Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 114 (8733 total)
Current session began: 
Page Loaded: 03-26-2017 4:52 PM
438 online now:
kjsimons, Modulous (AdminModulous), NoNukes, PaulK, Percy (Admin), Rrhain (6 members, 432 visitors)
Chatting now:  Chat room empty
Newest Member: timtak
Post Volume:
Total: 801,990 Year: 6,596/21,208 Month: 2,357/2,634 Week: 20/525 Day: 20/11 Hour: 1/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
RewPrev1
...
1718
19
2021
...
24Next
Author Topic:   Where did the matter and energy come from?
Huntard
Member
Posts: 2854
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 271 of 357 (606091)
02-23-2011 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 269 by NoNukes
02-23-2011 6:17 PM


Re: A "just right" universe is our universe.
NoNukes writes:

The earth's motion in its orbit does produce the seasons. The earth's axis does not change direction on a yearly basis. Instead we have winter in the northern hemisphere when the earth is in a certain portion of its orbit.

The earth's orbit is nearly circular, and the earh's eccentricity plays essentially no role in determining the seasons. As has been pointed out the earth is at perihelion in early January.


Well, yes, but bear with me here. If the Earth were to sit perfectly still and not orbit the sun, then still we would have seasons. Granted, it would take 27.000 of our current years (since, obviously, there wouldn't be any years any more) to complete 1 cycle, but in those 27.000 years there would be winter, spring, summer and autumn, yes? Hence my comment.

Sigh. Of course that negates the actual point John 10:10 tried to make.

Ah yes, that as well.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 269 by NoNukes, posted 02-23-2011 6:17 PM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

    
John 10:10
Member (Idle past 346 days)
Posts: 766
From: Mt Juliet / TN / USA
Joined: 02-01-2006


Message 272 of 357 (606298)
02-24-2011 4:31 PM


Both orbit around the sun and tilt combined produce the earth's seasons
Try learning how both orbit & tilt combined produce the earth's seasons in the northern hemisphere.

http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/6h.html

I wish you all the best if some want to live on planet earth if we were in a Venus or Mars orbit around the sun.

I corrected my error concering % of the universe that is unfit for life as we know it, but some did not catch this. I meant much much larger in the smaller direction; i.e., the % of the universe that is unfit for life as we know it is much much smaller than 0.001%.

Some believe a Divine Tailor was very inefficient in designing a universe with so much matter & energy waste in it as they interpret waste. But when one does not learn the why, one will always be lost in trying to figure out the how, or in demanding that we who know our Divine Tailor provide acceptable proof to those who have no desire to know the truth.


Replies to this message:
 Message 273 by jar, posted 02-24-2011 5:03 PM John 10:10 has not yet responded
 Message 274 by frako, posted 02-24-2011 5:39 PM John 10:10 has not yet responded
 Message 278 by Percy, posted 02-25-2011 6:00 AM John 10:10 has responded

    
jar
Member
Posts: 28433
From: Texas!!
Joined: 04-20-2004
Member Rating: 2.6


Message 273 of 357 (606304)
02-24-2011 5:03 PM
Reply to: Message 272 by John 10:10
02-24-2011 4:31 PM


Re: Both orbit around the sun and tilt combined produce the earth's seasons
John 10:10 writes:


I corrected my error concering % of the universe that is unfit for life as we know it, but some did not catch this. I meant much much larger in the smaller direction; i.e., the % of the universe that is unfit for life as we know it is much much smaller than 0.001%.

And as usual, you are still wrong. The percentage of the Universe that is unfit for life is closer to 100% than 0.001%; far more like 99.999999...9%


Anyone so limited that they can only spell a word one way is severely handicapped!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by John 10:10, posted 02-24-2011 4:31 PM John 10:10 has not yet responded

  
frako
Member
Posts: 2678
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 274 of 357 (606309)
02-24-2011 5:39 PM
Reply to: Message 272 by John 10:10
02-24-2011 4:31 PM


Re: Both orbit around the sun and tilt combined produce the earth's seasons
An elliptical orbit causes the Earth's distance from the Sun to vary over a year. Yet, this phenomenon is not responsible for the Earth’s seasons!

FROM THE SAME PAGE YOU GAVE THE LINK!!!!

Edited by frako, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by John 10:10, posted 02-24-2011 4:31 PM John 10:10 has not yet responded

    
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 1496 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 275 of 357 (606333)
02-24-2011 8:50 PM


Ok I jumped to last page and even went back some 2 pages

What i want to know is what does any of this have to do with the matter availibe at the time of big bang. I think it is impossible to do anything but guess at this point. Maybe there is a god who created it and set the wheels in motion to create the universe as we know it??? But maybe all the matter that was needed was the leftovers from a universe that collapsed?? Either way you look at it it still leaves question of where did it all come from.... I don't know if that can be answered...least not in my lifetime...without a huge leap of faith.


    
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 1496 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 276 of 357 (606334)
02-24-2011 9:02 PM


I like the question of this topic. I think it may be one of the few things that cant be explained by any science as of this point in time....But it in no means proves there is a god.....I would think it would be a fundamental question for any advanced race... But one without an answer. Please enlighten me to any scientific theory that would explain where matter came from??
Replies to this message:
 Message 277 by frako, posted 02-25-2011 2:38 AM fearandloathing has responded

    
frako
Member
Posts: 2678
From: slovenija
Joined: 09-04-2010
Member Rating: 2.0


Message 277 of 357 (606354)
02-25-2011 2:38 AM
Reply to: Message 276 by fearandloathing
02-24-2011 9:02 PM



I like the question of this topic. I think it may be one of the few things that cant be explained by any science as of this point in time....But it in no means proves there is a god.....I would think it would be a fundamental question for any advanced race... But one without an answer. Please enlighten me to any scientific theory that would explain where matter came from??

Big bang theory, super string theory, oh and virtual particles pop in and out of exsistance all the time.

Edited by frako, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 276 by fearandloathing, posted 02-24-2011 9:02 PM fearandloathing has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 279 by fearandloathing, posted 02-25-2011 8:34 AM frako has not yet responded

    
Percy
Member
Posts: 15491
From: New Hampshire
Joined: 12-23-2000
Member Rating: 4.3


Message 278 of 357 (606363)
02-25-2011 6:00 AM
Reply to: Message 272 by John 10:10
02-24-2011 4:31 PM


Re: Both orbit around the sun and tilt combined produce the earth's seasons
John 10:10 writes:

Try learning how both orbit & tilt combined produce the earth's seasons in the northern hemisphere.

http://www.physicalgeography.net/fundamentals/6h.html

Not only was your original claim that the Earth's orbit produces the seasons incorrect, not only is your second attempt that "both orbit & tilt combined produce the earth's seasons in the northern hemisphere" incorrect, but even the link you cited contradicts you:

Your link writes:

An elliptical orbit causes the Earth's distance from the Sun to vary over a year. Yet, this phenomenon is not responsible for the Earth’s seasons!
...
Note that the angle of the Earth's axis in relation to the ecliptic plane and the North Star on these four dates remains unchanged. Yet, the relative position of the Earth's axis to the Sun does change during this cycle. This circumstance is responsible for the annual changes in the height of the Sun above the horizon. It also causes the seasons, by controlling the intensity and duration of sunlight received by locations on the Earth.
...
Note how the position of the North Pole on the Earth's surface does not change. However, its position relative to the Sun does change and this shift is responsible for the seasons.

You can see that your link states in three different places in three different ways how the Earth's tilt is responsible for the seasons. If you're trying to make sense about why this should be so, consider that (as your link also states) that the amount of sunlight arriving on the Earth varies by only about 6% during the year due to changes in distance, but the length of the day and the angle of the sun vary far more dramatically and hence have a much larger impact, and this is the result of tilt. In the summer the length of the day becomes much longer, 24 hours long as you approach the poles. The sun is not only in the sky for a longer period, but it is higher in the sky and beats more directly downward. And of course the reverse is true in winter, with the days becoming shorter and eventually disappearing altogether as you approach the poles, and the sun sits very low in the sky and only strikes obliquely.

John 10:10 writes:

I corrected my error concering % of the universe that is unfit for life as we know it, but some did not catch this. I meant much much larger in the smaller direction; i.e., the % of the universe that is unfit for life as we know it is much much smaller than 0.001%.

I see. So when you say larger you actually mean smaller. So since you still have this backwards, should we also assume that when you say "unfit" you actually mean "fit"?

Some believe a Divine Tailor was very inefficient in designing a universe with so much matter & energy waste in it as they interpret waste. But when one does not learn the why, one will always be lost in trying to figure out the how, or in demanding that we who know our Divine Tailor provide acceptable proof to those who have no desire to know the truth.

Stop pretending to speak for your Divine Tailor. You have no more idea of his ways than you do of the seasons or math or fitness for life. Congratulations for composing an entire post without making one correct statement. You're obviously an acolyte of Buzsaw in the way you make errors and then have to spend the rest of a thread trying to explain them away. Can you explain to me again how you've decided in your mind that you can be wrong in all the details while being right in your conclusions?

--Percy

Edited by Percy, : Fix error noticed by Huntard.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 272 by John 10:10, posted 02-24-2011 4:31 PM John 10:10 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 280 by Huntard, posted 02-25-2011 8:43 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply
 Message 286 by John 10:10, posted 02-26-2011 6:33 PM Percy has responded

    
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 1496 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 279 of 357 (606376)
02-25-2011 8:34 AM
Reply to: Message 277 by frako
02-25-2011 2:38 AM


[qs=frako][qs]
big bang or anthing you mentioned has nothing to do with the question...Where did it come from... I asked for scientific theroy on where matter comes from...not how the universe started...I have several of Hawkings books...breif history of time is is a good one, but it does not adress where all the original matter came from. I do know the First law of thermodynamics says Matter cannot be created or destroysd?? well that cant be 100% correct. I have read why there isnt more anti-matter in our universe, but nothing that explains what led up to big bang...where did this energy/matter come from...did it all just pop into exsistence as a lot of virtual particles that interacted to make our universe?? if so then why and where did they come from???

Edited by fearandloathing, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 277 by frako, posted 02-25-2011 2:38 AM frako has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 281 by 1.61803, posted 02-25-2011 12:10 PM fearandloathing has not yet responded
 Message 282 by Rahvin, posted 02-25-2011 12:41 PM fearandloathing has responded

    
Huntard
Member
Posts: 2854
From: Limburg, The Netherlands
Joined: 09-02-2008


Message 280 of 357 (606378)
02-25-2011 8:43 AM
Reply to: Message 278 by Percy
02-25-2011 6:00 AM


Re: Both orbit around the sun and tilt combined produce the earth's seasons
Percy writes:

Not only was your original claim that the Earth's tilt produces the seasons incorrect...


I think you mean his initial claim that the Erth's orbit produces the seasons. Because first of all he never made the claim that it was the Earth's tilt and second, the claim that the Earth's tilt produces the seasons is, of course, quite correct.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 278 by Percy, posted 02-25-2011 6:00 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

    
1.61803
Member
Posts: 2664
From: Lone Star State USA
Joined: 02-19-2004
Member Rating: 3.9


Message 281 of 357 (606419)
02-25-2011 12:10 PM
Reply to: Message 279 by fearandloathing
02-25-2011 8:34 AM


No "where"
Hello Fearandloathing, welcome to EVC.
fearandloathing writes:

...did it all just pop into existence as a lot of virtual particles that interacted to make our universe?? if so then why and where did they come from???


As of now there is no definite answer to your questions. There are particle theorist doing experiments in the LHC trying to rewind the clock back to T=0. But just "poping" into existence is one theory. What some scientist call a quantum fluctuation. It is not easy trying to wrap ones mind around the conditions prior to the big bang. It is almost counter intuitive to us humans to fathom anything prior the emergence of space/time.
F&L writes:

....if so then why and where did they come from???

The why suggest there is a reason. There very well may not be a why. The why in other words is more of a religious/philosophical question. The "where" would indicate a co ordinance, and since there was no space prior to T=0, there is no where.
Keep reading and investigating!
This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by fearandloathing, posted 02-25-2011 8:34 AM fearandloathing has not yet responded

  
Rahvin
Member (Idle past 538 days)
Posts: 3964
Joined: 07-01-2005


(1)
Message 282 of 357 (606429)
02-25-2011 12:41 PM
Reply to: Message 279 by fearandloathing
02-25-2011 8:34 AM


Hi FandL.

big bang or anthing you mentioned has nothing to do with the question...Where did it come from... I asked for scientific theroy on where matter comes from...not how the universe started...I have several of Hawkings books...breif history of time is is a good one, but it does not adress where all the original matter came from. I do know the First law of thermodynamics says Matter cannot be created or destroysd?? well that cant be 100% correct. I have read why there isnt more anti-matter in our universe, but nothing that explains what led up to big bang...where did this energy/matter come from...did it all just pop into exsistence as a lot of virtual particles that interacted to make our universe?? if so then why and where did they come from???

Your confusion is well-founded. A little clarification might help, though.

Time is a dimension, just like length, or width, or height. We experience time a bit differently, but that's not a problem for physics. Every moment of time is just like a location in one of the spacial dimensions. If I draw a ray:

*-------------------------->

we can see that there is a beginning point, and the ray stretches on into infinity. If we call the beginning point "0," we can use distance measurements to locate specific points on the ray.

Time is very similar. There is a first moment, T=0, and then time moves on in just one direction, possibly forever but at least until today.

There is no moment of time before T=0, just like there is no point on the ray above further to the left than the "*". Asking "what came before the "*" on that ray" just wouldn't make sense - it would be like asking what point is further North than the North Pole. It's a question that displays a fundamental misunderstanding of the concept.

"Creation" and "destruction" are concepts that require at minimum two locations in time: a location where the object in question does exist, and a location where it does not. To "create" something, it has to not exist before it's created, right? To destroy something, it has to exist before it is destroyed.

What happens, then, when there is no before?

100% of the mass/energy of the Universe has existed at every single moment of time, all the way back to T=0. All of it. It has existed in different forms (in the first moments there was just as much total mass/energy as there is today, it was simply not in the form of matter; that came a little bit later, and we understand that process decently well).

So...where did the mass and energy of the Universe come from? It's always been here, for the entirety of time, at every single moment. It was not created, because that would require it to have not existed, and we know that all of the total mass/energy has existed for every moment beginning with the beginning of time itself.

If you look at a ball, where on the surface of the ball does the ball begin? Can you identify it? Is there a point where there is no surface, and then the surface comes into existence? Is there a point where it ends?

Human beings are used to concepts of beginnings and endings, because we both begin and end. We're familiar with the concept of causality, where every event is the effect of a cause, and every cause is the effect of an earlier cause and so on. But what happens when there is no earlier time for a cause to exist in?

Physics challenges us to comprehend the Universe from a different frame of reference. Our intuitive understandings of motion and gravity and time and space just don't always apply in reality. Newton's description of gravity works fine here on Earth at the scales we're used to, but astronomers noticed that Newtonian gravity was inaccurately predicting the motion of some planets; Einstein's version corrected the inaccuracy, even though Newtonian mechanics work fine in our everyday lives and are more intuitive for us.

To understand the beginning of the Universe, even as a layperson, you need to accept the fact that what we'll find is not necessarily intuitive from a normal human perspective, and that the Universe is likely more fantastic, amazing, and surprising than we tend to think.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 279 by fearandloathing, posted 02-25-2011 8:34 AM fearandloathing has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 283 by fearandloathing, posted 02-25-2011 1:29 PM Rahvin has not yet responded

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 1496 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 283 of 357 (606442)
02-25-2011 1:29 PM
Reply to: Message 282 by Rahvin
02-25-2011 12:41 PM


I understand everything after T=0,in a simplified fashion even with my limited understanding as a layperson. I guess it is just hard for me to wrap my mind around not knowing what set of circumstances led up to it.
As I understand time it is relative to the place it is being measured. Going near the speed of light for a period of time would cause a space traveler a problem coming home. His time relative to ours was slowed down so that it appears to him he was gone much longer than the amount of time that passed on his ship. The longer you go then the greater the difference. Not time travel, but to the traveler it appears so.
Sorry...got off topic a bit. As I said earlier, Thermodynamics says no matter can be created or destroyed and this fits with the overall model. Thanks for input I will read more after few aspirin!!! lol.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 282 by Rahvin, posted 02-25-2011 12:41 PM Rahvin has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 284 by DBlevins, posted 02-25-2011 2:53 PM fearandloathing has responded

    
DBlevins
Member (Idle past 1126 days)
Posts: 652
From: Puyallup, WA.
Joined: 02-04-2003


Message 284 of 357 (606471)
02-25-2011 2:53 PM
Reply to: Message 283 by fearandloathing
02-25-2011 1:29 PM


Relativity
...so that it appears to him he was gone much longer than the amount of time that passed on his ship.

I think you mean that on Earth, more time would have transpired than it would have for the spacecraft and its crew.

Going off memory here, but a spaceship and crew leaving Earth to travel to the center? of our galaxy and then back to Earth would take it 20 years. On Earth, though, 2 million years would have passed.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 283 by fearandloathing, posted 02-25-2011 1:29 PM fearandloathing has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 285 by fearandloathing, posted 02-25-2011 3:18 PM DBlevins has not yet responded

  
fearandloathing
Member (Idle past 1496 days)
Posts: 990
From: Burlington, NC, USA
Joined: 02-24-2011


Message 285 of 357 (606477)
02-25-2011 3:18 PM
Reply to: Message 284 by DBlevins
02-25-2011 2:53 PM


Re: Relativity
DBlevins writes:

...so that it appears to him he was gone much longer than the amount of time that passed on his ship.

I think you mean that on Earth, more time would have transpired than it would have for the spacecraft and its crew.

Going off memory here, but a spaceship and crew leaving Earth to travel to the center? of our galaxy and then back to Earth would take it 20 years. On Earth, though, 2 million years would have passed.


Thats what I meant. My wording was not as clear as it should have been, sorry.
It would appear to traveler that much more time had passed at home than had passed for him on the ship.
This message is a reply to:
 Message 284 by DBlevins, posted 02-25-2011 2:53 PM DBlevins has not yet responded

    
RewPrev1
...
1718
19
2021
...
24Next
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2015 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2017