Facebook
Google
GitHub
Linkedin
If I remember correctly, he said his "greatest blunder" was the inclusion of the "cosmological constant", which in the end turned out to be true, after all. How is that related to dark matter?
Aliens at last?
- Thread starter cmartinez
- Start date
Dark matter/energy is a 'solution' to the positive cosmological constant needed for an expanding universe. The main problem is the huge dependency between what's needed for correct Planck scale particle physics and the expected cosmological constant.
http://www.csicop.org/sb/show/the_problem_with_the_cosmological_constant/
http://www.csicop.org/sb/show/the_problem_with_the_cosmological_constant/
Oh, really? Please supply the incontrovertible evidence to support this conclusion!
Aren't dark matter and dark energy two different things?
Well, my rigorist friend, guess you got me there, because there is no such thing as incontrovertible evidence (if you want to argue about that too, then first please talk to the rapper that says the earth is flat. Then we can argue some more).
All I can say is what the wikipedia says:
Observations announced in 1998 of distance–redshift relation for Type Ia supernovae[9][10] indicated that the expansion of the universe is accelerating. When combined with measurements of the cosmic microwave background radiation these implied a value of
Of course, one could argue that the cosmological constant, as first stated by Einstein, was only a mathematical term, and it wasn't as understood at the time as it is now, limited though our understanding might be.
Ahhh...but you said it was "true"!Well, my rigorist friend, guess you got me there, because there is no such thing as incontrovertible evidence (if you want to argue about that too, then first please talk to the rapper that says the earth is flat. Then we can argue some more).
All I can say is what the wikipedia says:
Observations announced in 1998 of distance–redshift relation for Type Ia supernovae[9][10] indicated that the expansion of the universe is accelerating. When combined with measurements of the cosmic microwave background radiation these implied a value of,[11] a result which has been supported and refined by more recent measurements. There are other possible causes of an accelerating universe, such as quintessence, but the cosmological constant is in most respects the simplest solution. Thus, the current standard model of cosmology, the Lambda-CDM model, includes the cosmological constant
Of course, one could argue that the cosmological constant, as first stated by Einstein, was only a mathematical term, and it wasn't as understood at the time as it is now, limited though our understanding might be.
May I point out that dark matter/energy is a requirement for an explanation (theory) of the (accelerating) expansion of the universe as we know it is today?
Remember, I have my own theories, which require neither dark energy/matter nor gravitons or gravitational waves. In fact, if any of these are proven to exist, my theory goes down the toilet.
Interestingly, my theory predicted the 'flatness' of the CMB before precise measurements confirmed it -- to my delight! Astrophysicist were surprised at the homogeneity of it -- I was "Ho, Hum....what else is new".
So far, all experimental data points to the correctness of my theory. Exciting times lie ahead.
Yes and both are needed as fixes in most theories of how we currently understand the small to large structure of the cosmos over billions of years. Dark matter is a fix for missing gravitational mass at the galaxy scale while Dark energy is a fix for acceleration at the universes scale. It's unknown how or if they are related but it seems a little too handy that dark matter with no detectable energy attracts while dark energy repels for them not to be related in some way if the theory is correct.
Last edited:
And all of the 'theories' are based on the assumption that the physics of the universe are the same as what we see on Earth. And since we haven't been "there" it is in reality all unknown. We don't even know what our solar system was like before this current iteration of it. (what was here in this area of the universe)
I have no problem with this. I think the CMB proves pretty much that every point in our universe is identical to every other.
No.
Why not?
See #212.
That, and while they may come up with some wild theories, astrophysicists, in general, aren't stupid.
Maybe... just maybe, you should start preparing that toilet you've mentioned:
https://www.newscientist.com/articl...avitational-waves-is-probably-true-this-time/
But as with everything involving science. We're gonna have to wait for confirmation, and most importantly, replication of said experiment.
To be fair, at the bottom of the page it reads:
"The last time something like this happened, it ended in a let-down – because the LIGO team creates false signals to test their analysis.
In 2010, before LIGO had been upgraded to its present sensitivity, a textbook chirp that looked like two black holes colliding came through. The team drafted a paper and sent maps of where the signal may have come from to astronomers, who searched for a counterpart with other telescopes.
There was just one problem: the signal was a fake deliberately injected into the data stream to make sure the team would be able to spot a real one. The dramatic opening of a sealed envelope revealed that fact to 300 team members in the room, with 100 more watching via a video link.
It’s not clear whether any of the new signals are false, but given the team’s plans for introducing fakes, it’s unlikely that they all are.
We’ll know on Thursday if any of these new signals were more than just a quality-control exercise."
"The last time something like this happened, it ended in a let-down – because the LIGO team creates false signals to test their analysis.
In 2010, before LIGO had been upgraded to its present sensitivity, a textbook chirp that looked like two black holes colliding came through. The team drafted a paper and sent maps of where the signal may have come from to astronomers, who searched for a counterpart with other telescopes.
There was just one problem: the signal was a fake deliberately injected into the data stream to make sure the team would be able to spot a real one. The dramatic opening of a sealed envelope revealed that fact to 300 team members in the room, with 100 more watching via a video link.
It’s not clear whether any of the new signals are false, but given the team’s plans for introducing fakes, it’s unlikely that they all are.
We’ll know on Thursday if any of these new signals were more than just a quality-control exercise."
Well, Joey, it seems that you're going to have to revise your cosmological theory a bit:
https://www.newscientist.com/articl...s-as-gravitational-waves-seen-for-first-time/
https://www.newscientist.com/articl...s-as-gravitational-waves-seen-for-first-time/
Last edited:
Boy, they sure drew a lot of conclusions from a single chirp. And I shall have to wait for independent confirmation. But, possibly, a revision, or complete dismissal, of my theory is in order.
I am a real scientist -- I don't mind evidence that negates my theories. In fact, I look forward to it.
Thanks for the heads-up.
Well, apparently this whole thing about an alien megastructure has a more mundane explanation.
I guess some things are just too good to be true most of the time. But it's till nice to fantasize a bit if the subject entails excitement.
I guess some things are just too good to be true most of the time. But it's till nice to fantasize a bit if the subject entails excitement.
| Thread starter | Similar threads | Forum | Replies | Date |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Those Gosh Darn Ancient Aliens | Off-Topic | 79 | |
|
Where are the 'Aliens'? | General Science, Physics & Math | 13 | |
|
|
Extraterrestrial Aliens Finally Located ? | Off-Topic | 30 | |
|
|
China looks for Aliens with new radio telescope. | General Science, Physics & Math | 1 | |
|
aliens' existence proven by scientific formulae | Off-Topic | 7 |
