Register | Sign In


Understanding through Discussion


EvC Forum active members: 65 (9162 total)
3 online now:
Newest Member: popoi
Post Volume: Total: 915,818 Year: 3,075/9,624 Month: 920/1,588 Week: 103/223 Day: 1/13 Hour: 0/1


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Big Bang Problem
crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 181 of 185 (144791)
09-26-2004 2:01 AM
Reply to: Message 180 by Morningstar
09-26-2004 1:16 AM


I was curious what caused the initial clumping of particles after the big bang? If my understanding is right, there would be equal gravitational force between all particles after the event.
My guess is, random peturbations in spacetime due to quantum effects, which would have disturbed the equilibrium and caused "clumping."
The situation of balanced graviational equilibrium you describe is negatively stable; it falls apart into clumping at the least touch. Quantum peturbations provide that touch.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 180 by Morningstar, posted 09-26-2004 1:16 AM Morningstar has not replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 182 by Diggo, posted 09-27-2004 9:03 PM crashfrog has replied

Diggo
Inactive Member


Message 182 of 185 (145177)
09-27-2004 9:03 PM
Reply to: Message 181 by crashfrog
09-26-2004 2:01 AM


Do i understand the situation properly if i say that the quantum fluctuations are due to the Heizenburg uncertainty principle? Are these quantum fluctuations a product of mass or actual space/time disturbances that get further amplifyed by the inflationary epoch?

This message is a reply to:
 Message 181 by crashfrog, posted 09-26-2004 2:01 AM crashfrog has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 183 by crashfrog, posted 09-27-2004 9:11 PM Diggo has not replied

crashfrog
Member (Idle past 1467 days)
Posts: 19762
From: Silver Spring, MD
Joined: 03-20-2003


Message 183 of 185 (145179)
09-27-2004 9:11 PM
Reply to: Message 182 by Diggo
09-27-2004 9:03 PM


Do i understand the situation properly if i say that the quantum fluctuations are due to the Heizenburg uncertainty principle?
I think so, yes. I was thinking specificly of the phenomenon they call "quantum foam", and wikipedia has this to say on the subject:
quote:
The quantum in quantum foam comes from quantum mechanics, and the foam comes from the idea that at extremely small distances (of the order of the Planck length), spacetime itself ceases to be smooth, and resembles instead a kind of rapidly changing foam. This is all thanks to the uncertainty principle.
The importance of quantum foam is that it is thought to give rise to a sea of virtual particles that pop into existence for an instant, that is, for a period of time that is less than the period of time known as Planck time. These virtual particles make their existence known by the Casimir effect.
So, yes, its all based on uncertainty.
Are these quantum fluctuations a product of mass or actual space/time disturbances that get further amplifyed by the inflationary epoch?
I believe that they are actualy spacetime disturbances, albeit extremely small ones. And they would indeed be amplified by the inflation of space.
But we've way exceeded my knowledge of the subject.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 182 by Diggo, posted 09-27-2004 9:03 PM Diggo has not replied

compmage
Member (Idle past 5153 days)
Posts: 601
From: South Africa
Joined: 08-04-2005


Message 184 of 185 (180438)
01-25-2005 12:04 PM


Scientists, practice what you preach!
Well, well well, what do you know. It appears as if main stream cosmologists has forgotten the meaning of science, and is persuing .... a believe system.
Basically, the first law in the religion of astronomy, is that the dominant force at work in the universe is gravity. Unfortunatly, this believe fails to explain many things in the universe. The models which the "scientists" dreamed up, is falling apart due to new data. Every time we send a probe into space, cosmologists are "suprised" by the data, and is send back to the drawing board. But instead of reviewing their model, they keep inventing new stuff to make their model work:
"curved space", "neutron stars", "WIMPs" (and now "WIMPZILLAS"), "MACHOs", several different sizes of "black holes", "superluminal jets", "dark energy", and magnetic field "lines" that "pile-up" and "reconnect"
All of these are fictional things that "must be there" to make the model work. And then, after they "discovered" these things, they create new theories. Theories which are then presented to the public as unshakeble facts. The poor public buying "scientific" books, are actually reading science fiction.
I make these claims, not based on the Bible, but based on the findings of a small band of "rebel" scientists, of whose religious orientation is not known to me. You see, they study a field of science which cosmologists do not: Electrisism and plasmas. They have a much more simplistic model of the universe, one based on the scientific method. But don't take my word for this, I'm just the layman. Read for yourself : http://www.electric-cosmos.org/introduction.htm
In this model, PLASMA AND ELECTRICITY, NOT GRAVITY, IS THE MOST SIGNIFICANT FORCES IN THE UNIVERSE. There is no need for an expanding universe, a big bang, even an old universe. "Impact" craters are actually the result of electrical discharge. So is the Mariner Valley on Mars. Comets are actually young planets, and Venus was a comet only a view thousand years ago. READ THIS STUFF, IT IS REALLY FACINATING, CONVINCING AND EASY TO UNDERSTAND!!! When these scientists presented their discoveries of the "scientific" establishment, they were cast out, because it destroy their model which they've attached religious devotion to. Science is no longer a search for the truth, but an effort to keep obsolute theories afloat, in order to save face.
Now the question. If the majority cosmologists can be so pig headed, so stubborn to see the obvious, so arrogantly sure of themselves, one can only wonder how much of this is happening in evolutionism as well. Like cosmology, evolusionist theories can not always be tested, but that doesn't stop "scientists" from passing these untested hipothesis as "SCIENTIFIC FACTS". For instance the idea that evolution happens incremental steps, not gradually. Ofcause, they've given this idea a important sounding name, and back it up with pseudo science. It is like the so called "Dark matter" which supposedly make up 95% of the universe. And if you disagree with this, the onus is on you to PROVE that something that isn't there, doesn't exist! How much "dark matter" exists in evolusionary theory? Why should we abandon our faith for unproven (even unprovable and disprovable) hipothesis?
Far too often scientists pass POSSIBLE explainations as FACTS, and then continue to invent more "FACTS" based on these so called "FACTS". In the end, I wonder if even they can still distinguish between science and science fiction.
This message has been edited by Hanno2, 01-25-2005 12:08 AM

Replies to this message:
 Message 185 by Admin, posted 01-25-2005 12:19 PM compmage has not replied

Admin
Director
Posts: 12998
From: EvC Forum
Joined: 06-14-2002
Member Rating: 2.3


Message 185 of 185 (180440)
01-25-2005 12:19 PM
Reply to: Message 184 by compmage
01-25-2005 12:04 PM


Re: Scientists, practice what you preach!
Welcome, Hanno2!
You're raising a very interesting point, but this thread is discussing a different topic. Please propose this in [forum=-25] and see if you can get it promoted.
This thread has been inactive for some months, I'm closing it down.

--Percy
EvC Forum Director

This message is a reply to:
 Message 184 by compmage, posted 01-25-2005 12:04 PM compmage 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