FSM HOME MESSAGE BOARD FSM CDs FSM ONLINE RESOURCES FUN STUFF ABOUT US  SEARCH FSM

LOG IN Forgot Login? Register General Discussion • Trading Post • Non-Film Score Discussion  Profile • Preferences • Community Rules • Help/Contact • Search Board Search Terms:  Search Within:  topics posts since 2019 2018 posts 2017 posts 2016 posts 2015 posts 2014 posts 2013 posts 2012 posts 2011 posts 2010 posts 2009 posts 2008 posts 2007 posts 2006 posts 2005 posts 2004 posts 2003 posts 2002 posts 2001 posts 2000 posts users  search tips  You must log in or register to post.   Go to page:  1      Non-Film Score Discussion: Unifying Theory of Dark Energy and Dark Matter?   Last Post   Posted:   Dec 5, 2018 - 11:02 PM     By:   spiderich   (Member) "Scientists at the University of Oxford may have solved one of the biggest questions in modern physics, with a new paper unifying dark matter and dark energy into a single phenomenon: a fluid which possesses 'negative mass.' If you were to push a negative mass, it would accelerate towards you. This astonishing new theory may also prove right a prediction that Einstein made 100 years ago." Brief description here: https://phys.org/news/2018-12-universe-theory-percent-cosmos.html Full paper here: https://arxiv.org/abs/1712.07962 Commentary by the researcher here: https://theconversation.com/bizarre-dark-fluid-with-negative-mass-could-dominate-the-universe-what-my-research-suggests-107922 Richard G.    Posted:   Dec 5, 2018 - 11:43 PM     By:   Solium   (Member) Well Dark Matter and Dark Energy are two different things. Dark Matter- Based on gravitational effects in the universe there must be more matter in the universe than what we can observed. Dark Energy- An explanation for the accelerating rate galaxies are moving away from one another. Combining them into the same thing, a "fluid web" of some kind makes no sense.    Posted:   Dec 6, 2018 - 3:40 AM     By:   mgh   (Member) Fascinating. Thanks for posting. Sounds like the Tao.    Posted:   Dec 6, 2018 - 4:00 AM     By:   Rameau   (Member) It looks like mankind exists to tell the universe what it is, & lay down laws to what it can & can't do...& the universe just rolls on oblivious, & we'll be gone in the blink of an eye.    Posted:   Dec 6, 2018 - 4:51 AM     By:   Jehannum   (Member) It looks like mankind exists to tell the universe what it is, & lay down laws to what it can & can't do...& the universe just rolls on, & we're be gone in the blink of an eye. If ignorance is bliss you must be one really happy guy. Mankind doesn't lay down the laws. The laws of physics are descriptive, not prescriptive. Science doesn't tell the universe what it is; it seeks to find out. If we make a hypothesis then it might come to nothing or it might bear fruit. At least we made the attempt. At least our desire to understand drove us to try to learn. And what is a universe without us or some similarly inquisitive species? Nothing more than a clockwork toy that will one day wind down for good. I know that the scientific community seems to some like a closed, secret society making mysterious pronouncements, but this viewpoint is nothing more than ignorance. Some knowledge of how the universe works is available to all who have the curiosity and ability.    Posted:   Dec 6, 2018 - 5:58 AM     By:   Rameau   (Member) If ignorance is bliss you must be one really happy guy. Ah, you have to love the FSM board, you can't make a point without an insult. None of this is fact, it's all theory & speculation, to be replaced by more theory & speculation down the line (& more & more academics are now pouring water on the Big Bang start to the universe - if there was no time before the BB, how could it have happened, don't you need time?). It's all writing on the sand while the tide is coming in, & it'll be coming inland a lot farther in a hundred years time. Only god knows, but damn it! He/she/it doesn't exist    Posted:   Dec 6, 2018 - 7:16 AM     By:   Jehannum   (Member) Ah, you have to love the FSM board, you can't make a point without an insult. None of this is fact, it's all theory & speculation, to be replaced by more theory & speculation down the line (& more & more academics are now pouring water on the Big Bang start to the universe - if there was no time before the BB, how could it have happened, don't you need time?). It's all writing on the sand while the tide is coming in, & it'll be coming inland a lot farther in a hundred years time. Only god knows, but damn it! He/she/it doesn't exist You don't seem to realise your post was itself an insult to those who devote their lives to finding out how things work. Dismissing something as "all theory" shows your intentions. Scientific theories represent the pinnacle of human thought and ingenuity on at least equal terms with the greatest symphonies and works of literature. What else could there be than "theory"? Only in pure mathematics can anything be truly proven. In real-world physics we can only use the best available model - until something disproves it, or a more inclusive theory comes along. This may or may not happen with the Big Bang model. Even if the model is disproven it doesn't mean you're making any kind of valid point. Regarding your question about time before the Big Bang: don't you think the same question has occurred to everyone else, scientist or otherwise? We're arguably on philosophical ground here, not even in the realm of physics. It seems you're not happy unless you are given perfect knowledge in one easy-to-digest gulp. You want to know everything: How the universe started. How it will end. Everything inbetween. How on Earth do you think you can approach such knowledge except by baby steps? And in a sense this is all the progress we have made. You seem to think it's not worth learning to walk.    Posted:   Dec 6, 2018 - 7:39 AM     By:   Solium   (Member) Rameau - You’re confusing hypothesis with fact. This article is presenting a theory one that would then need to be studied and supported by evidence. But Jehannum is correct Mankind doesn’t lay down the laws of the universe. We have a scientific fact when a theory can be demonstrated, observed and repeated by multiple independent studies. Every aspect of your life is ruled by our command and understanding of science. Scientists didn’t make up the theory of the internet. It is because of our understanding of the laws of physics we have the internet. Virtually everything else in our lives from the shoes you have on your feet to the medications you take are from the result of understanding physics and biology. Regarding the Big Bang, clumps of galaxies are moving away from each other at an ever increasing rates. We know this because the further away the galaxy the more red-shifted the light. Thus you can wind back time so to speak where all of time and matter in the universe was a singularity. We have evidence of the Big Bang from the discovery of the cosmic microwave background (noise) which was theorized to exist before it was actually discovered. What happened before the Big Bang? No one knows and that's okay. Science may one day answer that question. What it doesn’t do is make things up. BTW most cosmetologists don’t really think there was nothing before the Big Bang, so the universe didn’t come from nothing. Just like evidence is mounting there is no “nothing”. Empty space in itself is “something”.    Posted:   Dec 6, 2018 - 1:35 PM     By:   chriscoyle   (Member) I follow Natalie Wolchover on Twitter and she references excellent articles on this and other subjects about the nature of the universe. https://www.quantamagazine.org/authors/natalie/    Posted:   Dec 7, 2018 - 5:12 AM     By:   Jehannum   (Member) What happened before the Big Bang? No one knows and that's okay. Science may one day answer that question. What it doesn’t do is make things up. BTW most cosmetologists don’t really think there was nothing before the Big Bang, so the universe didn’t come from nothing. Just like evidence is mounting there is no “nothing”. Empty space in itself is “something”. Nothingness is really hard to think about, let alone define formally. It seems to me that it's an abstract, human-invented concept that may have no place in reality. For example, the Uncertainty Principle suggests that true nothingness is impossible: a definite zero energy level can only exist for infinitely uncertain time interval. Conversely, zero time would give rise to infinitely uncertain energy. So there may always have been something. What was before the Big Bang is then a meaningless question, like "how heavy is purple?"    Posted:   Dec 15, 2018 - 7:37 PM     By:   spiderich   (Member) Physicist, Sabine Hossenfelder's take, "No, negative masses have not revolutionized cosmology": http://backreaction.blogspot.com/2018/12/no-negative-masses-have-not.html Richard G.     Non-Film Score Discussion: Unifying Theory of Dark Energy and Dark Matter?    < 1  >   Go to page:  1   First Post    General Discussion • Trading Post • Non-Film Score Discussion  Profile • Preferences • Community Rules • Help/Contact • Search Board You must log in or register to post.   Go to page:  1

© 2024 Film Score Monthly. All Rights Reserved. Website maintained and powered by Veraprise and Matrimont.