Understanding through Discussion


Welcome! You are not logged in. [ Login ]
EvC Forum active members: 64 (9057 total)
426 online now:
PaulK, Tangle (2 members, 424 visitors)
Newest Member: drlove
Post Volume: Total: 889,841 Year: 953/6,534 Month: 953/682 Week: 6/182 Day: 6/27 Hour: 1/2


Thread  Details

Email This Thread
Newer Topic | Older Topic
  
Author Topic:   Coffee House Musing
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 62 of 159 (887844)
08-23-2021 7:19 AM
Reply to: Message 61 by dwise1
08-23-2021 2:35 AM


Re: Dark Energy does not add any extra "space" to Space in a galaxy.
Nobody, who accepts the Big Bang, denies that there have been inflationary forces (or fields), from the very beginning.

There is a majority of scientific opinion that accepts a very early inflation field that began and ended when the Universe was less than 1 second old.

What is today called Dark Energy is generally viewed as something unrelated to that earlier, and much stronger, field.

Today's Dark Energy is much weaker, in its repulsive push (verses matter) than the early inflation (the super early inflation is technically known as "inflation", while the later inflation is known ad Dark Energy.

The ironic thing is that today's "Dark Energy" could very well have existed from the very beginning and worked as a team with earlier inflation fields. In fact today's inflation ( Dark Energy!), by itself, is probably not strong enough to have separated matter, with the creation of space, in the first several million (or so) years of our Univers' existence.

We have no idea how many constituent (various inflation field) parts there are to the current expansion of space.

( Dark Energy is an interpretation of distant observations that were only recently discovered. The whole thing is on its infancy, and all admit that much more is known of Dark Matter than Dark Energy, though the knowledge EVEN THERE is ...well. fairly dark. No pun intended, but they named these thing "dark" due to the fact that they would be extremely difficult to get to the bottom of)


This message is a reply to:
 Message 61 by dwise1, posted 08-23-2021 2:35 AM dwise1 has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 65 of 159 (887849)
08-23-2021 10:13 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Percy
08-23-2021 9:25 AM


Re: Dark Energy does not add any extra "space" to Space in a galaxy.
Where are Draco and Crux located?

You said we observe Dark Energy affects there?

Try and keep the response limited to my specific question.

( You already let Paul of Arizona confuse your interpretation of this entire discussion, so don't make you own slight of hand waves)

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Percy, posted 08-23-2021 9:25 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 66 of 159 (887850)
08-23-2021 10:36 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Percy
08-23-2021 9:25 AM


Re: Dark Energy does not add any extra "space" to Space in a galaxy.
Just to avoid POTENTIAL slight of hand opportunities, I was able to find some work downtime to clarify that I know Percy was talking about observations in the space toward and around the stars in Crux, as well as Draco.

I understand what he said ( I dont have time to re read it right now), and I just want to see what he has to demonstrate his comment's background details.

Respond to all angles of the question, with integrity.

Crux is totally in the Milky Way, I think, so I am just wondering what directions, near Crux, show Dark Energy. I have no great preconceptions about the (coming) demonstration mind you.

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Percy, posted 08-23-2021 9:25 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

Replies to this message:
 Message 74 by anglagard, posted 08-24-2021 2:39 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 67 of 159 (887851)
08-23-2021 10:44 AM
Reply to: Message 63 by Percy
08-23-2021 9:25 AM


Re: Dark Energy does not add any extra "space" to Space in a galaxy.
I just noticed something.

Did you really mean to say "cosmoligical constant" in the direction of Crux?

You might have meant Cosmological PRINCIPLE?

Answer my previous question, in any case.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 63 by Percy, posted 08-23-2021 9:25 AM Percy has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 73 by Percy, posted 08-23-2021 5:22 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 68 of 159 (887852)
08-23-2021 10:45 AM
Reply to: Message 64 by AZPaul3
08-23-2021 9:51 AM


Re: Dark Energy does not add any extra "space" to Space in a galaxy.
I dont feel that Dark Energy necessarily creates space in any condensed part of the Universe.

You admit that the space cant be measured in our Galaxy while you propose that it is created inside our very bodies then just floats away.

(Ready for my words to be twisted)

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 64 by AZPaul3, posted 08-23-2021 9:51 AM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 69 by AZPaul3, posted 08-23-2021 10:54 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 70 of 159 (887857)
08-23-2021 1:10 PM
Reply to: Message 69 by AZPaul3
08-23-2021 10:54 AM


Re: Dark Energy does not add any extra "space" to Space in a galaxy.
But has the speeding up "visual signal" (my words) been from looking at space between galaxies?

I will get my words twisted but you remember the multiple Super Nova revelations from 1998. The visual observation of light indicated a speeding up of space.

Can you be certain that matter in galaxies, and the galaxie real estate itself, is subject to the expansion of space?

Has it been demonstrated.?

(I am not just talking about the Milky Way. Better make it clear that your distortions, if not rank dishonesty, are OVER on that one)

(And my initial comments, way back, should not have elicited such hostile & disruptive intrusions, from you, into the discussion)

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 69 by AZPaul3, posted 08-23-2021 10:54 AM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 71 by AZPaul3, posted 08-23-2021 2:41 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 75 of 159 (887882)
08-24-2021 10:13 PM


Dark Gravity means what to this discussion?
That's a question.

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 76 of 159 (887995)
08-29-2021 12:12 AM


Steven Weinberg mentioned god and dark energy when asked about the multiverse
I was flipping through some Quanta magazine articles, and came to a 2015 interview. He was asked about the multiverse hypothesis (which Alan Guth says is more likely than not, with the existence of the early inflation field), by the interviewer.

Weinberg said:

I am not a proponent of the idea that our big bang universe is just part of a larger multiverse. It has to be taken seriously as a possibility, though. And it does lead to interesting consequences. For example, it would explain why some constants of nature, particularly the dark energy, have values that seem to be favorable to the appearance of life. Suppose you have a multiverse in which constants like dark energy vary from one big bang to another. Then if you ask why it takes the value it does in our big bang, you have to take into account that there's a selection effect: It's only in big bangs where the dark energy takes a value favorable to the appearance of life that there's anybody around to ask the question.

This is very closely analogous to a question that astronomers have discussed for thousands of years, concerning the earth and the sun. Why is the sun the distance that it is from us? If it were closer, the Earth would be too hot to harbor life; if it were further, the Earth would be too cold. Why is it at just the right distance? Most people, like Galen, the Roman Physician, thought that it was due to the benevolence of the gods, that it was all arranged for our benefit. A much better answer - the answer we would give today - is that there are billions of planets in our galaxy, and billions of galaxies in the universe. ...a few of them ... are positioned in a way that's favorable for life.

The Big Bang, combined with the Dark Energy theory, does actually involve theological explanations by some. It might explain why some will bring god/gods into the discussion.

( One poster attempted to get around my suggestion, that space expansion, at the galaxy level, at the present time, has not been demonstrated, by bringing god/gods into the discussion. The comment was clearly an attempt to twist and confuse my points, but the poster bragged, in a subsequent post, about what a clever attack he was making.)

It is interesting that the issue of the (possible) multiverse will quickly become something of a theological issue. The first ever proponent of the Big Bang, George's Lemaitre, in a 1927 scientific paper, had to remove references to the biblical book of Genesis from his theory.

I would urge posters here to avoid dishonest behavior, while discussing scientific theories. Religion and science have a complicated relationship, because both try to answer some of the same questions. George Gamov erroneously said that Hoyle's Steady State theory was the official theory of the Soviet Union, while Hoyle made far too much out of the Pope's support for the Big Bang theory. (In reality, the whole theological angle had little to do with the scientific work while both theories could be used to argue for or against a god/gods)

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


Replies to this message:
 Message 77 by Percy, posted 08-29-2021 1:10 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded
 Message 78 by AZPaul3, posted 08-29-2021 1:40 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 79 of 159 (888018)
08-29-2021 10:20 PM
Reply to: Message 78 by AZPaul3
08-29-2021 1:40 PM


Re: Steven Weinberg mentioned god and dark energy when asked about the multiverse
He was asked how we can test the multiverse theory, when we can't observe it.

He went on to tell us how we can perform tests that will give us a likely answer.

(It's possibility of having a demonstrable existence was heavily tied to observations surrounding String Theory)

(He also mentioned the scaler field particle, the Higgs Boson, but that was earlier, I think. It helps to provide infirect evidence for the Inflaton particle, along with the WMAP evidence, I believe)

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 78 by AZPaul3, posted 08-29-2021 1:40 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 81 by AZPaul3, posted 09-01-2021 6:03 PM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 82 of 159 (888075)
09-01-2021 10:12 PM
Reply to: Message 81 by AZPaul3
09-01-2021 6:03 PM


Re: And So?
He did not mention god when he was asked if the multiverse theory could ever be tested. He earlier mentioned the god issue.

(You combined words from an earlier post, when gods were mentioned, by me. If you cant label my quotes, with a post number, then at least use a 4 dot ellipsis between quotes)

Higgs was mentioned earlier in his interview. I mentioned it because Higgs is a scaler field particle. It provides a hope that an inflation field particle can possibly exist ( hope as in a hope to find answers). The existence of the Alan Guth inflaton particle is powerful evidence for a multiverse.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 81 by AZPaul3, posted 09-01-2021 6:03 PM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 83 by AZPaul3, posted 09-02-2021 1:05 AM LamarkNewAge has responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 84 of 159 (888080)
09-02-2021 1:49 AM
Reply to: Message 83 by AZPaul3
09-02-2021 1:05 AM


Re: And So?
I don't think that mentioning the god issue, while looking at the possible multiverse existence, should be described as a historical tidbit.

It might be considered a rebuttal to the early 1980s stuff Fred Hoyle was putting in his books. About some sort of intelligence creating the Universe we all know of. I think Hoyle coined a technical term, called "anthropic". Fred Hoyle knew how to write books that would be widely cited. He attempted to "go viral" before the internet age.

That aside, I dont see the multiverse as an old theory.

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 83 by AZPaul3, posted 09-02-2021 1:05 AM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 94 of 159 (888908)
10-22-2021 1:51 PM
Reply to: Message 93 by Percy
10-22-2021 7:43 AM


Re: Planetary Defense
George Norey, of Coast to Coast championed these catyclismic issues a decade ago.

Megan McCain supported him on the electrical pulse petition.

Megan was a true " maverick,"

Graham Hancock made a major push, in his book on the Mars "face ".

Keep pushing the issue.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 93 by Percy, posted 10-22-2021 7:43 AM Percy has acknowledged this reply

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 114 of 159 (888999)
10-28-2021 10:53 PM
Reply to: Message 113 by AZPaul3
10-28-2021 7:03 PM


Re: The Standard Model
I just love how you are so smart that you refuse to read books with annotations.

(Leave those notes for the "********")

God, he's awesome


This message is a reply to:
 Message 113 by AZPaul3, posted 10-28-2021 7:03 PM AZPaul3 has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 115 by LamarkNewAge, posted 10-28-2021 10:57 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 115 of 159 (889000)
10-28-2021 10:57 PM
Reply to: Message 114 by LamarkNewAge
10-28-2021 10:53 PM


Re: The Standard Model
Now I am not allowed to type an adjective with an -ant- suffix (tacked onto ignore)?

Wtf!

This site is just too brilliant.

Great shining lights, indeed.

(All 5 of the majority, of 9 total posters left, will tell you themselves.)

(Lol)

Edited by LamarkNewAge, : No reason given.


This message is a reply to:
 Message 114 by LamarkNewAge, posted 10-28-2021 10:53 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 116 by AZPaul3, posted 10-29-2021 12:06 AM LamarkNewAge has responded
 Message 120 by Admin, posted 10-29-2021 11:13 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
LamarkNewAge
Member
Posts: 2092
Joined: 12-22-2015


Message 117 of 159 (889003)
10-29-2021 12:16 AM
Reply to: Message 116 by AZPaul3
10-29-2021 12:06 AM


Re: The Standard Model
Some of my squeaks are bleeped out.

(I wonder if there are codes I can crack to get my squeaks back).


This message is a reply to:
 Message 116 by AZPaul3, posted 10-29-2021 12:06 AM AZPaul3 has responded

Replies to this message:
 Message 118 by nwr, posted 10-29-2021 12:22 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded
 Message 119 by AZPaul3, posted 10-29-2021 12:25 AM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded
 Message 122 by ringo, posted 10-29-2021 12:11 PM LamarkNewAge has not yet responded

  
Newer Topic | Older Topic
Jump to:


Copyright 2001-2018 by EvC Forum, All Rights Reserved

™ Version 4.0 Beta
Innovative software from Qwixotic © 2022