Welcome to MilkyWay@home

Posts by Fayvitt

1) Message boards : News : N-Body (Message 59989)
Posted 25 Sep 2013 by Fayvitt
Post:
How about less "really cool science" and "new dwarf galaxy models" and more computing on what milkyway@home is supposed to be doing? Completing a 3d model of the universe... And seriously, it's got me boggled as to why that is so hard. See stars, get pc's to measure red shift, plot in 3d model. Why the hell does that take so long?
2) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40541)
Posted 19 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
3) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40520)
Posted 18 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
Ok, i stand corrected. From what i could gather of the 3 episodes and various other viewings and readings was this. If the higgs mechanism wasn't found, there was no way to add mass to the massless particles to allow them to form larger particles...based on the theory of the standard model.

It's ok to be able to do wonderfull things with the particles in mathematics and hypothetical experiments, but if we can't give them mass it's all pretty pointless.

It just gets to me, really annoys me, that when something doesn't seem to work in 'science' these days, the theory doesn't get reworked. It simply gets stuff added to it. Invented stuff added to it to make the equations balance. It doesn't have to be real, just an an added concept or abstraction to make the maths work.

I'll shut up now. Just frustrated by the lack of what i call 'science' in science. I mean, how can you have this dense soup of super heavy 'syrup' all around us, and not be able to detect it? Yet massless particles are detected.

Edit: This Higgs mechanism. May it only have been around, and able to act upon these particles and form mass as we know it during a certain period of the big bang?
4) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40518)
Posted 18 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
It can be argued that the most interesting discovery would be that we cannot find the higgs proving practically that it isn't there. That would mean that we really haven't understood something, that's a very good scene for science. Revelations sometimes come from the fact you hit a wall and you realize that you truly haven't understood anything.


That's what the bearded dude states. I agree, that's how science works. In essence, we don't find it, we've been wrong all along? Haven't understood Quantum Mechanics?

5) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40515)
Posted 18 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
I'll rephrase what i said, may have been a bit off. No higgs, no Standard Model. All predictions, experiments, theories...null, void, invalid, worthless.

Can't have a set of massless particles flying around at the speed of light unable to slow down to form matter, can we now?

Just wouldn't be scientific.
6) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40514)
Posted 18 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
Well, pardon me. Sounds more like you can't defend an incomplete theory. No Higgs, no theory.

That's kind of how it works.

Edit: Even better. Here's the link to a youtube video where the scientists say what i just told you. No Higgs, no theory.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_XbKZwXK-3c&feature=related

I suggest you go trolling there for information straight from a LHC scientists mouth.
7) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40511)
Posted 18 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
But quantum theory is NOT a complete theory until the higgs mechanism is found. No proof, no cigar, unworkable theory.

One simply cannot PROVE an incomplete theory. You don't have all the pieces of the jigsaw. Scientists think they know what they are, but can NOT prove the existence of THEORETICAL particles by experiment.

The mathematics of it all may be brilliant, but it is not describing observable real world events because you can't prove the existence of a particle that PROVES QT.
8) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40501)
Posted 18 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
And when you have a higgs boson and a graviton that justify and qualify the other 16 particles, one can start spouting QM as a usable, testable theory. Not a mathematical theory that produces questionable experimental evidence based on hypothetical particles.
9) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40500)
Posted 18 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
That's why I said earlier that such advanced theories are currently not much more than playing around with some advanced mathematics without any factual base.


But that also encompasses the big bung theory. Alan Guth, inventor of the Inflation theory (bolted on to the big bung) freely admits that his calculations, and theory, is wrong. Yet big bungers hold on to the thought religiously. Why?

And the Casimir effect, how is that justified with 16 elementery particles, +2 hypotheticals. Don't they need their opposite spin particles to make sense? Those other 16 particles that were MADE UP i.e. NO EVIDENCE FOR except the fact that mathemeticians needed them for QM to make sense?
10) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40487)
Posted 17 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
11) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40484)
Posted 17 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
No. The universe as a whole came into existence about 13.7 billion years ago. We know that, because no light older than that had the chance to reach us so far.


Didn't you say though that there's part of the universe beyond our viewable range? Please be consistent.

Looks like you mix up now quite some stuff. Hawking had nothing to do with the Big Bang idea for instance and he didn't invented the singularities either.


Penrose penned (pardon the pun) the singularity, Hawking 'borrowed' it as the source of the big bang. Yep, i'm the Mix Master!

M-theory won't explain how the universe came to existence. Furthermore, it first has to grow into a consistent theory (which it isn't currently).


If it does become viable (i hope not), they already have a model for the big bang.

There is some concept named energy conservation which is generally fullfilled except on very short time scales. That is where the vacuum fluctuations come into the game. And by the way, the total energy of the universe may be zero ;)


Vacuum fluctuations? Theory? No facts? Not provable but invented to fill a knowledge gap? We aren't talking gravitons are we? Of course not. We're quoting Hawking again. The man that gave us the unworkable multiple universe theory. Well, he thought it worked anyway.

http://www.braungardt.com/Physics/Vacuum%20Fluctuation.htm
It is possible to settle the issue by a simple calculation. Astronomers can measure the masses of galaxies, their average separation, and their speeds of recession. Putting these numbers into a formula yields a quantity which some physicists have interpreted as the total energy of the universe. The answer does indeed come out to be zero within the observational accuracy.


That's Hawking's zero energy. But that doesn't account for our dark matter or dark energy, does it? So is Hawking wrong, or wrong?
12) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40480)
Posted 17 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
So, Mr Physik, there is part of our universe beyond what we can see. I get that from what you're saying. But it doesn't explain this..

[url] http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galaxy_formation_and_evolution[/url]
In 2007 the Keck telescope, a team from California Institute of Technology found six star forming galaxies about 13.2 billion light years (light travel distance) away and therefore created when the universe was only 500 million years old.
Damn, i'm using evil Wiki.

Of the oldest observable light, our universe is 13.7 billion years old. But what about the part of the universe we can't see, beyond the horizon? I assume it's still part of our 'universe' by your own definition.
So how, with any accuracy, can we predict when galaxies first formed? There could be 20 billion light years worth of creation beyond our horizon. Well, that could mean we don't really know squat about what formed and when. Correct?
13) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40478)
Posted 17 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
I don't believe in god, but on the same token i don't believe in the big bang. I find it difficult to fathom basing the current fate of the universe whilst only knowing a % of the whole picture.

The Hartle and Hawking No-Boundary Proposal

Hartle and Hawking's new theory treated the universe like a quantum particle. As a result, they created a wave function that describe all possible universes. The wave function is assumed to have a large value for our own universe, and small, non-zero values for an infinite number of other possible, parallel universes. The other universes are expected to have different physical constants than our universe and are believed to be devoid of life.

The problem with Hartle and Hawking's theory is that it predicted the universe is "closed." Consider a closed universe to be the surface of an inflating balloon. Objects such as galaxies on the surface of the balloon would move away in one direction as the balloon inflates, and eventually end up at their initial positions. In addition, the concept of a closed universe implies that the universe will one day stop expanding, and collapse under the force of its own gravity.

Observations suggest that there is insufficient matter in the universe to create enough gravity to recollapse it. In fact, there is evidence predicting the universe to be expanding at a faster rate than the inflationary theory predicts. Thus, observations favor the idea of an "open" universe, a universe that will continue to expand.


The same idiot that gave us singularities and big bang's. First he comes up with multiple universes, then we get 1 from a big bang.

Where did the initial big bang 'singularity' suddenly appear from? Not there 1 microsecond, expanding exponentially the next.
I atleast give M-Theory a rap for having a go at explaining it, whilst current science palms it off to philosophers to debate over. Puts it in the too hard basket as it interferes with their current theory.

Matter can't be created or destroyed? Law of some sort? ;) 'Big bang' energy came from....
14) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40476)
Posted 17 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
You are making the common mistake of trying to look at the universe from the outside. But this doesn't make any sense as a hypothetical observer outside would be completely disconnected from our spacetime inside (remember the hypothetical vaccum fluctuation which inside growed into our universe while it simply disappered in the other spacetime?).


Like us looking at the hypothetical fish in the water? The universe by definition, as all that we know. Are you claiming we now know everything that there is to know?

There is a reason I wrote that there is not even an outside.


So, answer the question. When i peer through the event horizon, what do i see? What do i travel into? The ocean with the fish in it?

And how do you come to the conclusion that gravitation is far to weak to influence the expansion? There is experimental evidence for about 27% of the mass needed to asymptotically stop the expansion. The open question is if we find the missing 73% or if those are comprised of the still hypothetical dark energy.


You answered your own question.
15) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40472)
Posted 17 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
Ok, so the fish would 'notice' how things affected his world. Just like we notice something is affecting our world.....an expanding universe, but you swear black and blue it must be from inside the universe based on.....your hunch? Based on a theory of dark energy? that can't be detected? like dark matter? like a higgs boson? Purely hypothetical explainations?

Did God tell you there was no medium into which our universe came into existence?

Explain to me what the universe is expanding into...that is, the event horizon of the universe. What's on the other side of the wall? Strings? Angels? Ahhh, i've got it, nothing! The universe is growing into nothing.

So, it started infinitely small, surrounded by....nothing. Grew to the size of a pea, compared to what? There is no frame of reference as there is nothing.

Why is the expansion not uniform? what's stopping it from expanding uniformly? What "outside" force is opposing it? Certainly can't be gravity from the inside, it's too weak.

Lay your wisdom upon me.
16) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40470)
Posted 17 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
Thanks for making my point Vid. Most appreciated.

How can you know where the universe is going, if you don't know where it's been? The 'point' or 'singularity' of the big bang, well, it came from somewhere.
17) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40468)
Posted 17 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
And the fish in the water swims around casually believing water is the only world there is. Just keep swimming.

That's all very well to have your own opinion. As all the mathematicians must be playing a fun game with M-theory. Seems like an awful lot of funding for a mathematical game, wouldn't you say?

Last i saw experimental/observational evidence for that was zero, nada, zilch, zip. Let's get some membranes out, and make a loaf universe!!

And if Wiki is your source of info, please find a more serious, scientific one. The people who correct/quote/contribute are all on board with mainstream science and have little time for others who wish to challenge their view.

Wiki = popular opinion, not fact.

The philosophy you are invoking is the God theory i believe. In the beginning.....

springing out of nothingness into something. Something from nothing. A 'point' that sprang from nothingness to something, within nothing. Spontaeneous creation.

Mr Physik, theology doesn't belong here.
18) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40465)
Posted 17 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
Ok, i define our universe as the "bubble universe" theory. Convenient, isn't it? Nice theory also.

What's the bubble forming in?

Want to not discuss it as it doesn't fit your theory? Easier to ignore than put a hypothesis forward?

It's just as philisophical as dark energy. 'We think something is accelerating the universe, so it must be inside'. That's kind of ignoring any other opinion, as it doesn't fit yours.

I believe the fate of the universe depends solely upon the medium into which it was born, big-banged. Blow up a balloon real fast, a huge influx of energy. What happens to it depends upon the pressures outside it.
19) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40459)
Posted 17 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
It's also possible that what lies outside our universe may push back on the universe one day, condensing it. Or what encompasses our universe may actually be sucking it out.
20) Message boards : MilkyWay@home Science : Is it posible that the universe are colapsing at this very moment? (Message 40456)
Posted 17 Jun 2010 by Fayvitt
Post:
Got a little off track there. Photons. Light.

Duality..Paradox. Light as a wave and a particle.

Do you believe that light can be explained by a quantum vector field?


Next 20

©2020 Astroinformatics Group