|
Register | Sign In |
|
QuickSearch
Summations Only | Thread ▼ Details |
|
Thread Info
|
|
|
Author | Topic: The black hole at the center of the Universe. | |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Dr Adequate Member (Idle past 284 days) Posts: 16113 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22392 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Son Goku Inactive Member |
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.'
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 lived another 25 years after this confession, never saying anything about his Cosmological Constant except how much he regretted it. 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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Lamont Member (Idle past 3942 days) Posts: 147 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Lamont Member (Idle past 3942 days) Posts: 147 Joined: |
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?
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Lamont Member (Idle past 3942 days) Posts: 147 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Lamont Member (Idle past 3942 days) Posts: 147 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Lamont Member (Idle past 3942 days) Posts: 147 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Peter Lamont Member (Idle past 3942 days) Posts: 147 Joined: |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
JonF Member (Idle past 168 days) Posts: 6174 Joined:
|
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Panda Member (Idle past 3713 days) Posts: 2688 From: UK Joined: |
Peter Lamont writes:
Ok...I'll bite.
I wish you would read it. quote:Well, to follow your obscure parlance... There are also:
"There is no great invention, from fire to flying, which has not been hailed as an insult to some god." J. B. S. Haldane
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Percy Member Posts: 22392 From: New Hampshire Joined: Member Rating: 5.2 |
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
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
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.
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Taq Member Posts: 9973 Joined: Member Rating: 5.6 |
Percy, any accelerating expansion is inward. How can you claim that when the space between any two points is increasing?
|
|
|
Do Nothing Button
Copyright 2001-2023 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved
Version 4.2
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2024