Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 63 (9161 total)
2 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,585 Year: 2,842/9,624 Month: 687/1,588 Week: 93/229 Day: 4/61 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Where Did Big Bang Energy Come From?
Kraniet
Inactive Member


Message 76 of 84 (215651)
06-09-2005 1:18 PM


this is all very interesting. im finding the string theory to be the winner when it comes to explaining "the world". Even tough it isnt really a true explanation that havent really been tested yet it seems to explain alot of things.
Dont know how well people know the string theory but it actually began with Einstein wanting to unify all the forces to one (just like the magnetic and electric force where found to come from one force; electromagnetic force). He didnt belive in quantum mechanics though so he spent the rest of his life working on something he couldnt solve. Since then with the string theory all the forces exept gravity can be combined to one force. Gravity is the real trickster here since it dont have the same force as the others dont know the exact figure but its really really weak compared to the electromagnetic force.
And thats also the reason why scientist cant go back to the time of big bang, all the calculations break down when gravity is brouth in to the equation. And since big bang is a collection of all the energies we need the solve the string theory (or rather the mystery of gravity) to be able to go back to big bang.
Me myself find it very plausible that the big bang were the result of to branes colliding even though it seems like a ad-hoc statement (since it doesnt explain where the energy came from).
Another question that sylas might be able to explain. String theory predicts 10 dimensions, the 4 "big" dimension we can see and 6 "curled up" dimensions to small for us to see. But if there are branes big as the whole universe dont they need to exist in a dimension as well? How is it that the brane we live in/on can exist if there is no space outside ou universe? Strings are one-dimension "thingies" and that would imply that the branes exist in another dimension(s)? And what would happen if the universe expanded to the edge of the brane?
Dont know how this is relevant to the original question but still related and interesting.
A note also about string theory being the only candidate for explaining these things. Stephen Hawkins seems to believe that the same can be done with special realtivity and quantum mechanics. But that is another question all by it self..

Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by 1.61803, posted 06-09-2005 6:38 PM Kraniet has not replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1494 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 77 of 84 (215720)
06-09-2005 6:38 PM
Reply to: Message 76 by Kraniet
06-09-2005 1:18 PM


Hi, string theory has several versions which one do you believe "best describes" the world?
I personally find string theory very difficult to wrap my head around. How convienant, planke size strings are the fundamental element that manifest matter.
But string is impossible to test because one can not observe something that IS the limit of size. So string theory what does it tell us if it can never be verified?
And this concept of a one dimentional string? That just seems silly. The very idea of something being one dimentional escapes me. Try it..just try to imagine something one dimentional. No width, No Length, Just Height? and existing in no space/time dimention? I just cant imagine it.
A planke size, one dimentional string vibrating in multiple dimentions unifying the 4 fundlemental forces of the universe and manifesting matter as quantum foam.
Sounds just as good as Genesis and I don't mean Phil Collins.

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

This message is a reply to:
 Message 76 by Kraniet, posted 06-09-2005 1:18 PM Kraniet has not replied

  
Kraniet
Inactive Member


Message 78 of 84 (215723)
06-09-2005 7:01 PM


well actually there is only one string theory. It just have five different forms (at least thats what E.Witten says).
Yes ST is not verified in any way there are just several indications that it could be right. Some problems that couldnt be solved with relativit/quantum mechanics have been solved by ST suggesting that it could be a better way to go.
Yes the idea of one dimension or for that matter anything other than four (a bit of a stretch since i really just know how to relate to the three physical dimensions) is puzzling and hard to get. But hey i cant really understand the quantum world either but its something that seems to be proved to exist. Once upon a time people didnt belive in atoms either or that the world is round.
Now they do belive that there could be big strings the sice of galaxies or solarsystems that could be viewed directly or indirectly (by radiaton of sertain particels/energies). But since the only have one dimension and are so big they are hard to spot.
Let me also point out that up till 2004 the academic world didnt really acknowledge that there is black matter. But one of the winner of the nobel price(David J. Gross, H. David Politzer and Frank Wilczek shared the price with their Quantum chromodynamics) in physics is saying that there is not only black matter in space but also matter that is neither black och light (this third matter is also taking up some 80% of all the matter in space).
So there are some quite astounding claims being validated. For maybe only 5 years ago he would have been kicked out from all the universities and shunned from the academic world for laying something like that out.
Why should the string theory be any different? (but hey it still isnt proven so im not saying anything either way. its just that it seems plausible to be describing the world)
edit: yes i forgot some of what i wanted to write..
Time isnt very easy to understand or explain either. Maybe the reason for this is that its one dimensional? Just a thought.
ST is akin to being a ad-hoc like theory i must admit. But it has a nice ring to it dont you think? Its all in line with Kant and his "the thing in itself". Its consistent with Sofist ideas about the universe being built on music (vibrating strings). It explains why the quantum world is so chaotic and how this relates to space-time being so calm. It simply seems to answers many questions in a nice way.
This message has been edited by Kraniet, 06-09-2005 07:06 PM

Replies to this message:
 Message 79 by AdminNosy, posted 06-09-2005 7:15 PM Kraniet has not replied
 Message 81 by 1.61803, posted 06-10-2005 2:45 PM Kraniet has not replied

  
AdminNosy
Administrator
Posts: 4754
From: Vancouver, BC, Canada
Joined: 11-11-2003


Message 79 of 84 (215728)
06-09-2005 7:15 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by Kraniet
06-09-2005 7:01 PM


reply button
Could you please use the small green-marked reply button at the bottom right of the post you are replying to?
This allows for notification to go to the poster and makes it easier for others to follow the flow of conversation.
Thanks.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Kraniet, posted 06-09-2005 7:01 PM Kraniet has not replied

  
Philip
Member (Idle past 4713 days)
Posts: 656
From: Albertville, AL, USA
Joined: 03-10-2002


Message 80 of 84 (215756)
06-09-2005 10:01 PM
Reply to: Message 75 by NosyNed
06-08-2005 8:36 PM


Re: Cosmology and Redemption
Very well...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 75 by NosyNed, posted 06-08-2005 8:36 PM NosyNed has not replied

  
1.61803
Member (Idle past 1494 days)
Posts: 2928
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004


Message 81 of 84 (215931)
06-10-2005 2:45 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by Kraniet
06-09-2005 7:01 PM


Well I do not have a degree in theoretical physics so I will leave the interpretations to those who can digest it.
SST, Open, Closed,M-Theory,Brane theory and all the others is based on a fundlemental one dimentional strings with tensions and vibrations that manifest bosons, quarks and sub atomic particles in various configurations of loops and dimentions that seems to postulate how reality behaves. This is based on how the mathmatics can be manipulated to give the answers one is seeking. The fact that the string is (in theory) Plankes length and mass and one dimentional side steps many problems of the quantum world and GR altogether. The complexity of String theory and the complex Cabela-yau shapes and S-matrix manifolds and all the tremendous energies and tensions required are only adequately understood mathmatically and it would take some time to get a handle on the math.
BUT.....I guess what I am saying is I do not fully understand String theory and hope for our sakes the universe is not as complex and unfantomable as String suggest. Someone once said that the ability to describe a concept in simplistic terms is directley proportionate to ones understanding of the concept. That being said I bow out of any further discussion of String theory and am content to wait until there is someone, somewhere who can bring the subject into the bounds and confines of my simple mind. Brian Greene did not do it for me... and I read his book twice. **yawn** Personally I am of the opinion that any theory that evades being tested is psuedoscience. edited to add punctuation for Phillp.
This message has been edited by 1.61803, 06-10-2005 02:49 PM

"One is punished most for ones virtues" Fredrick Neitzche

This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by Kraniet, posted 06-09-2005 7:01 PM Kraniet has not replied

  
valerieelliott
Inactive Member


Message 82 of 84 (216348)
06-12-2005 6:34 AM
Reply to: Message 9 by Brad
01-29-2005 3:30 AM


Re: checking out books
I'm kinda old like you. I believe you'll find "Case for the Creator" by Lee Strobel a good, easy read. Strobel hosts "Faith Under Fire" on PAX TV.
Val

This message is a reply to:
 Message 9 by Brad, posted 01-29-2005 3:30 AM Brad has not replied

  
Vash
Inactive Member


Message 83 of 84 (217847)
06-18-2005 11:11 AM
Reply to: Message 73 by Philip
06-08-2005 6:55 PM


Re: Redemptive ID and Insult
1) Practically omnipotent energy existed at and/or prior to the BB.
2) The BB energy was (and/or is) non-chaotic, thus, is redemptive in nature
This easily proves to me (1) a God and (2) a Christ.
How?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 73 by Philip, posted 06-08-2005 6:55 PM Philip has not replied

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 3633 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 84 of 84 (217863)
06-18-2005 12:21 PM
Reply to: Message 70 by Sylas
06-07-2005 3:57 AM


Re: Redemptive ID and Insult
Hi! Newbie to the forum, but long time Christian and used to be a theoretical/mathematical physicist...
My mother often speaks with affection of one of her lecturers from when she studied theology at Melbourne Uni, for a BD. He said: "They can split the atom, and split the atom, but they won't find God." Quite so. This wise old theologian was not rejecting the notions of science or atomic structure; but pointing out that whether atoms are made of waves, or particles, or quarks, or baryons, or whatever else, is not telling is anything much about God Himself. Quarks, or inflation, or spacetime curvature, are neither proofs nor disproofs of God's existence or goodness.
Hi Sylas... Couldn't have put it better myself, though I would add "Beginnings and endings of time, or the lack of such things are neither proofs nor disproofs of God's existence or goodness."
Too many theists seem to think that the "big bang" is a good thing because it gives a moment of creation, where-as many non-theists seem to think that a universe without beginning provides no place for a creator.
And this concept of a one dimensional string? That just seems silly. The very idea of something being one dimensional escapes me.
Hi 1.61803... never judge a theory by how silly it sounds... Your last sentence is the important bit. My mother thinks relativistic time-dilation is silly... doesn't worry me too much :-) nor the guys at CERN and FermiLab. Unfortunately, "silliness" is often the sited evidence for refuting many ideas, whether they be string theory, the big bang, black holes, evolution, theism, Christianity, etc.
BUT.....I guess what I am saying is I do not fully understand String theory and hope for our sakes the universe is not as complex and unfathomable as String suggest.
Well, string theory appears complex at the moment becasue we don't really know what it is... Hopefully one day it will become as simple as say General Relativity... which cannot be beaten for its simplicity and elegance. In fact, I'm particularly annoyed at God for not stopping with GR and spoiling everything with all this quantum gravity nonsense. Then again, I guess He knows what He's doing...

This message is a reply to:
 Message 70 by Sylas, posted 06-07-2005 3:57 AM Sylas 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