Check out the discussion:
http://www.sciforums.com/threads/the-etp-model-has-been-empirically-confirmed.152487/page-50

Russ_Watter ran away with his tail between his legs. So did the rest of the peak oil denier crew.
The Etp model has been confirmed.

You are *WAY* out of your league, paddoboy.



---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Here is an interesting alternative to the Big Bang Theory:



"According to modern cosmology, the Steady State model of the universe, an alternative to the Big Bang theory, is now obsolete. Yet, modern cosmology faces devastating blows to Big Bang cosmology. "Dark matter" weakly interacting massive particles (WIMPS) have not been detected. Super-symmetry particles have also not be detected. The recent observation of gravitational waves has been discredited. The absence of these discoveries is a devastating blow to modern cosmology placing it on shaky ground. As the Big Bang and Inflation theory begin to loose their luster, the return to a steady state theory of the universe seems inevitable.

We’ve been exploring the idea of three-dimensional time and applying it to physics. Multidimensional time isn’t a new idea by any stretch. Yet, a unique way of deriving three-dimensional time emerges from a set of simple and peculiar equations. Let’s suspend everything we know about time for a moment and open up our imagination. The concepts of ordinary time and time dilation found in physics have equivalences with our use of multidimensional time and are easily accounted for. These equivalences gives rise to temporal mechanics, a new approach to the concept of mass and how it relates to energy and conservation laws. Can multidimensional time be used to solve the unresolved problems in physics?"
~Gavin Wince



---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Yep, totally rejected due to contradictions to what we observe.

The original reported result was nullified as directly detecting gravitational waves. It certainly does not invalidate gravity waves as we still have strong evidence that they do exist.
The problem is the technology required to detect them. Remember how long it took to create GP-B [3 OR 4 Decades] to verify the other predictions of GR such as spacetime curvature and the Lense Thirring effect.

Total unmitigated bullshit. Unless of course you have any evidence of any mainstream astronomer/cosmologist disowning the BB.
Remembering you claimed Professor Krauss had disowned the BB, yet you could never show where.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Fact was of course that claim was a furphy, just as the above new claims by yourself and the crank you quote are furphies.

Another Hans Christian Andersen like inspired fairy tale.

 

I had to look up furphy since it is not commonly used in American English. Are you Australian?



---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

That's nice.....In the mean time you should also check out the difference between unsupported speculation and a scientific theory.

 

Cool. In the meantime, why not just answer my simple question?

Are you an Aussie?



---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

I was born in the belly of stars. Some of the same stuff that went into forming the Earth. I am a child of the Universe

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Were you born on the earth? If so, were you born in Australia?



---Futilitist

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

 

Yes, I'm an Aussie, born in Brisbane Q'Land and living in Maroubra, Sydney on the shores of one of the best surfing beaches on our coast.

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!

Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image!