Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
4 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,817 Year: 3,074/9,624 Month: 919/1,588 Week: 102/223 Day: 13/17 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The black hole at the center of the Universe.
Dr Adequate
Member (Idle past 284 days)
Posts: 16113
Joined: 07-20-2006


Message 61 of 305 (699929)
05-28-2013 12:12 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Peter Lamont
05-25-2013 5:54 PM


When in 1998, while looking to see how fast the expansion of the Observbable Universe was slowing down in the manner of all Outward Expansions, Modern Scientists dug up Einstein's Cosmological Constant (Anti-Gravity) which Einstein himself had denouced in the strongest language possible, calling it 'The greatest blunder in his career.'
And since Einstein was never wrong about the cosmological constant we should take his opinions on it as gospel ... oh, wait.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-25-2013 5:54 PM Peter Lamont has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 68 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-28-2013 6:56 PM Dr Adequate has not replied
 Message 81 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-29-2013 5:41 PM Dr Adequate has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 62 of 305 (699932)
05-28-2013 12:51 PM
Reply to: Message 57 by Peter Lamont
05-27-2013 9:05 PM


Re: Context
Hi Peter,
If acceleration implies movement inward while deceleration implies movement outward, then since the expansion of the universe was decelerating until about 5.5 billion years ago it must have been an outward movement up until then.
Then after 5.5 billion years ago the expansion began accelerating, so in your view the movement must have become inward.
Can you explain how outward movement suddenly became inward?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 57 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-27-2013 9:05 PM Peter Lamont has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 67 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-28-2013 6:43 PM Percy has replied

  
Son Goku
Inactive Member


Message 63 of 305 (699954)
05-28-2013 5:15 PM
Reply to: Message 41 by Peter Lamont
05-25-2013 5:54 PM


When in 1998, while looking to see how fast the expansion of the Observbable Universe was slowing down in the manner of all Outward Expansions, Modern Scientists dug up Einstein's Cosmological Constant (Anti-Gravity) which Einstein himself had denouced in the strongest language possible, calling it 'The greatest blunder in his career.'
Einstein lived another 25 years after this confession, never saying anything about his Cosmological Constant except how much he regretted it.
When you derive the field equations of General Relativity, you naturally get the cosmological constant or lambda as it is more commonly known. However the theory doesn't tell you what value the constant should have.
Einstein then the constant to a certain value in order to make the universe static (neither expanding or contracting), since he found that more aesthetically pleasing. Observational evidence then showed that the universe was expanding, so lambda must be very small. Einstein then realised he was wrong about what value lambda had and admitted he made a mistake.
So we knew lambda was quite small, near zero. In most cases the difference between a small value of lambda and a zero value is negligible. It makes no difference for stellar orbits or black holes or neutron stars. So for the next few decades we mostly worked with lambda set to zero, since the equations are much easier to solve in this case.
Then in 1998, we found lambda wasn't zero. No big deal really, nobody had being claiming or desperately hoping it was zero.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 41 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-25-2013 5:54 PM Peter Lamont has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 66 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-28-2013 6:30 PM Son Goku has not replied

  
Peter Lamont
Member (Idle past 3942 days)
Posts: 147
Joined: 09-11-2012


Message 64 of 305 (699957)
05-28-2013 6:02 PM
Reply to: Message 54 by Iblis
05-25-2013 7:19 PM


Re: The black hole at the center of your argument
Iblis, Dark Energy doesn't exist.
Inward Expansion;
A low pressure is the same thing as expansion.
On it's way to the nozzle of a Central Vac, drawn by a low pressure area, Air will accelerate as it nears said nozzle, losing pressure and expanding. Air goes into the nozzle in it's most expanded state. This represents an accelerating expansion and please note the Inward Direction.
Actually any 'accelerating expansion' is inward. In 1998 they found out the 'expansion' of the Observable Universe was 'accelerating.'
That's why I say we're going in. I explain this in my 'Observational Evidence. I wish you would read it.
You, with your Big Bang, have an 'accelerating expansion,' that is Outward. An 'accelerating expansion' Outward doesen't exist.
I know around ten of these 'accelerating expansions', all of them Inward, Try thinking of one, and let me know what direction it is. They are fairly common.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 54 by Iblis, posted 05-25-2013 7:19 PM Iblis has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 91 by Iblis, posted 05-29-2013 10:42 PM Peter Lamont has replied

  
Peter Lamont
Member (Idle past 3942 days)
Posts: 147
Joined: 09-11-2012


Message 65 of 305 (699958)
05-28-2013 6:21 PM
Reply to: Message 56 by JonF
05-27-2013 7:23 PM


Re: Context
JohnF, okay, you tell me what keeps an airplane up. Are you going to tell me Acceleration doesn't lead to a loss of pressure?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 56 by JonF, posted 05-27-2013 7:23 PM JonF has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 70 by JonF, posted 05-28-2013 8:13 PM Peter Lamont has replied

  
Peter Lamont
Member (Idle past 3942 days)
Posts: 147
Joined: 09-11-2012


Message 66 of 305 (699959)
05-28-2013 6:30 PM
Reply to: Message 63 by Son Goku
05-28-2013 5:15 PM


Son Goku, it was in 1998 they found the Expansion of the Observable Universe was accelerating. Any accelerating expansion is Inward, I show this clearly in my 'Observational Evidence' quite early on in this thread. I wish you would read it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Son Goku, posted 05-28-2013 5:15 PM Son Goku has not replied

  
Peter Lamont
Member (Idle past 3942 days)
Posts: 147
Joined: 09-11-2012


Message 67 of 305 (699960)
05-28-2013 6:43 PM
Reply to: Message 62 by Percy
05-28-2013 12:51 PM


Re: Context
Hi Percy.n Where do you get this idea that the expansion slowed. There is absolutely no evidence of any 'slowing down' of the expansion. The expansion started slowly and has since accelerated.
Percy, any accelerating expansion is inward. Try thinking of one and see what direction it is (not your Universe). There is no such thing as an Outward Accelerating Expansion. Unless you can think of one.
I explain this clearly in my 'Observational Evidence', I wish you would read it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 62 by Percy, posted 05-28-2013 12:51 PM Percy has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 72 by Percy, posted 05-29-2013 7:12 AM Peter Lamont has replied
 Message 75 by Taq, posted 05-29-2013 9:18 AM Peter Lamont has not replied

  
Peter Lamont
Member (Idle past 3942 days)
Posts: 147
Joined: 09-11-2012


Message 68 of 305 (699961)
05-28-2013 6:56 PM
Reply to: Message 61 by Dr Adequate
05-28-2013 12:12 PM


Einstein denounced his 'Lambda' in the strongest language possible, calling it the graetest mistake of his career.
Any 'accelerating expansion' is inward. I explain this clearly in my 'Observational Evidence,' early in this thread. I ,wish you would read it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by Dr Adequate, posted 05-28-2013 12:12 PM Dr Adequate has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by Taq, posted 05-29-2013 9:17 AM Peter Lamont has not replied

  
Peter Lamont
Member (Idle past 3942 days)
Posts: 147
Joined: 09-11-2012


Message 69 of 305 (699962)
05-28-2013 7:06 PM
Reply to: Message 39 by Taq
05-24-2013 10:48 AM


Re: Uhh ... Well ...
Taq, Space isn't expanding. The Universe is a vortex, like the Milky Way, or Whirpool Galaxy, complete with a black hole at the center.
We're going in, not out. Any 'accelerating expansion' is Inward. I show this clearly in my 'Observational Evidence' early in this thread.
I wish you would read it.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 39 by Taq, posted 05-24-2013 10:48 AM Taq has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by Panda, posted 05-29-2013 5:58 AM Peter Lamont has replied
 Message 73 by Taq, posted 05-29-2013 9:16 AM Peter Lamont has not replied

  
JonF
Member (Idle past 168 days)
Posts: 6174
Joined: 06-23-2003


(1)
Message 70 of 305 (699966)
05-28-2013 8:13 PM
Reply to: Message 65 by Peter Lamont
05-28-2013 6:21 PM


Re: Context
What keeps an airplane up is way off topic. Briefly, you are assuming that the same pairs of molecules that separate at the leading edge must rejoin at the trailing edge. Tain't so, there's no such restriction. The full answer is complex, look it up if you're interested.
I see you've relapsed into incoherent gibbering.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 65 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-28-2013 6:21 PM Peter Lamont has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 99 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-30-2013 3:23 PM JonF has not replied

  
Panda
Member (Idle past 3713 days)
Posts: 2688
From: UK
Joined: 10-04-2010


Message 71 of 305 (699974)
05-29-2013 5:58 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by Peter Lamont
05-28-2013 7:06 PM


Re: Uhh ... Well ...
Peter Lamont writes:
I wish you would read it.
Ok...I'll bite.
quote:
Observational Evidence...
There are two kinds of expansion, the first kind (1) Accelerates and then slows down, and the second kind (2) which starts slowly and then accelerates.
Well, to follow your obscure parlance...
There are also:
  1. Starts slowly and then slows down
  2. Accelerates slowly and then accelerates quickly
  3. Maintains a steady rate of expansion
  4. Maintains a steady rate of expansion and then slows down
  5. Maintains a steady rate of expansion and then stops
  6. Accelerates, slows down and then accelerates again
  7. Starts quickly and then accelerates
  8. etc.
So, it doesn't look like your initial premise holds up.

"There is no great invention, from fire to flying, which has not been hailed as an insult to some god." J. B. S. Haldane

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-28-2013 7:06 PM Peter Lamont has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 94 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-30-2013 2:19 PM Panda has replied

  
Percy
Member
Posts: 22392
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 5.2


Message 72 of 305 (699975)
05-29-2013 7:12 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by Peter Lamont
05-28-2013 6:43 PM


Re: Context
Peter Lamont writes:
Hi Percy.n Where do you get this idea that the expansion slowed. There is absolutely no evidence of any 'slowing down' of the expansion. The expansion started slowly and has since accelerated.
Wrong, wrong and wrong.
When the expansion settled down after the period of inflation around 13.8 billion years ago, it was decelerating. It began accelerating around 5 billion years ago. This is from the Wikipedia article on the Accelerating Universe:
Wikipedia writes:
In 1998, observations of type Ia supernovae also suggested that the expansion of the universe has been accelerating since around redshift of z~0.5
A redshift of z~0.5 corresponds to around 5.5 billion years ago. Here's an excerpt from the abstract of a technical paper titled The Turning Point for the Recent Acceleration of the Universe with a Cosmological Constant:
T. X. Zhang writes:
The universe turned its expansion from past deceleration to recent acceleration at the moment when its size was about 3/5 of the present size if the density parameter in matter is about 0.3 (or the turning point redshift is 0.67).
A red shift of .67 corresponds to about 9 billion years ago. Gee, Peter, how could you not know that the expansion hasn't always been accelerating?
Percy, any accelerating expansion is inward.
Yes, we know you think this. So since the expansion was decelerating until around 5 billion years ago when it began accelerating, how did an outward expansion suddenly become an inward expansion?
--Percy

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-28-2013 6:43 PM Peter Lamont has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 84 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-29-2013 6:05 PM Percy has replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 73 of 305 (699994)
05-29-2013 9:16 AM
Reply to: Message 69 by Peter Lamont
05-28-2013 7:06 PM


Re: Uhh ... Well ...
Taq, Space isn't expanding. The Universe is a vortex, like the Milky Way, or Whirpool Galaxy, complete with a black hole at the center.
Based on what evidence?
We're going in, not out. Any 'accelerating expansion' is Inward. I show this clearly in my 'Observational Evidence' early in this thread.
I wish you would read it.
Where do you show it? Be specific.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-28-2013 7:06 PM Peter Lamont has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 74 of 305 (699995)
05-29-2013 9:17 AM
Reply to: Message 68 by Peter Lamont
05-28-2013 6:56 PM


Einstein denounced his 'Lambda' in the strongest language possible, calling it the graetest mistake of his career.
He denounced a lambda that was equal to the force of gravity for no other purpose than to prop up a static universe.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 68 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-28-2013 6:56 PM Peter Lamont has not replied

  
Taq
Member
Posts: 9973
Joined: 03-06-2009
Member Rating: 5.6


Message 75 of 305 (699996)
05-29-2013 9:18 AM
Reply to: Message 67 by Peter Lamont
05-28-2013 6:43 PM


Re: Context
Percy, any accelerating expansion is inward.
How can you claim that when the space between any two points is increasing?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 67 by Peter Lamont, posted 05-28-2013 6:43 PM Peter Lamont has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Panda, posted 05-29-2013 10:38 AM Taq has not replied

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024