Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 82 (8950 total)
43 online now:
DrJones*, jar, JonF, PaulK, ringo, Tangle (6 members, 37 visitors)
Newest Member: Mikee
Post Volume: Total: 867,349 Year: 22,385/19,786 Month: 948/1,834 Week: 18/430 Day: 18/63 Hour: 5/0


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Size of the universe
Larni
Member
Posts: 3990
From: Liverpool
Joined: 09-16-2005


Message 151 of 248 (624462)
07-18-2011 3:55 AM
Reply to: Message 145 by Alfred Maddenstein
07-17-2011 5:04 PM


Re: Redundant Offense
- it is a conceptual issue just like the impossibility of pink unicorns eating yellow dragons

So, all of your rambling boils down to 'it does not make sense, to me'.

You do know that is a logical fallacy, don't you?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 145 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 07-17-2011 5:04 PM Alfred Maddenstein has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 152 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 07-18-2011 2:19 PM Larni has not yet responded

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 2312 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 152 of 248 (624527)
07-18-2011 2:19 PM
Reply to: Message 151 by Larni
07-18-2011 3:55 AM


Re: Redundant Offense
Larni, well..there are two ways not to believe in God. Some people and that would include most of those posting here would say that they don't believe in God because there is no evidence for such.
Others, myself included, would just find the concept perfectly contradictory and absurd and they would find that the term itself has never been defined really making any alleged evidence for such an ill-defined entity irrelevant. To me the ideas of Big Bang and Black Holes are very much like God in this respect. If my scepticism seems a fallacy to you, I am happy to stay fallacious leaving to you all the good logic to enjoy.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 151 by Larni, posted 07-18-2011 3:55 AM Larni has not yet responded

  
Alfred Maddenstein
Member (Idle past 2312 days)
Posts: 565
Joined: 04-01-2011


Message 153 of 248 (624540)
07-18-2011 3:12 PM
Reply to: Message 150 by cavediver
07-18-2011 2:40 AM


Re: Redundant Offense
Well, Crankdriver, you are not helping me to overcome my ignorance. You are not enlightening me. Do you want to say that the only requirements for a black hole is to be a light trapping region surrounded by an event horizon and that in your version of what the entity should be it may not have a singularity at its center? No infinities, no zero anything, everything is countable beyond the horizon is what you are saying?
Also the event horizon is a contradictory concept. The traffic is supposed to be one way only and that requirement is satisfied for light and whatever the hole is gobbling up, yet as you must know gravity is a relation of at least two bodies. Inverse square law is talking about mutual relation between two masses as a function of distance between them. Now a black hole in this scenario is one mass and the galaxy going around is another. The event horizon lies between them. Gravity seems to be crossing the horizon in either direction.
How do you explain that? If light is trapped on itself inside the hole why the gravity is not? When they define event horizon, they talk also about information going in one direction only. Does your theory hold that gravity of a black hole does not represent any information passed to the galaxy spinning around it?

Edited by Alfred Maddenstein, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 150 by cavediver, posted 07-18-2011 2:40 AM cavediver has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 154 by cavediver, posted 07-18-2011 6:21 PM Alfred Maddenstein has responded

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 1988 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


(3)
Message 154 of 248 (624569)
07-18-2011 6:21 PM
Reply to: Message 153 by Alfred Maddenstein
07-18-2011 3:12 PM


Re: Redundant Offense
Do you want to say that the only requirements for a black hole is to be a light trapping region surrounded by an event horizon and that in your version of what the entity should be it may not have a singularity at its center?

I don't want to say that - that is simply the way it is. And we don't even need the event horizon, as we could never have the globally required god's-eye view to determine if it exists. An apparent horizon is good enough.

yet as you must know gravity is a relation of at least two bodies.

I certainly must not know, as it is blatently untrue. Depending on context, gravity is the reaction of the metric to itself and the stress-enegy distribution (essentially the mathematics of General Relativity); or it is the reaction of a test body to the metric (essentially the physics of General Relativity.)

Inverse square law is talking about mutual relation between two masses as a function of distance between them.

Yes, if we are talking about Newtonian gravity and mechanics. But as we are discussing black holes, we are actually talking about General Relativity and have left such basic concepts long behind.

Gravity seems to be crossing the horizon in either direction.

Gravity does not "cross" anything. The space-time metric has a particular form around the black hole, and external bodies will move according to that form. There is no gravity "force" at this level of discussion, and gravity cannot be "trapped" inside the horizon - although one could look at propagating fluctuations in the metric (gravitational waves) and these are indeed trapped.

Actually, an almost identical situation occurs with the electromagnetic field, where propagating fluctuations are trapped (i.e. light cannot escape), but static field configurations can straddle the horizon as we see with electrically and magnetically charged (Reissner-Nordstrom) black holes.

When they define event horizon, they talk also about information going in one direction only. Does your theory hold that gravity of a black does not represent any information passed to the galaxy spinning around it?

Information does become trapped until the point where the black hole evaporates away. But we are now moving through semi-classical relativity into quantum gravity, and this certainly does not belong in a discussion that is still clinging to Newtonian concepts and terminology.

Edited by cavediver, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 153 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 07-18-2011 3:12 PM Alfred Maddenstein has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 169 by Alfred Maddenstein, posted 07-29-2012 6:11 PM cavediver has responded

  
ProtoTypical
Member
Posts: 1793
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 155 of 248 (668610)
07-23-2012 1:41 AM


A question about scale
Where is the mid point between 1.616199 x 10E-35, a Plank length, and 1.4 x 10E26 meters, the size of the observable universe?

Replies to this message:
 Message 156 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-23-2012 3:16 AM ProtoTypical has responded

  
Dr Adequate
Member
Posts: 16107
Joined: 07-20-2006
Member Rating: 8.3


Message 156 of 248 (668611)
07-23-2012 3:16 AM
Reply to: Message 155 by ProtoTypical
07-23-2012 1:41 AM


Re: A question about scale
The arithmetic mean would clearly be 7x1025 meters, and the geometric mean would be about 0.0476 millimeters.

This message is a reply to:
 Message 155 by ProtoTypical, posted 07-23-2012 1:41 AM ProtoTypical has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 157 by ProtoTypical, posted 07-23-2012 12:02 PM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

  
ProtoTypical
Member
Posts: 1793
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 157 of 248 (668642)
07-23-2012 12:02 PM
Reply to: Message 156 by Dr Adequate
07-23-2012 3:16 AM


Re: A question about scale
Thanks Dr Adequate, ye venerable knower of things.

I guess what I am really looking for is the median.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 156 by Dr Adequate, posted 07-23-2012 3:16 AM Dr Adequate has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 158 by NoNukes, posted 07-23-2012 12:48 PM ProtoTypical has responded
 Message 160 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-23-2012 2:07 PM ProtoTypical has acknowledged this reply

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 158 of 248 (668645)
07-23-2012 12:48 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by ProtoTypical
07-23-2012 12:02 PM


Re: A question about scale
I guess what I am really looking for is the median.

I'm pretty sure you don't want the median either. When there are only two numbers the median is the same as the mean.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison


This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by ProtoTypical, posted 07-23-2012 12:02 PM ProtoTypical has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 159 by ProtoTypical, posted 07-23-2012 2:04 PM NoNukes has responded

  
ProtoTypical
Member
Posts: 1793
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


Message 159 of 248 (668651)
07-23-2012 2:04 PM
Reply to: Message 158 by NoNukes
07-23-2012 12:48 PM


Re: A question about scale
Every morning at Sisyphus' School for Continuing Education they teach us to never give up.

If there were a ruler with the Plank length at one end and the size of the observable universe at the other end, where would the middle be?

I am LMAO here.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 158 by NoNukes, posted 07-23-2012 12:48 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 162 by NoNukes, posted 07-24-2012 12:59 PM ProtoTypical has responded

  
New Cat's Eye
Inactive Member


(1)
Message 160 of 248 (668653)
07-23-2012 2:07 PM
Reply to: Message 157 by ProtoTypical
07-23-2012 12:02 PM


Re: A question about scale
I guess what I am really looking for is the median.

If you want to put 10^-35 on one end of a continuum, and 10^25 on the other, and then find out about what size is in the middle, then wouldn't that just be 10^(-35 + 26) or 10^-9?

So we're talking on the order of a nanometer.

ABE: Ha! Didn't even see your previous message. I totally read your mind.

ABE2: Actually I don't think 10^-9 is right.

We're talking about 61 total exponents, so the mid-point would be at 30.5 point away from -35, so that'd be -4.5.

So that'd be around 0.05 centimeters, or 50 microns, which is about the diameter of a hair.

Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.

Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.

Edited by Catholic Scientist, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 157 by ProtoTypical, posted 07-23-2012 12:02 PM ProtoTypical has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 161 by NoNukes, posted 07-23-2012 6:59 PM New Cat's Eye has acknowledged this reply

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 161 of 248 (668700)
07-23-2012 6:59 PM
Reply to: Message 160 by New Cat's Eye
07-23-2012 2:07 PM


Re: A question about scale
e're talking about 61 total exponents, so the mid-point would be at 30.5 point away from -35, so that'd be -4.5.

On a log based scale, that would be correct.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison


This message is a reply to:
 Message 160 by New Cat's Eye, posted 07-23-2012 2:07 PM New Cat's Eye has acknowledged this reply

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 162 of 248 (668784)
07-24-2012 12:59 PM
Reply to: Message 159 by ProtoTypical
07-23-2012 2:04 PM


Re: A question about scale
If there were a ruler with the Plank length at one end and the size of the observable universe at the other end, where would the middle be?

The Plank length would for practical purposes be at the zero end of the stick. The middle would be at half of the observable size of the universe as Dr. A has suggested.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison


This message is a reply to:
 Message 159 by ProtoTypical, posted 07-23-2012 2:04 PM ProtoTypical has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 163 by ProtoTypical, posted 07-26-2012 12:52 AM NoNukes has responded

  
ProtoTypical
Member
Posts: 1793
From: Ontario Canada
Joined: 08-04-2010


(2)
Message 163 of 248 (668949)
07-26-2012 12:52 AM
Reply to: Message 162 by NoNukes
07-24-2012 12:59 PM


Re: A question about scale
Snort

Well yes...the middle would be about half way.

I was just marvelling at the thought that, relative to me, the Plank length is about as small as the universe is big.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 162 by NoNukes, posted 07-24-2012 12:59 PM NoNukes has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 164 by NoNukes, posted 07-26-2012 8:50 AM ProtoTypical has responded
 Message 165 by cavediver, posted 07-28-2012 11:24 AM ProtoTypical has responded

  
NoNukes
Inactive Member


Message 164 of 248 (668967)
07-26-2012 8:50 AM
Reply to: Message 163 by ProtoTypical
07-26-2012 12:52 AM


Re: A question about scale
I was just marvelling at the thought that, relative to me, the Plank length is about as small as the universe is big.

Well, the comparison is off by 10 orders of magnitude.

And the "coincidence" is an artifact of our choice of measurement units. For example if our measurement unit was 10 plank units, then the length of a plank unit would be 0.1, while the universe would measure 10^60. We could pick a unit that would make your "marvelous" observation seem downright miraculous. I believe CS has already calculated the correct size for your height to make that work out.


Under a government which imprisons any unjustly, the true place for a just man is also in prison. Thoreau: Civil Disobedience (1846)

The apathy of the people is enough to make every statue leap from its pedestal and hasten the resurrection of the dead. William Lloyd Garrison


This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by ProtoTypical, posted 07-26-2012 12:52 AM ProtoTypical has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 166 by ProtoTypical, posted 07-29-2012 8:21 AM NoNukes has acknowledged this reply

  
cavediver
Member (Idle past 1988 days)
Posts: 4129
From: UK
Joined: 06-16-2005


Message 165 of 248 (669240)
07-28-2012 11:24 AM
Reply to: Message 163 by ProtoTypical
07-26-2012 12:52 AM


Re: A question about scale
I was just marvelling at the thought that, relative to me, the Plank length is about as small as the universe is big.

Yep, ignore the naysayers - I've always used this as a "see, we are at the centre of everything" smart-arse comment

Have I missed much?


This message is a reply to:
 Message 163 by ProtoTypical, posted 07-26-2012 12:52 AM ProtoTypical has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 167 by ProtoTypical, posted 07-29-2012 8:24 AM cavediver has responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2019