TranceAddict Forums

TranceAddict Forums (www.tranceaddict.com/forums)
- Chill Out Room
-- A Baffling Physics Question That Should Make You Think
Pages (4): « 1 [2] 3 4 »


Posted by Krypton on Jul-20-2009 06:04:

quote:
Originally posted by Sushipunk

[quote]What if there was a black hole (or something similar) that was so large and so dense that it slowed the expansion, and eventually reversed it? Is something like that possible?


All the matter in the entire universe is not strong enough to slow down or reverse this expansion.

quote:
That's why the 'cyclical' theory makes more sense (to me anyway )


Well, how can the cyclical theory be true if the universe's expansion isn't slowing down or reversing, but growing faster and faster?


Posted by Krypton on Jul-20-2009 06:05:

quote:
Originally posted by Sunsnail
1) The universe doesn't have to have a beginning


Big Bang Theory


Posted by Sunsnail on Jul-20-2009 06:05:

quote:
Originally posted by Sushipunk
That doesn't make sense. The gravity from a black hole is so great that even light can't escape from it. That isn't the case with a planet's gravity.


http://cosmology.berkeley.edu/Education/BHfaq.html#q6

(link is weird, look for "if the sun became a black hole")

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Big Bang Theory


not necessarily a beginning


Posted by Sushipunk on Jul-20-2009 06:07:

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
All the matter in the entire universe is not strong enough to slow down or reverse this expansion.


If you say so. I really wouldn't know

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
Well, how can the cyclical theory be true if the universe's expansion isn't slowing down or reversing, but growing faster and faster?


So the expansion is accelerating? What is causing that?


Posted by yukii on Jul-20-2009 06:11:

quote:
Originally posted by Sushipunk
So the expansion is accelerating? What is causing that?


yes.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space


Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Jul-20-2009 06:15:

quote:
Originally posted by Sushipunk
What is causing that?


well that's the question isn't it? this is where dark energy or matter enters the discussion. the only answer to your question right now is we simply don't know.


Posted by Krypton on Jul-20-2009 06:16:

quote:
Originally posted by Sushipunk
If you say so. I really wouldn't know


Well, it's simple. The universe is expanding despite the huge amount of matter in it. So you can say that all the matter in the universe is not making the expansion slow down or reverse.

quote:
So the expansion is accelerating? What is causing that?


The expansion is due partly to inertia (that is, the matter in the universe is separating because it was separating in the past) and partly to a repulsive force of unknown nature, which may be a cosmological constant. Inertia dominated the expansion in the early universe, and according to the ΛCDM model the cosmological constant will dominate in the future. In the present era they contribute in roughly equal proportions.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Metric_expansion_of_space
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hubble's_Law


Posted by Sushipunk on Jul-20-2009 06:17:

quote:
Originally posted by pkcRAISTLIN
well that's the question isn't it? this is where dark energy or matter enters the discussion. the only answer to your question right now is we simply don't know.


That means there's a possibility that I'm right!

No idea what I might be right about though. All this stuff is such a huge head-fuck. I haven't thought about it much since I stopped smoking weed


Posted by SuspicionVandit on Jul-20-2009 06:17:

Just think of a grenade. The particles of a grenade after the boom are traveling very very fast, eventually slowing down to resistance of the air and gravity. This is only a very few second, and this is relatively a very small bang in comparison to that needed to spark the universe.
Like I said earlier padwan, the universe may not
1) have yet reached a point where it has succumbed to its internal resistance. So we could very well have billions of more years to go before there an observation can be made that the universe has ceased its accelerated growth.
2) the bang was just so enormous that the outer most particles are traveling too fast to be affected by the gravity of particles of a different time/space.


Posted by yukii on Jul-20-2009 06:20:

quote:
Originally posted by Sushipunk
All this stuff is such a huge head-fuck.


that's what we love


Posted by Krypton on Jul-20-2009 06:21:

quote:
Originally posted by SuspicionVandit
Just think of a grenade. The particles of a grenade after the boom are traveling very very fast, eventually slowing down to resistance of the air and gravity. This is only a very few second, and this is relatively a very small bang in comparison to that needed to spark the universe.
Like I said earlier padwan, the universe may not
1) have yet reached a point where it has succumbed to its internal resistance. So we could very well have billions of more years to go before there an observation can be made that the universe has ceased its accelerated growth.
2) the bang was just so enormous that the outer most particles are traveling too fast to be affected by the gravity of particles of a different time/space.


There is a problem with that. First, the grenade's blast is expanding into air, which provides friction. There is no friction in outer space. The universe is not expanding into air. So there is nothing that is going to slow down its expansion.


Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Jul-20-2009 06:25:

quote:
Originally posted by SuspicionVandit
Just think of a grenade. The particles of a grenade after the boom are traveling very very fast, eventually slowing down to resistance of the air and gravity. This is only a very few second, and this is relatively a very small bang in comparison to that needed to spark the universe.
Like I said earlier padwan, the universe may not
1) have yet reached a point where it has succumbed to its internal resistance. So we could very well have billions of more years to go before there an observation can be made that the universe has ceased its accelerated growth.
2) the bang was just so enormous that the outer most particles are traveling too fast to be affected by the gravity of particles of a different time/space.


the only issue i have with this is that the grenade's fragments are slowing down from the instant they explode, right? at no time do they accelerate after the initial bang. unless im mistaken, which is more than likely.


Posted by Renzo on Jul-20-2009 06:25:

There's no air friction in space. There is friction. Very little, though.


Posted by SuspicionVandit on Jul-20-2009 06:29:

yeah but explain the molten steel


yeah i'm exit. i feel bad when I'm wrong. bad jimmy bad jimmy smith jr


Posted by pkcRAISTLIN on Jul-20-2009 06:33:

quote:
Originally posted by SuspicionVandit
yeah but explain the molten steel



Posted by boris_the_bear on Jul-20-2009 06:33:

Re: A Baffling Physics Question That Should Make You Think

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
The law of conservation of mass and energy states that matter cannot be created or destroyed in a system, only transferred. So, how did matter and energy get here in the first place? Is it infinite? Well, if it's infinite, and the universe had a beginning at the Big Bang, then WTF?

this topic is a constant interest for thousands of physicists (like my dad) around the world. and you want someone on TA to give you THE answer straight out of their pocket? massive fail


Posted by yukii on Jul-20-2009 06:35:

lawl, boris we don't expect that- we just like to debate and share ideas!







































































































plur


Posted by trancechan on Jul-20-2009 07:04:

big bang theory is clearly a lie devised by the liberal media

let's bring this discussion back to god, this time with six wings.


Posted by Acton on Jul-20-2009 07:48:

Oooooh where do I start in this thread

With the original post I guess....

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
The law of conservation of mass and energy states that matter cannot be created or destroyed in a system, only transferred. So, how did matter and energy get here in the first place? Is it infinite? Well, if it's infinite, and the universe had a beginning at the Big Bang, then WTF?


....not by critising it, but adding to it to induce further confusion in the COR...

Particles can actually appear out of nowhere, they can just spontaneously be "created" in our universe having borrowed energy from essentially nowhere! They don't stick around much and have an incredibly small lifespan, but still, food for thought

As for the "big crunch", we don't know if that's going to happen yet as we haven't summed up all the forces involved to make a conclusion. There is obviously gravity which is wanting to pull the universe back together, but if you didn't know there is a force that is actually increasing the rate of expansion of our universe. Interesting stuff.


Posted by Sushipunk on Jul-20-2009 07:59:

quote:
Originally posted by Acton
Particles can actually appear out of nowhere, they can just spontaneously be "created" in our universe having borrowed energy from essentially nowhere! They don't stick around much and have an incredibly small lifespan, but still, food for thought


I've read about that before, but it's so fucking vague. And, there are lots of issues with what could only be described as 'measurement error'.


Posted by Acton on Jul-20-2009 08:02:

quote:
Originally posted by Sushipunk
I've read about that before, but it's so fucking vague. And, there are lots of issues with what could only be described as 'measurement error'.


What I mentioned in my post is explained by the Uncertainty Principle, which essentially, is all to do with measurement .


Posted by Sushipunk on Jul-20-2009 08:07:

quote:
Originally posted by Acton
What I mentioned in my post is explained by the Uncertainty Principle, which essentially, is all to do with measurement .


It's definitely interesting shit, I'll give you that.

My biggest issue with all of this is mostly the measurement factor though. I mean, we THINK we're measuring it all correctly, but are we even getting close?

It's also why I think this is such a popular topic of disussion. People can throw in any and all kinds of theories without any risk of being proven wrong


Posted by Lira on Jul-20-2009 14:08:

Re: Re: Re: A Baffling Physics Question That Should Make You Think

quote:
Originally posted by Krypton
If the universe has a beginning, how could matter and energy have been here all along?

Why should the universe have a beginning? And what makes you think the big bang must've been the very initial starting point of the universe?

As a matter of fact, why do you believe the universe we know is all there is? There could be many more multiverses!


Posted by Akridrot on Jul-20-2009 14:09:

quote:
Originally posted by jennypie
Oh great, another religion thread.

This made me laugh for some reason.


Posted by Krypton on Jul-20-2009 16:47:

Re: Re: A Baffling Physics Question That Should Make You Think

quote:
Originally posted by boris_the_bear
this topic is a constant interest for thousands of physicists (like my dad) around the world. and you want someone on TA to give you THE answer straight out of their pocket? massive fail


I wanted to start an interesting discussion. Sorry if that bothers you..


Pages (4): « 1 [2] 3 4 »

Powered by: vBulletin
Copyright © 2000-2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.