|
Author
|
Topic: Cosmology 101
|
Taz
Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: 07-18-2006
|
|
Message 4 of 79 (472187)
06-20-2008 10:18 PM
|
Reply to: Message 3 by Force
06-20-2008 10:11 PM
|
|
Universal Expansion Cosmic Background Radiation
I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 3 by Force, posted 06-20-2008 10:11 PM | | Force has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 5 by Force, posted 06-20-2008 10:31 PM | | Taz has replied |
|
Taz
Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: 07-18-2006
|
|
|
Message 6 of 79 (472193)
06-20-2008 10:44 PM
|
Reply to: Message 5 by Force
06-20-2008 10:31 PM
|
|
Almost universal red shifts. Basically, everywhere they looked, everything was red shifted. The further away the objects, the more red shifted they were. If everything is expanding at an accelerated speed right now in every direction, it doesn't take a genius to work it backward to a lot smaller and compact universe. The BBT predicted a very hot, very dense universe near the beginning. If so, an afterglow of this early condition should be found everywhere we look. I can't remember off the top of my head the guys that first discovered it. What happened was they kept picking up a background noise in their instruments. At first, they thought the instruments were faulty, but they couldn't find what was wrong. Then they decided to point the radio telescope to a different direction and they got the same background noise. In fact, everywhere they looked they saw the same thing. BINGO! They found the "afterglow" predicted by the BBT.
I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 5 by Force, posted 06-20-2008 10:31 PM | | Force has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 7 by Force, posted 06-20-2008 10:51 PM | | Taz has replied |
|
Taz
Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: 07-18-2006
|
|
|
Message 8 of 79 (472200)
06-20-2008 11:07 PM
|
Reply to: Message 7 by Force
06-20-2008 10:51 PM
|
|
Force writes: So in all directions, external to our planet, all stars are red shifted?
No, not all stars. Remember that we are talking in cosmic scales here. Stars are insignificant. We are talking about galaxies, globular clusters, etc.
I suppose anything is possible but how do cosmologist know that the universe is expanding outward from a point instead of just simply moving in a single direction like a current?
Because everywhere we look things are accelerating away from us.
So the cosmic background radiation is a glow, noise, or both?
Hahahahahaha It's an electromagnetic "noise". It's not sound wave if that's what you mean. It's within the electromagnetic spectrum, specifically microwave. I referred to it as "noise" because in a sense it is noise. Imagine yourself in a party with a lot of people. Every direction you could hear background noises, and clearly these background noises aren't coming from any single source you could identify. That's what the cosmic background radiation is. It's clearly not coming from any single source that we could see. Yet, everywhere we look it's there at 3K.
I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 7 by Force, posted 06-20-2008 10:51 PM | | Force has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 9 by Force, posted 06-20-2008 11:21 PM | | Taz has replied | | | Message 21 by Force, posted 06-21-2008 2:15 PM | | Taz has not replied |
|
Taz
Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: 07-18-2006
|
|
|
Message 10 of 79 (472206)
06-20-2008 11:46 PM
|
Reply to: Message 9 by Force
06-20-2008 11:21 PM
|
|
Force writes: So, effectively, cosmic microwave radiation is a "noise" in a frequency range that can't be heard via the ear but can be seen via a electromagnetic detecting device.
Just to get something clear, no part of the electromagnetic spectrum can be "heard" by the ear.
I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 9 by Force, posted 06-20-2008 11:21 PM | | Force has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 11 by Force, posted 06-20-2008 11:53 PM | | Taz has not replied |
|
Taz
Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: 07-18-2006
|
|
|
Message 38 of 79 (472341)
06-21-2008 8:12 PM
|
Reply to: Message 15 by Agobot
06-21-2008 1:57 PM
|
|
Re: Multiverse
Agobot writes: The strentgh of the fundamental forces in the universe(force of gravity, speed of light, strong nuclear force, weak nuclear force, proton mass, etc.) is so finely tuned(to support life?), that the only good explanation for the existence of these finely tuned conditions besides god, would be a multiverse and multiple big bangs giving rise to multiple universes.
Since the universe is so finely tuned to support life, would you like to go up into space in a space shuttle and then take a little flying lesson outside in space without a space suit? I hear that there is an increasing interest to send some people to Mars. Would you like to volunteer to be the first man on Mars while not wearing a life-support suit? Your statement there is false in so many ways... I don't even know where to begin. Everything about the universe is AGAINST life as we know it. The Earth is only a tiny oasis in an infinitely vast desert. But don't mind me. If you really want to prove your statement to the rest of us, an action is worth more than a thousand words. Just sign up to be an astronaut and demonstrate to us just how hospitable the universe is to our form of life.
I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 15 by Agobot, posted 06-21-2008 1:57 PM | | Agobot has replied |
|
Taz
Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: 07-18-2006
|
|
|
Message 49 of 79 (472462)
06-22-2008 2:38 PM
|
Reply to: Message 39 by Agobot
06-22-2008 3:07 AM
|
|
Re: Multiverse
Agobot writes: I obviously meant to say to support life on Earth.
No, you said that the fundamental forces and just about everything about the universe is finely tunned to support our form of life. Therefore, I'd like to see you demonstrate this by taking a little flying lesson up in space without a space suit. Or perhaps you'd like to take a walk on Mars without a life support suit.
So on to the question - how do you know there's life outside of earth? Care to present your evidence? Care to dress your space suit and take us to where alien life might be?
No, you're the one that claims that the universe is finely tuned to support life. You're the one that claims the universe is teeming with life. The burden of proof is on YOU. Since most of the universe is just empty space, show us how finely tuned the universe is for life by going up in orbit without a life support space suit.
I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 39 by Agobot, posted 06-22-2008 3:07 AM | | Agobot has not replied |
|
Taz
Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: 07-18-2006
|
|
|
Message 50 of 79 (472463)
06-22-2008 2:41 PM
|
Reply to: Message 40 by cavediver
06-22-2008 6:38 AM
|
|
Re: Multiverse
cavediver writes: Nonsense. Everything about the Universe is precisely what is required to enable life on at least one planet.
And if you had bothered to read the rest of my post rather than quote mining me, you'd see that I referred to planet Earth as an oasis in an infinitely large desert. Whether or not everything about the universe that enables life on at least this one planet is another question. Ago claimed that the universe is finely tuned to support our form of life. I'd like to see him prove this claim by going out into space without a space suit. It's a simple challenge for such a bold claim.
I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 40 by cavediver, posted 06-22-2008 6:38 AM | | cavediver has replied |
|
Taz
Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: 07-18-2006
|
|
|
Message 55 of 79 (472503)
06-22-2008 9:45 PM
|
Reply to: Message 53 by Agobot
06-22-2008 5:03 PM
|
|
Re: Multiverse
Ok, I'll bite.
Ago writes: Currently, both science and religeon lack the ability to pinpoint what started all - if a Supreme Being made the first universe, who or what made the Supreme Being? And, if everything began with a mostly-dead ensemble of universe containing the intelligent mother universe, how did that come about?
Let me guess. The answer to both questions is that the god of abraham created the universe and that nothing created him because he is eternal and always have been. Good enough answer?
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 53 by Agobot, posted 06-22-2008 5:03 PM | | Agobot has not replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 56 by Coyote, posted 06-22-2008 10:53 PM | | Taz has replied |
|
Taz
Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: 07-18-2006
|
|
|
Message 57 of 79 (472508)
06-22-2008 11:01 PM
|
Reply to: Message 56 by Coyote
06-22-2008 10:53 PM
|
|
Re: Multiverse
Coyote writes: Perhaps you could provide some evidence for your answer (other than religious belief).
You should ask Agobot for the evidence, not me. He was the one that brought up the supreme god/creator thing being the only explanation for this fine tunning thing. All I did was try to guess which deity he had in mind for being this supreme creator. I guessed it was the god of abraham.
I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 56 by Coyote, posted 06-22-2008 10:53 PM | | Coyote has replied |
|
Taz
Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: 07-18-2006
|
|
|
Message 64 of 79 (472627)
06-23-2008 4:58 PM
|
Reply to: Message 63 by Agobot
06-23-2008 4:06 PM
|
|
Re: old rag-bags
Ago writes: Could you reference a link that states that life is possible even if the laws of the universe were different?
You can't determine anything from a single data point except for that the single datapoint exists.
I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 63 by Agobot, posted 06-23-2008 4:06 PM | | Agobot has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 65 by Agobot, posted 06-23-2008 5:38 PM | | Taz has replied |
|
Taz
Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: 07-18-2006
|
|
|
Message 67 of 79 (472722)
06-24-2008 1:53 PM
|
Reply to: Message 65 by Agobot
06-23-2008 5:38 PM
|
|
Re: old rag-bags
Agobot writes: True, however i want to see their point of view in full details and what evidence, if any, there is to support this claim that life is possible under different values for the fundamental forces.
It works both ways. You can't say either way whether it's possible or not possible. All you can do is have thought experiments.
I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 65 by Agobot, posted 06-23-2008 5:38 PM | | Agobot has not replied |
|
Taz
Member (Idle past 3321 days) Posts: 5069 From: Zerus Joined: 07-18-2006
|
|
|
Message 69 of 79 (472776)
06-24-2008 4:54 PM
|
Reply to: Message 68 by Force
06-24-2008 4:37 PM
|
|
Re: Multiverse
And as I pointed out earlier, you can't do jack shit with a single data point. It is fallacious for creos to use the "finely tuned" condition argument and it certainly is fallacious for him to use it as well.
I'm trying to see things your way, but I can't put my head that far up my ass.
| This message is a reply to: | | | Message 68 by Force, posted 06-24-2008 4:37 PM | | Force has replied |
| Replies to this message: | | | Message 70 by Force, posted 06-24-2008 5:10 PM | | Taz has not replied |
|
™ Version 4.2