Jump to content


Photo

Cosmology: The Origin and Nature of the Universe


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
14 replies to this topic

#1 Kid Frost

Kid Frost

    Hime

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 258 posts
  • LocationJet-Setting

Posted 14 January 2016 - 09:43 PM

Cosmology is a topic that gets quite a bit of discussion in this sub-forum (or used to anyway), usually within the god debate thread, but truly deserves a thread of it's own since it's an interesting subject with many debatable points of discussion to be had. This thread is to debate all such ideas both within and beyond the standard CDM model of the universe.


To kick things off a bit with some starting topics...

Does dark energy exist and if so what exactly is it and what role does it play in our universe?

Why does the universe appear to be expanding? Is cosmic inflation really the answer?

What is the exact shape of the universe? Is it finite or infinite? Does it possess a positive, negative, or zero curvature?

What is the ultimate fate of the universe?

Is there any credible reason to reconsider a steady state model?

What is the evidence for a cyclic model of the universe?

Do black holes really exist?

Is General Relativity still the best theory of gravitation or is it time for it to be replaced and if so what are the possible alternatives?

-----

There are many things to discuss so I look forward to seeing how this thread develops; just remember to always follow the debate forum rules (IDK what happened but there seems to be quite a bit of locked threads already).

Note: While I love metaphysics as much as the next girl, this thread is for a scientific debate on all things cosmology. All discussions of a religious or philosophical nature belong in the god debate thread.


WZhSNm9.jpg

Spoiler Top 20 Anime

Spoiler Top 20 Manga

Spoiler Top 20 Western Comics

#2 retroluffy13

retroluffy13

    Keeper of the Beasts

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,873 posts

Posted 15 January 2016 - 03:57 PM

Stoner thoughts with retro: lets say I accept for a second that dark energy is a thing. then assuming it abides by conventional hysical law it can only come from two places. the center of the universe itself or everything there is ever.

a power sourse big enough to encmpas the entire universe in theory has to be centeral to some degree or it doesn't mae sense right and though a hypothetical edge is possible that could also explain the acceelaration for it to exist in al directions goes against conventional physical thought so

as for what could explain accelaraaton: is it possible its ot acceleration that's speeding p out there but time itself, and that the further you get away from the centeral scource the faster time goes?

isn't it like a space thng where you leave earth and time starts moving all winkity wakity? maybe its an energy thing where the more your potential energy is dispursed directly corrilates with your movement in relation to space and time.

 this is a music video I made for a friend of mine.  give it a listen.  the visuals are pretty dope

Spoiler


also some ear kandy
Spoiler

when you love something..  and I mean. really love it.  you fight for it for as long as you can until you cant stand any longer.  then when its all said and done, walk away with a smile hoping you did right.


#3 Ultrafragor

Ultrafragor

    Exorcist

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 11,205 posts
  • LocationVigrid

Posted 16 January 2016 - 10:58 PM


as for what could explain accelaraaton: is it possible its ot acceleration that's speeding p out there but time itself, and that the further you get away from the centeral scource the faster time goes?

isn't it like a space thng where you leave earth and time starts moving all winkity wakity? maybe its an energy thing where the more your potential energy is dispursed directly corrilates with your movement in relation to space and time.

 

Time and space are tied together. The reason time changes as you travel through space is because you leave the earth's gravity.

 

Grave warps space and, therefore, time. The more dense the fabric of space becomes, the faster time moves.

 

 

 

A black hole is a place where space-time is infinitely dense. Logically, there is an opposing event in the universe where space-time is infinitely sparse. 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I believe that we exist in a chaotic phase of reality. The two logical extremes of existence are for there to be everything and for there to be nothing. Like infinity and zero. 

 

If those things exist, then, by extension, every value between them also exists. Our universe is expanding and is slowly traversing the distance between an infinitely small, infinitely dense point and an infinitely large, infinitely spacious existence. As well, it will take an infinite amount of time to complete this transition.

 

At the end of the transition, nothing will exist, but that cannot happen. Everything cannot fail to exist in the same way that everything cannot exist in an single point. So, for an immeasurably small unit of time, so small that it is only hypothetical and can't ever be fathomed, the universe will equal zero and, because of that, it will be forced back into existence and will begin to contract.

 

 

We are the opposites of the intelligent life forms that exist in a shrinking reality. Studying how the seem to have coalesced from nothingness and how their universe if collapsing down to a single, infinite point.


  • retroluffy13 likes this

0680-007%20-%20Copy_zpsyjmuhkna.png


#4 Zodiac

Zodiac

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 77 posts

Posted 18 January 2016 - 12:19 AM

Black holes do not exist—at least, not as we know them, says renowned physicist Stephen Hawking, potentially provoking a rethink of one of space's most mysterious objects.

 

A new study from Hawking also says that black holes may not possess "firewalls," destructive belts of radiation that some researchers have proposed would incinerate anything that passes through them but others scientists deem an impossibility.

(Editor's note: Watch for our feature "The Truth About Black Holes" in the March issue of National Geographic magazine, out February 15.)

The conventional view of black holes posits that their gravitational pull is so powerful that nothing can escape from them—not even light, which is why they're called black holes. The boundary past which there is supposedly no return is known as the event horizon.

In this conception, all information about anything that ventures past a black hole's event horizon is destroyed. On the other hand, quantum physics, the best description so far of how the universe behaves on a subatomic level, suggests that information cannot ever be destroyed, leading to a fundamental conflict in theory.

No Event Horizons

Now Hawking is suggesting a resolution to the paradox: Black holes do not possess event horizons after all, so they do not destroy information.

"The absence of event horizons means that there are no black holes, in the sense of regimes from which light can't escape," Hawking wrote in a paper he posted online on January 22. The paper was based on a talk he gave last August at a workshop at the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics in Santa Barbara, California.

Instead, Hawking proposes that black holes possess "apparent horizons" that only temporarily entrap matter and energy that can eventually reemerge as radiation. This outgoing radiation possesses all the original information about what fell into the black hole, although in radically different form. Since the outgoing information is scrambled, Hawking writes, there's no practical way to reconstruct anything that fell in based on what comes out. The scrambling occurs because the apparent horizon is chaotic in nature, kind of like weather on Earth.

We can't reconstruct what an object that fell into a black hole was like based on information leaking from it, Hawking writes, just as "one can't predict the weather more than a few days in advance."

Firewalls Removed

Hawking's reasoning against event horizons also seems to eliminate so-called firewalls, which are searing zones of intense radiation that some scientists recently (and controversially) suggested may exist at or near event horizons.

To grasp the significance of this revision, it helps to know that Hawking revealed decades ago that black holes are not perfectly "black." Instead, they emit radiation just beyond their event horizons, the energy of their gravitational fields causing pairs of particles to pop into existence in the surrounding vacuum.

Over time, generating this so-called Hawking radiation makes black holes lose mass—or even completely evaporate.

According to this theory, the pairs of particles created around black holes should be entangled with each other. This means the behavior of each pair's particles is connected, regardless of distance. One member of each pair falls into the black hole while the other escapes.

But recent analyses suggest that each particle leaving a black hole must also be entangled with every outgoing particle that has already left. This runs head-on into a well-tested principle of quantum physics stating that entanglement is always "monogamous," meaning two particles, and only two, are paired from the time of their creation.

Since no particle can have two kinds of entanglement at the same time—one pairing it with another particle at the time of its origin, and one pairing it with all other particles that have left a black hole—one of those entanglements theoretically must get uncoupled, releasing vast amounts of energy and generating a firewall.

Firewalls obey quantum physics, solving the conundrum black holes pose regarding entanglement. But they pose another problem by contradicting Einstein's well-tested "equivalence principle," which implies that crossing a black hole's event horizon should be an unremarkable event. A hypothetical astronaut passing across an event horizon would not even be aware of the transit. If there were a firewall, however, the astronaut would be instantly incinerated. Since that violates Einstein's principle, Hawking and others have sought to prove that firewalls are impossible.

"It almost sounds like he is replacing the firewall with a chaos-wall," said Kavli Institute physicist Joe Polchinski, who did not participate in Hawking's work.

Open Questions

Although quantum physicist Seth Lloyd of the Massachusetts Institute of Technology felt Hawking's idea was a good way to avoid firewalls, he said it doesn't really address the problems that firewalls raise.

"I would caution against any belief that Hawking has come up with a dramatic new solution answering all questions regarding black holes," said theoretical physicist Sean Carroll at the California Institute of Technology, who did not participate in this study. "These problems are very far from being resolved."

Theoretical physicist Leonard Susskind at Stanford University in California, who also did not take part in Hawking's research, suggests there may be another solution to the conundrums that black holes pose. For instance, work by Susskind and his colleague Juan Maldacena hint that entanglement might be linked to wormholes: shortcuts that can in theory connect distant points in space and time. This line of thought might serve as the foundation for research that could solve the firewall controversy, Susskind said.

Theoretical physicist Don Page at the University of Alberta in Edmonton, Canada, noted that there will be no way to find evidence to support Hawking's idea in the immediate future. Astronomers will not be able to detect any difference in the behavior of black holes from what they have already observed.

Nevertheless, Hawking's new proposal "might lead to a more complete theory regarding quantum gravity that makes other predictions that are testable," Page said.

Carroll plans to keep an eye on Hawking in the days ahead: "It's very plausible Hawking has a much better argument that he hasn't yet gotten down on paper."

 


This is the Zodiac speaking

 


#5 kame d. kaze

kame d. kaze

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,834 posts

Posted 23 January 2016 - 09:01 PM

Some sort of energy has to exist to repel things otherwise the Universe would've become a Pangaea after the initial spread.



#6 Kid Frost

Kid Frost

    Hime

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 258 posts
  • LocationJet-Setting

Posted 16 February 2016 - 05:47 PM

Nobody has mentioned the fact that we've finally directly observed gravitational waves after a century and opened up a whole new world for potential discoveries in astronomy and other fields...I can't be the only person on the forum that was beyond excited about the LIGO researchers' announcement on Thursday :(


  • m1hawkgsm, Petite Fleur, azer_moli and 4 others like this

WZhSNm9.jpg

Spoiler Top 20 Anime

Spoiler Top 20 Manga

Spoiler Top 20 Western Comics

#7 DarkNemesis

DarkNemesis

    Keeper of the Threads

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,284 posts

Posted 16 February 2016 - 06:29 PM

Nobody has mentioned the fact that we've finally directly observed gravitational waves after a century and opened up a whole new world for potential discoveries in astronomy and other fields...I can't be the only person on the forum that was beyond excited about the LIGO researchers' announcement on Thursday :(


I read it. I wanted to be excited. Really I did. But... I didn't really know what to be excited for. Aside from "that's cool", I didn't know or understand what the ramifications of this discovery are. Other than, once again, Einstein was smarter than the rest of us.

Kubo's announcement will be his new work will be called Tide; not as strong as bleach but does its trolling in a more colorful fashion! - arcane_chaos

Spoiler

#8 Candles

Candles

    Member

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 94 posts
  • LocationJamaica Estates

Posted 18 February 2016 - 05:17 PM

Honestly the announcement had less of an impact for me since I already knew about it from when the rumors first started to surface back in early autumn. That said hearing this officially less than a month after the eLISA pathfinder mission successfully launched makes this is easily the most intrigued I've been in anything relating to cosmology this decade; in fact for all of science this even surpasses the Cas9 and Cpf1 for me in terms of interest which is saying something considering how preoccupied I had become with molecular biology for the past seven years. It's not everyday a whole new branch of science comes about.


Edited by Candles, 18 February 2016 - 06:48 PM.

  • Kid Frost likes this

#9 Kid Frost

Kid Frost

    Hime

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 258 posts
  • LocationJet-Setting

Posted 18 February 2016 - 06:32 PM

^ Well the pathfinder is only phase one, the real mission is a very long way down the road. Though for now we can not spend too much time working far outside the standard model...as far as GR is concerned anyway.  I don't know if I agree with that last part personally, though that may be down to difference between applied and theoretical science for me.

@DN
Fair enough but I was only really referring to those of us that are familiar with this sort of stuff in the first place...I know we have (or at least had) more than a few because on the old forum we literally had an entire thread's worth of discussion about this very topic and that was when we weren't sure they existed yet so now that we've actually confirmed their existence through direct observation I was just surprised that there wasn't at least a single post.

As far as what you said, that is really one of the downsides to being a scientist in a complex field like this. Someone can spend years or decades working tirelessly on an incredible discovery and most people will react like "that's cool" as you did if not with outright indifference. There really is a major lack of appreciation for the work done in that world by the general public but that speaks more to the gap between laymen and scientists that I mentioned in the other thread.
 


  • Candles likes this

WZhSNm9.jpg

Spoiler Top 20 Anime

Spoiler Top 20 Manga

Spoiler Top 20 Western Comics

#10 DarkNemesis

DarkNemesis

    Keeper of the Threads

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 16,284 posts

Posted 18 February 2016 - 06:55 PM

As far as what you said, that is really one of the downsides to being a scientist in a complex field like this. Someone can spend years or decades working tirelessly on an incredible discovery and most people will react like "that's cool" as you did if not with outright indifference. There really is a major lack of appreciation for the work done in that world by the general public but that speaks more to the gap between laymen and scientists that I mentioned in the other thread.


I almost feel like I'm being attacked. Even though, I believe I'm not (I don't think). As much as I love scientific discoveries and cutting-tech, I feel the ramifications of this discovery hasn't really been explained. Ion engines, being able to hold 360 terabytes of data in glass the size of a half-quarter, fuel-cells, bydroelectric buoys, those are all things I can see how the future would benefit or what can come of them in the future. But with this, I don't think the scientific community as a whole really has helped laymen, such as myself, in that field understand why it's so exciting. What they will or can do next. How this really helps how they see the universe. People like Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Michio Kaku, God bless their souls, do an extraordinary job explaining the grand ideas, concepts, and tech to laymen and enthusiasts. But I haven't heard any real tangible, relatable, consumable explanation yet from anyone about why and how this is so important.
  • Morfeus and YoWid like this

Kubo's announcement will be his new work will be called Tide; not as strong as bleach but does its trolling in a more colorful fashion! - arcane_chaos

Spoiler

#11 Kid Frost

Kid Frost

    Hime

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 258 posts
  • LocationJet-Setting

Posted 18 February 2016 - 08:46 PM

But with this, I don't think the scientific community as a whole really has helped laymen, such as myself, in that field understand why it's so exciting.

But I haven't heard any real tangible, relatable, consumable explanation yet from anyone about why and how this is so important.


What's considered exciting and important in science is subjective in the first place and will partially depend on what fields you're into; the less you're into a certain field the less developments within that field will resonate with you. I'd honestly be surprised if someone who wasn't already into GR would care about this beyond a mild curiosity. On top of that I think it's a given that most people are more into applied sciences than pure research fields anyway like this anyway.

For the record I think it's been explained as well as it could have been in the articles that I've seen including all of the questions you're asking in this post so we may have read different stuff. That said beyond a certain point this isn't something that will easily translate into the pop science you're into because GR isn't really intuitive to begin with.

http://www.space.com...t-it-means.html

http://news.discover...what-160213.htm

http://www.nature.co...-tackle-1.19337

http://fivethirtyeig...waves-are-real/

 

----------------------
Just found these youtube videos as well...they feature Michio Kaku and Tyson




 


Edited by Kid Frost, 19 February 2016 - 07:32 AM.

  • Candles and YoWid like this

WZhSNm9.jpg

Spoiler Top 20 Anime

Spoiler Top 20 Manga

Spoiler Top 20 Western Comics

#12 YoWid

YoWid

    Moe

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,731 posts

User's Awards

     

Posted 19 February 2016 - 03:28 AM


As far as what you said, that is really one of the downsides to being a scientist in a complex field like this. Someone can spend years or decades working tirelessly on an incredible discovery and most people will react like "that's cool" as you did if not with outright indifference. There really is a major lack of appreciation for the work done in that world by the general public but that speaks more to the gap between laymen and scientists that I mentioned in the other thread.

 


I almost feel like I'm being attacked. Even though, I believe I'm not (I don't think). As much as I love scientific discoveries and cutting-tech, I feel the ramifications of this discovery hasn't really been explained. Ion engines, being able to hold 360 terabytes of data in glass the size of a half-quarter, fuel-cells, bydroelectric buoys, those are all things I can see how the future would benefit or what can come of them in the future. But with this, I don't think the scientific community as a whole really has helped laymen, such as myself, in that field understand why it's so exciting. What they will or can do next. How this really helps how they see the universe. People like Neil DeGrasse Tyson and Michio Kaku, God bless their souls, do an extraordinary job explaining the grand ideas, concepts, and tech to laymen and enthusiasts. But I haven't heard any real tangible, relatable, consumable explanation yet from anyone about why and how this is so important.

 

I once wrote extensively on 2012 in a local (i.e., Indonesian/non-English speaking majority) forum (Kaskus, meaning "chit-chat", informally speaking) about the discovery of Higgs Boson (The original text got lost in archive or something wtf):

 

http://archive.kasku...ead/939683/1600

 

There's this response:

 

Spoiler Indonesian

 

Spoiler English (Loose Translation)

 

And I replied:

 

Spoiler Indonesian

Spoiler Translation (English)

 

My point: I argue that it's totally okay if this kind of discovery got more "whoa-super-cool-okay-then-let's-move-on-I-gotta-pay-the-bills" reaction than "whoa-super-cool-let's discover-some-more-with-science" reaction cos the triggering of the former would (in my slightly idealistic notion) lead to the latter one, which, in turn, would foster more appreciation of scientific discovery with not-readily-apparent practical benefits by the general public.  


 

Though, I gotta admit, I'm less idealistic than I was in 2012, and ain't gonna lie, I'd appreciate more discovery like this artificial Raspberry Pi pancreas that would help many diabetics and can be built with low cost, essentially making it the poor-man's Artificial Pancreas that works.

 

https://www.raspberr...ry-pi-pancreas/


 

On topic: I think learning about cosmology and dark matter and stuff are still useful, despite few apparent practical benefits.

 

Why? Because it will educate the masses on general scientific methods which are used to find those sciencey stuff in the first place, like spotting the differences in definitions between hypothesis, law, and theory.

 

(e.g., hypothesis is the first rung on the ladder of scientific enquiry. It's an idea, or a best guess that's formlated to explain observations; scientific laws are a description of how something works under specific circumstances; and a theory usually includes several different hypotheses and laws--each of which must have withstoodall attempts to prove them false. Theories explain observations and laws by providing the mechanism that makes them work.)

 

.

.

.

 

Okay I ripped that almost verbatim out of Science But Not As We Know It by DK Books (2015) (pp.100-102), but my point still stands: all these jibber jabber about cosmology and all that could be the gateway drug for kids and adults like to a thinking grounded more in the soundness of logic and also better one's critical thinking ability.


  • m1hawkgsm likes this

Spoiler Music by Gazillions

 


#13 Kid Frost

Kid Frost

    Hime

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 258 posts
  • LocationJet-Setting

Posted 19 February 2016 - 07:38 AM

My point: I argue that it's totally okay if this kind of discovery got more "whoa-super-cool-okay-then-let's-move-on-I-gotta-pay-the-bills" reaction than "whoa-super-cool-let's discover-some-more-with-science" reaction


I agree with this, (though I disagree with a lot of the other things you said), still this thread is not about how relatable developments in the subfields of cosmology are. I could write several long posts about why certain fields register with the common man while others do not but it's not a conversation that belongs here so let's end this now to avoid going even further off topic. Discussion in this thread should center around the questions posed in the OP or topics similar to it.



Does dark energy exist and if so what exactly is it and what role does it play in our universe?

Why does the universe appear to be expanding? Is cosmic inflation really the answer?

What is the exact shape of the universe? Is it finite or infinite? Does it possess a positive, negative, or zero curvature?

What is the ultimate fate of the universe?

Is there any credible reason to reconsider a steady state model?

What is the evidence for a cyclic model of the universe?

Do black holes really exist?

Is General Relativity still the best theory of gravitation or is it time for it to be replaced and if so what are the possible alternatives?



Do you have anything to add regarding any of the above? I think one of the exciting things with this latest development is that we've finally answered the last two to a reasonable degree but that in turn may lead to even more interesting questions in the near future. What effects do we think this new field of science will eventually have on the standard model?


  • YoWid likes this

WZhSNm9.jpg

Spoiler Top 20 Anime

Spoiler Top 20 Manga

Spoiler Top 20 Western Comics

#14 Goddess Nike

Goddess Nike

    Tsundere

  • Members
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 344 posts
  • LocationIn Despair

Posted 23 February 2016 - 04:36 PM

Just from an engineering standpoint this was remarkably impressive, I knew the advanced version was supposed to be significantly more powerful than the original when it finally came online but with something as difficult as this is to actually pull it off is without a doubt incredible.
I can't say I'm really surprised though; Sean Carrol predicted that this would happen by 2017 and likewise I thought we'd have them by 2016 (I said that almost exactly ten years ago so it was partly just hopeful thinking on my part) and as optimistic as that seemed we got confirmation even faster than either of us thought. The Nobel Prizes for this will be well deserved...not that it isn't always but still.

@Tracy
It's entirely possible that rather than make changes to the current standard model it will just lead to an entirely new one? It will probably depend on what we find out in regards to cold dark matter.

At the very least we may for the first time be able to gather information from the pre-recombination era since matter is no longer an obstacle unlike with electromagnetic radiation. Of course it's not likely with our current technology but at some point in our lifetimes primordial waves can be a real possibility.


  • Candles and Kid Frost like this


2h7297a.jpg

Pro Scientia Atque Sapientia


#15 retroluffy13

retroluffy13

    Keeper of the Beasts

  • Banned
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 9,873 posts

Posted 27 February 2016 - 11:40 PM

I just solved life. gravity=/energy.

when a flame flickers what your seeing is a flux of energy which binds the mass of said gass to it and manipulates it as to take shape.
 
EVERYONE TAKE NOTES BECAUSE IM SUPER HIGH AND SLEEP DEPRIVED AND THE OMENT I CRASH, SO IS THE NATURE OF EXISTANCE!!!

the laws of mass are simple. the greater a flux of potential energy is in a given aresa of space and time as well as subfactors taken into consideration such as the chemical nature of the mass said energy flux is inhabiting will directly correlate to a mass of energys ability to maniplulatr space and time. while the nature of this flux is fleating and will always be dispersed at one point or another, when observing a massive serge in energy flux in an environment in which said energy is given free dominion, we can see that the very nature o this energy lux is that o lie itself. when gravity is concentrated at levels great enough thst manipulation of the space time fabric creates within itself a sort of pocket paradox wherin time and space itself can be manipulated completely freely by said energy mass, creating life.
 
Space and time are literally the same thing life is. like. the faster somethings relative sense of time becomes the more able said energy mass becomes able to manipulate and bend reality to its whim. when something moves slow. or its solid. or its cold. its not because any of those things are true but rather because that objects space and time are out o tune with yours and produce differing physical events when two objects that are out of tune collide with each other.

Edited by retroluffy13, 27 February 2016 - 11:14 PM.

 this is a music video I made for a friend of mine.  give it a listen.  the visuals are pretty dope

Spoiler


also some ear kandy
Spoiler

when you love something..  and I mean. really love it.  you fight for it for as long as you can until you cant stand any longer.  then when its all said and done, walk away with a smile hoping you did right.





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users