Here's an exercise: Find 50 examples of ring galaxies. Look for galaxies similar to ring galaxies, like a galaxy core with arms spiralling around the surface of a large toroid where the toroid's hole is similar to the open space betwen ring and core in a ring galaxy. It all looks like a quantum gravity wave phenomenon to me, like GR times a cosine wave-function of distance from the core mass puts the ring at a local downwelling in the gravitational field, produced by the cosine factor.
if you expand a part of universe it will have more vacuum so it will have more energy, so you will have more energy in total but it can't happen; can it?
This is something I've looked at in a blog entitled 'Conservation of energy, the first law of thermodynamics and dark energy' which you can find posted on my Myspace page or over in the blogs section at Physics Forums, (just follow the links on the channel page). I can't guarantee it's 100% correct but it does look at the issues involved.
how do you expand "part" of a universe. if you dont understand or cannot predict its actual size or are able to say whether its finite or infinite, there is no way to determine increase in an unknown quantity
no actually we dont know its finite. its just happens to fit some theories , there are ofcourse counter theories. and nothing is proven as of yet. still a physical limit to our local universe would mean little if ones postulates a multiverse model
theoretical physics go back and forth on that so much its not even worth discussing. the whole thing is, you cannot disprove a multiverse, evidence is nice, very effective. however i am not personally a scientist nor do i subscribe to the scientific method solely. science will catch up to much of philosophy eventually as tools and mathematics evolve and improve in scope and compass, however the evidence there is , that im aware of, cannot limit the universe only the local physical universe.
and the fact that the night sky is dark, is a proof that the universe infinite, or at least the amount of matter in it is.
but GR, does say that the universe in finite. GR is one of the fundamental theories, so if you dont agree with GR, i dont thing you would agree with quantum theory.
He didn't like his cosm... constant, but there was something there. I can relate to th Membranes-Theory. We have shorter days now too, I just heave Lunch and supper, Rob
We need einstien back rite now... if he could most probally make good progress in the physics world if he knew about all the things that make up this universe that we know of today as compared to 50 yrs ago.
the big rip
benamukee 1 year ago
Here's an exercise: Find 50 examples of ring galaxies. Look for galaxies similar to ring galaxies, like a galaxy core with arms spiralling around the surface of a large toroid where the toroid's hole is similar to the open space betwen ring and core in a ring galaxy. It all looks like a quantum gravity wave phenomenon to me, like GR times a cosine wave-function of distance from the core mass puts the ring at a local downwelling in the gravitational field, produced by the cosine factor.
CACBCCCU 2 years ago
if you expand a part of universe it will have more vacuum so it will have more energy, so you will have more energy in total but it can't happen; can it?
kamyarghofrani 3 years ago
This is something I've looked at in a blog entitled 'Conservation of energy, the first law of thermodynamics and dark energy' which you can find posted on my Myspace page or over in the blogs section at Physics Forums, (just follow the links on the channel page). I can't guarantee it's 100% correct but it does look at the issues involved.
stevebd1 3 years ago
how do you expand "part" of a universe. if you dont understand or cannot predict its actual size or are able to say whether its finite or infinite, there is no way to determine increase in an unknown quantity
runelord37 2 years ago
when i say part, i mean any part.
and we do know that its finite, (at least according to our theories)
and we do know that its expanding faster than it was before.
kamyarghofrani 2 years ago
no actually we dont know its finite. its just happens to fit some theories , there are ofcourse counter theories. and nothing is proven as of yet. still a physical limit to our local universe would mean little if ones postulates a multiverse model
runelord37 2 years ago
of course but if you believe in GR, or even aby theory that has the big bang, it will say that its finite.
we have more evidence of it being finite than infinite.
kamyarghofrani 2 years ago
theoretical physics go back and forth on that so much its not even worth discussing. the whole thing is, you cannot disprove a multiverse, evidence is nice, very effective. however i am not personally a scientist nor do i subscribe to the scientific method solely. science will catch up to much of philosophy eventually as tools and mathematics evolve and improve in scope and compass, however the evidence there is , that im aware of, cannot limit the universe only the local physical universe.
runelord37 2 years ago
are you suggesting that you dont believe in the big bang :O
kamyarghofrani 2 years ago
and the fact that the night sky is dark, is a proof that the universe infinite, or at least the amount of matter in it is.
but GR, does say that the universe in finite. GR is one of the fundamental theories, so if you dont agree with GR, i dont thing you would agree with quantum theory.
are you a philosipher?
kamyarghofrani 2 years ago
Wow, jespriella and PlutonWolf win the prize for greatest intellectual gap between two comments.
EGarrett01 3 years ago
I CALLED IT!
"Glaven!" moment at 9:52 lmao
RexNunc 3 years ago
This is a good video, 'k?
Now, I will share this with my friends, and they will like it, 'k?
RexNunc 3 years ago
If the universe is expanding. on what is it expanding on? what holds the universe. I mean what contains the universe?.
jespriella 3 years ago
infinity "contains" the universe
runelord37 2 years ago
He didn't like his cosm... constant, but there was something there. I can relate to th Membranes-Theory. We have shorter days now too, I just heave Lunch and supper, Rob
roblowe777 3 years ago
Right with it, Rob
roblowe777 3 years ago
One proposed field(force), the Higgs.
One anti-field. Einsteins Constant.
I've always said Einstein was wrong, not by very much though. A slight misunderstanding really.
There are other explanations to a "sped-up expantion rate". It is possible there was no speed up, but gravity is still the problem anyway.
4Dmetricology 3 years ago
We need einstien back rite now... if he could most probally make good progress in the physics world if he knew about all the things that make up this universe that we know of today as compared to 50 yrs ago.
rustygates 4 years ago
Negative vacuum energy. Always wondered like...
Really great lecture thanks for sharing.
urquiza78 4 years ago
if energy is not created or destroyed, than...how does that explain this vacuum energy?
anyways, you are still awesome for uploading this ^^
hunterbender 4 years ago
Everybody is hyped on the Higgs field and the mysterious Higgs boson (at 120 times the weight of a proton!?!?!)
superfisto 4 years ago
please upload more from this lecture, it is very interesting and Mr. (/Doctor/Professor??) Giest explains it very well.
OperationNautilus 4 years ago