Home
What's new
Latest activity
Authors
Store
Latest reviews
Search products
Forums
New posts
Search forums
What's new
New posts
New listings
New products
New profile posts
Latest activity
Members
Current visitors
New profile posts
Search profile posts
Log in
Register
Cart
Cart
Loading…
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
New posts
Search forums
Search titles only
By:
Menu
Log in
Register
Navigation
Install the app
Install
More options
Change style
Contact us
Close Menu
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Pics and Videos Buffet
No More Big Bang
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="wurd2" data-source="post: 11671445" data-attributes="member: 15196"><p>Do be careful here. If you do not have an educational background in physics, the delta between your <em>internal understanding</em> of the standard model of particle physics and the <em>actual</em> standard model of particle physics is, in all likelihood, extremely vast. Like most physics enthusiasts, I do not have a formal education in the field. And forgive me any offense, but I assume you are in the same boat. Having pulled the carpet of expertise out from under our conversation, I will attempt to address a few points of yours that I feel I have learned something about.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>Three points here: <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">According to Lawrence Krauss, empty space is anything but empty. It is rather a bubbling broth of virtual particles that pop in and out of existence on a time scale so short that we cannot measure them. But we can measure their effects on atoms and nuclei indirectly. In fact, most of the energy in the universe actually resides in empty space.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">The software running on GPS satellites uses Einstein's mathematical equations from his special theory of relativity to account for gravity's curving effect on the fabric of space and the resulting distortion of the passage of time. Without Einstein's equations, GPS technology would not work at all. But because GPS does in fact work like a charm, as we all know, we can be certain that gravity warps and stretches space in the precise manner that Einstein predicted and mathematically modeled.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">We can observe light as it travels through space that is curved by gravity. As we would expect, the light follows and obeys the curve in the fabric of space.</li> </ul><p></p><p>I think the important point about dark matter and dark energy is that we do not know what they are, but we know they are there because we can observe their effects indirectly. According to Lawrence Krauss, dark energy, or the energy of empty space, is gravitationally repulsive and is causing the expansion of the universe to accelerate. This discovery was recently awarded a Nobel Prize.</p><p></p><p></p><p></p><p>As a rationalist and science enthusiast, I have learned to stick with the consensus of scientific research because I trust in the scientific method and the cleansing nature of the peer review process. I always look at it in terms of peer-reviewed publication counts: <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Standard Model of Particle Physics: THOUSANDS</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Plasma Cosmology: DOZENS</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Electric Universe: ZERO</li> </ul><p></p><p>Obviously you are free to believe as you will, but you are tossing a scientific theory around that is backed by mountains of observational evidence (as any established scientific theory is). And in proclaiming big bang theory incorrect, you are essentially saying the whole of the physics community is just wrong about the universe. This is highly unlikely.</p><p></p><p><span style="color: black">.</span></p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="wurd2, post: 11671445, member: 15196"] Do be careful here. If you do not have an educational background in physics, the delta between your [i]internal understanding[/i] of the standard model of particle physics and the [i]actual[/i] standard model of particle physics is, in all likelihood, extremely vast. Like most physics enthusiasts, I do not have a formal education in the field. And forgive me any offense, but I assume you are in the same boat. Having pulled the carpet of expertise out from under our conversation, I will attempt to address a few points of yours that I feel I have learned something about. Three points here:[list][*]According to Lawrence Krauss, empty space is anything but empty. It is rather a bubbling broth of virtual particles that pop in and out of existence on a time scale so short that we cannot measure them. But we can measure their effects on atoms and nuclei indirectly. In fact, most of the energy in the universe actually resides in empty space.[*]The software running on GPS satellites uses Einstein's mathematical equations from his special theory of relativity to account for gravity's curving effect on the fabric of space and the resulting distortion of the passage of time. Without Einstein's equations, GPS technology would not work at all. But because GPS does in fact work like a charm, as we all know, we can be certain that gravity warps and stretches space in the precise manner that Einstein predicted and mathematically modeled.[*]We can observe light as it travels through space that is curved by gravity. As we would expect, the light follows and obeys the curve in the fabric of space.[/list] I think the important point about dark matter and dark energy is that we do not know what they are, but we know they are there because we can observe their effects indirectly. According to Lawrence Krauss, dark energy, or the energy of empty space, is gravitationally repulsive and is causing the expansion of the universe to accelerate. This discovery was recently awarded a Nobel Prize. As a rationalist and science enthusiast, I have learned to stick with the consensus of scientific research because I trust in the scientific method and the cleansing nature of the peer review process. I always look at it in terms of peer-reviewed publication counts:[list][*]Standard Model of Particle Physics: THOUSANDS[*]Plasma Cosmology: DOZENS[*]Electric Universe: ZERO[/list] Obviously you are free to believe as you will, but you are tossing a scientific theory around that is backed by mountains of observational evidence (as any established scientific theory is). And in proclaiming big bang theory incorrect, you are essentially saying the whole of the physics community is just wrong about the universe. This is highly unlikely. [color=black].[/color] [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Forums
SVTPerformance's Chain of Restaurants
Pics and Videos Buffet
No More Big Bang
Top