Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 63 (9072 total)
71 online now:
dwise1, nwr, Theodoric (3 members, 68 visitors)
Newest Member: FossilDiscovery
Post Volume: Total: 893,162 Year: 4,274/6,534 Month: 488/900 Week: 12/182 Day: 12/28 Hour: 0/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   The Unbended Curved Bar Space Slugout Thread
Modulous
Member (Idle past 1338 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 406 of 413 (484573)
09-29-2008 3:50 PM
Reply to: Message 392 by Buzsaw
09-28-2008 11:28 PM


Re: Senseless Message.
The universe includes everything existing.

This is equivocation. Theists that accept the Big Bang do not think that the Big Bang was the birth of everything that exists (and neither do I!)

Onifre's link which I watched last night began with simplistic classic mechanics, all of which was interesting, educational and fundamental to reality. I hope to become more apprised on physics so hopefully I can become more articulate on how the progression of basic realistic fundamentals of physics move into the mystical abstract aspects of QM so as to arrive at the BBT which had no place/area to exit in, no time to exist in, and no outside of to expand into. Logically, it could not have happened and violates all of the laws of thermodynamics observed in the real universe.

I watched the first and second lecture. The second lecture is still about basically pure classical physics, with a tiny reference to quantum physics. For the most part though, the second lecture is abstract mathematics (complex conjugates sound more like a grammar thing than a maths thing :)), which you might not enjoy but I'm advised its vital to understand what happens next.

That said: its not really relevant to the topic at hand. Do you think there's much more life in it? Everyone seems to be repeating themselves.

Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.

Edited by Modulous, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 392 by Buzsaw, posted 09-28-2008 11:28 PM Buzsaw has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 409 by Buzsaw, posted 09-29-2008 9:19 PM Modulous has replied
 Message 411 by Buzsaw, posted 09-29-2008 10:58 PM Modulous has taken no action

onifre
Member (Idle past 2185 days)
Posts: 4854
From: Dark Side of the Moon
Joined: 02-20-2008


Message 407 of 413 (484586)
09-29-2008 6:28 PM
Reply to: Message 402 by Buzsaw
09-29-2008 10:37 AM


Re: Gravitational effect on Spacetime
Buz writes:

Onifre's link which I watched last night began with simplistic classic mechanics,

I just wanted you to listen to the first 8 minutes, as the professor breaksdown what it's like to understand physics.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 402 by Buzsaw, posted 09-29-2008 10:37 AM Buzsaw has taken no action

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 408 of 413 (484596)
09-29-2008 8:57 PM
Reply to: Message 404 by Son Goku
09-29-2008 2:31 PM


Re: Gravitational effect on Spacetime
SonGoku writes:

Okay, the real answer. Although it will not be much use.
The diffeomorphism invariance of spacetime is the property that allows it to curve. This provides a conserved current, the Stress-Energy tensor which matter can then couple to. This allows matter to directly influence the Ricci curvature of spacetime.
If this does not satisfy you then it's the fact that spacetime is pseudo-Riemannian.
Or rather the question has a much simpler answer given already. Which is that it can curve because it can curve. There is no need for me to evade. Spacetime's curvature has been measured, that is a simple fact. There is no need to understand curvature in terms of other underlying properties, it is a property itself.

1. So it appears that what attributes what is observed in the cosmos, relative to curvature, to properties of space is the math of QM and GR which on paper and in the mind attributes the curvature to space and not properties of mass, energy and forces located in space. I have said enough in this thread regarding my objection to this that I see no need to labor further on it.

2. "....space curves because it can curve...." I like that. :cool: Maybe I'll try it for Jehovah who is the designer because he designs and we observe the intelligent complexity of what he has designed. ;)


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 404 by Son Goku, posted 09-29-2008 2:31 PM Son Goku has taken no action

Replies to this message:
 Message 410 by lyx2no, posted 09-29-2008 10:47 PM Buzsaw has taken no action

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 409 of 413 (484599)
09-29-2008 9:19 PM
Reply to: Message 406 by Modulous
09-29-2008 3:50 PM


Re: Senseless Message.
Modulous writes:

This is equivocation. Theists that accept the Big Bang do not think that the Big Bang was the birth of everything that exists (and neither do I!)

There was something before the BB? Is there a thread on this anyone? I've forgotten whether there is or not.

Modulous writes:

I watched the first and second lecture. The second lecture is still about basically pure classical physics, with a tiny reference to quantum physics. For the most part though, the second lecture is abstract mathematics (complex conjugates sound more like a grammar thing than a maths thing ), which you might not enjoy but I'm advised its vital to understand what happens next.

That said: its not really relevant to the topic at hand. Do you think there's much more life in it? Everyone seems to be repeating themselves.

I watched over an hour which included what he called the classic mechanics section.

Yes I agree, Modulous. All we can do is repeat ourselves from here. Hopefully we've all learned something from it. If you care to shut it down, it's fine with me. Again, I appreciate that you moderators have allowed an extension in order to hash out some of which we've covered in the last hundred messages.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 406 by Modulous, posted 09-29-2008 3:50 PM Modulous has replied

Replies to this message:
 Message 412 by Modulous, posted 09-30-2008 7:52 AM Buzsaw has taken no action

lyx2no
Member (Idle past 3950 days)
Posts: 1277
From: A vast, undifferentiated plane.
Joined: 02-28-2008


Message 410 of 413 (484610)
09-29-2008 10:47 PM
Reply to: Message 408 by Buzsaw
09-29-2008 8:57 PM


Time to Get this Show on the Road
2. "....space curves because it can curve...." I like that. Maybe I'll try it for Jehovah who is the designer because he designs and we observe the intelligent complexity of what he has designed.

In the first we observe a phenomena. We make guesses as to the cause. We work out the implications of our guesses. We sort our guesses and see which ones can be eliminated by testing and which can stand. We work harder to find more profound implications and tests — think LHC — until we eliminate all the guesses. Yes, all the guesses. We've been trying to eliminate ToE for 159 years.

In the second we are told a story by our mommies and then shoehorn all the observations into it.

Now a problem arises on those rare occasions where our mommies aren't theoretical physicists. She might have accidentally mislabeled a muon as a mason or something. In these instances we are required to think things out for ourselves a bit more than other kids.

The lucky ones and the hard working ones try to be understanding when meeting up with one of those kids who didn't get the memo — society demands it — but we're under no obligation to disprove their stupid, childish ideas, bear their insult or treat them as peers.

Seven hundred post into this inanity and you've yet to provide a single supporting agument that isn't based on your total lack of understanding of even the simplest of ideas; i.e., analogy. The only thing that you have demonstrated, the only thing you have substantiated, the only thing you have made clear, is that you are a silly, old tosspot.

Here's a smiley face, :), to lighten the mood for you.

Edited by lyx2no, : Structure.


Kindly

∞∞∞∞∞∞∞

When I was young I loved everything about cigarettes: the smell, the taste, the feel … everything. Now that I’m older I’ve had a change of heart. Want to see the scar?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 408 by Buzsaw, posted 09-29-2008 8:57 PM Buzsaw has taken no action

Buzsaw
Inactive Member


Message 411 of 413 (484612)
09-29-2008 10:58 PM
Reply to: Message 406 by Modulous
09-29-2008 3:50 PM


One more question.
Modulous writes:

Buzsaw writes:

The universe includes everything existing.

This is equivocation. Theists that accept the Big Bang do not think that the Big Bang was the birth of everything that exists (and neither do I!)

Is the universe, i.e. everything that exists condidered 13 1/2 - 14 billion years or so old? If so doesn't that mean the BB originated curvature of space, time, any existing god and everything else?

Edited by Buzsaw, : change title.


BUZSAW B 4 U 2 C Y BUZ SAW.
The immeasurable present eternally extends the infinite past and infinitely consumes the eternal future.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 406 by Modulous, posted 09-29-2008 3:50 PM Modulous has taken no action

Modulous
Member (Idle past 1338 days)
Posts: 7789
From: Manchester, UK
Joined: 05-01-2005


Message 412 of 413 (484633)
09-30-2008 7:52 AM
Reply to: Message 409 by Buzsaw
09-29-2008 9:19 PM


Re: Senseless Message.
There was something before the BB? Is there a thread on this anyone? I've forgotten whether there is or not.

I didn't say that, since for all I know that is gibberish. More reasonably, there is something else that exists other than what we call the cosmos. Theists that accept the BB generally believe that one such entity is God and that God created spacetime. Sometimes they see the BB as a creation event, other times they believe God created the 4D universe in one go (past, present and future) and the BB is just one coordinate within the spacetime He created.

Is the universe, i.e. everything that exists condidered 13 1/2 - 14 billion years or so old? If so doesn't that mean the BB originated curvature of space, time, any existing god and everything else?

Everything that exists in spacetime, from our perspective, has existed for that amount of time. The Braneworld (or quantum foam etc) of some physicists, the divine realm of some monotheists and the metadivine world of some pagans all exist may have existed for 'longer' if such a thing as time exists outside of this 'pocket' of spacetime.

Perhaps another possible thread might be possible to discuss the 'eternal' nature of God. Did the Israelites believe in an eternal God? They used the word qedem, which in a time context seems to imply 'ancient' more than 'eternal'. Is there another word they use to describe Him somewhere else I've missed?

I have some chores to run, when I'm done I'll take a look at the thread. That we're being drawn into theology right now is probably a sign the thread has run its course.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 409 by Buzsaw, posted 09-29-2008 9:19 PM Buzsaw has taken no action

AdminModulous
Administrator (Idle past 1338 days)
Posts: 897
Joined: 03-02-2006


Message 413 of 413 (484643)
09-30-2008 11:42 AM


The final bell
The slugout is over. While I hesitated to close this due to the fact it gives my user account the 'last word' I'm hoping nobody minds. If anyone really really wants to do it all again or to discuss any spinoff issues, feel free to propose a new topic.

Edited by AdminModulous, : No reason given.


Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.1
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022