Welcome to
Science a GoGo's
Discussion Forums
Please keep your postings on-topic or they will be moved to a galaxy far, far away.
Your use of this forum indicates your agreement to our terms of use.
So that we remain spam-free, please note that all posts by new users are moderated.


The Forums
General Science Talk        Not-Quite-Science        Climate Change Discussion        Physics Forum        Science Fiction

Who's Online
0 registered (), 251 Guests and 0 Spiders online.
Key: Admin, Global Mod, Mod
Latest Posts
welcome to the newly developing glaciation period.
by paul
10/24/19 03:23 PM
Potatoes on Mars
by paul
10/24/19 02:55 PM
Fishing , baiting the hook.
by paul
10/24/19 02:43 PM
F=mv ... mv=F
by paul
10/24/19 02:37 PM
Do we have a moderator?
by paul
10/23/19 12:30 AM
Is there anybody out there?
by paul
10/23/19 12:22 AM
Top Posters (30 Days)
paul 13
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 >
Topic Options
#44880 - 08/21/12 03:59 AM Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade.
socratus Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 06/20/08
Posts: 415
Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade.
=.
There are many different spaces: 2 dimension space, 3D space,
4D, 5D . . . .. .10D, 11D . . . . maybe more.
There are also ‘ closed’ and ‘open’ spaces.
There are many topological spaces too.
Question:
Which space has the Universe as a whole?
Answer:
It is fact: the Universe as a whole has exactly the
required density of matter to be flat.
The average density of matter in the universe (even
incorporating a dark mass and dark energy ) is equal to
or less than critical density and therefore the universe
as a whole is a flat infinite continuum.
==..
But the physicists refuse to admit this fact .
Why ?
Because they don’t know that to do with ‘ a flat infinite
continuum’. And they ‘ burned ‘ the real infinite flat
cosmological continuum ( using different abstract models )
to rid it of its infinite flatness.
And from Einstein’s time they discus about cosmological
constant that will close the flat- open Universe
into a close- sphere.
==..
The Universe as a whole is an Infinite Flat Universe.
Only in some rare places the Infinite Flatness is breaked.
==..
So, instead to say : ‘ It is fact: the Universe as a whole is flat,
they say: ‘To take the Universe as an infinite flat space - it is
impossible fact. There’s something wrong with the Universe. ‘
=== =..
P.S.
' But I don't want to go among mad people,' said Alice.
'Oh, you can't help that,' said the cat. 'We're all mad here.'
/ Lewis Carroll.
Alice's Adventures in Wonderland. /
==..
#
How is possible to understand the Flatness ?
How is possible to understand the Infinite Flat Universe ?
What is possible to say about a cold Kelvin space T=0K ?
==.
Flatness is a Vacuum.
Vacuum is an Empty space between billions and billions Galaxies.
Now (!) the physicists think (!) that the Universe as whole has
temperature: T= 2,7K . The parameter T=2,7K is not constant.
It is temporal and goes down. In the future it will come to T= 0K.
#
In my opinion this cold Kelvin space T=0K has old physical -
classical model so-called ‘ model of an Ideal Gas’.
Now we think that model of ‘ Ideal Gas is an abstraction’,
but this abstraction suit very well to another ‘ abstraction ‘,
to ‘a cold zero Kelvin space.’
These two models have negative temperature, and
in these two models there are ‘abstract ideal – virtual particles’.
And to have real model is needed something to change in these
abstraction models .. . .. and this change can be only quantum.
#
Now, let us put an elemenrary particles in the cold Kelvin space:
T = 2,7K ---> 0K. Which geometrical form they can have ?
The answer is: ‘ They must be flat particles.’
Why?
Because according to Charle’s law and the consequence of the
third law of thermodynamics as the thermodynamic temperature
of a system approaches absolute zero the volume of particles
approaches zero too. It means the particles must have flat forms.
They must have geometrical form of a circle: pi= c /d =3,14 . . . .
#
All formulas, equations and laws of ‘ an Ideal Gas’
is possible to use to the Infinire Vacuum T=0K.
===…
All the best.
Israel Sadovnik Socratus.
===.
P.S.
The universe is flat on the large scale, as per the scientific
evidence provided by WMAP.
Thus the universe was known to be flat to within about 15% accuracy
prior to the WMAP results.
WMAP has confirmed this result with very high accuracy and precision.
We now know that the universe is flat with only a 0.5% margin of error.

http://wmap.gsfc.nasa.gov/universe/uni_shape.html.
==..

Top
.
#44883 - 08/21/12 09:35 AM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: socratus]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
I am going to use Paul physics to answer you Socratus.

See apparently there is no conservation of energy so you can make energy and remove energy from the universe.

So I am going to make unlimited energy and via E=MC2 I can make as much matter as I like and therefore I can make my own infinite universe.

THERFORE I AM A GOD.

I choose to make it flat because it artistically contrasts to my round black holes where I remove energy to satisfy my artistic cravings.

So you religious types better pray energy is finite in this universe because it is you only chance of salvation from my me and my fellow scientists else we can become gods.

Sounds all perfectly reasonable hey.


Edited by Orac (08/21/12 09:42 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#44884 - 08/21/12 11:37 AM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: socratus]
Bill S. Offline
Megastar

Registered: 08/20/10
Posts: 3570
Loc: Essex, UK
Somewhere in this rambling there is an assumption that a temperature of 0K can actually be achieved; there is also an expressed need for QM. Wouldn’t the precepts of QM prevent 0K from ever being attainable?
_________________________
There never was nothing.

Top
#44886 - 08/21/12 12:25 PM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: Bill S.]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Bill S sometimes you make my day with you logic ... and since you have sorted thru the garbage I will get you to think futher.

The reason laser cooling can cool lower to absolute zero than conventional cooling is because in effect it can cool out the quantum noise because it is a photonic effect.

So can you actually achieve near absolute zero on both a QM and physical vibration now there is an obvious QM question isn't there.

http://www.newscientist.com/article/dn18541-what-happens-at-absolute-zero.html

Quote:

The curious things that happen at low temperatures keep on throwing up surprises. Last week, scientists reported that molecules in an ultra-cold gas can chemically react at distances up to 100 times greater than they can at room temperature.

In experiments closer to room temperature, chemical reactions tend to slow down as the temperature decreases. But scientists found that molecules at frigid temperatures just a few hundred billionths of a degree above absolute zero (−273.15°C or 0 kelvin) can still exchange atoms, forging new chemical bonds in the process, thanks to weird quantum effects that extend their reach at low temperatures.


Now things start to get interesting if you use a bit of logic.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bose%E2%80%93Einstein_condensate

Think about it a bit more Bill S you have a good logic and a keen sense of science even though you insist you don't have the maths and science background.

Hint the answer also sort of solves Socratus problem of why the universe is very close to flat.

This may help piece it together: http://www.scientificamerican.com/article.cfm?id=bose-einstein-condensate

cheat if you get stuck ... try doing it without using it (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=veU6hK3jMH4) :-)

The sucky bit with the scientific answer is I may never get to be a god ... sigh


Edited by Orac (08/21/12 12:54 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#44887 - 08/21/12 01:15 PM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: socratus]
socratus Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 06/20/08
Posts: 415
Book ‘ Parallel Worlds’ by Michio Kaku.
#
‘ According to the picture emerging from the WMAP satellite,
a mysterious antigravity force is accelerating the expansion
of the universe. If it continued for billions or trillions of years,
the universe will inevitably reach a big freeze . . . .’
/ page 288 /
In 1854, . . . . Helmholtz realized that the laws of
thermodynamics could be applied to the universe as a whole,
meaning that everything around us, including the stars and
galaxies, would eventually have to run down.’
/ page 289 /
==..
There isn’t laws of thermodynamics without the ‘ Ideal gas’.
There isn’t thermodynamics of cosmos without the ‘ Ideal gas’.
==.

Top
#44889 - 08/21/12 02:03 PM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: socratus]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
NEWSFLASH Socratus

That is one view from one scientist there is no consensus on it

HERE try a more active reference

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

I would want to have alot more data before I guessed at that ... in the end to science we have no urgency of time we will know the answer when we know the answer.

It took 58 years to find the Higgs Boson given the universe most likely isn't going to end tomorrow ... not really a huge time pressure on science to work out how the universe ends.

The second point is the ideal gas las is a crock of rubbish here try wiki in particular go down to the "Deviations from real gases" section. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_law)

QM has rewritten all these "classic" laws and until you get that in your head you really are flogging a dead horse.

You keep trying to make meaning yet you refuse to start at the beginning and follow the proofs of what is known and how.

NOW YOUR QUESTION TIME SOCRATUS

Do you accept the conservation of energy or can I create infinite energy and thus become a god because that at a religious level is where that question leads?


Edited by Orac (08/21/12 02:49 PM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#44890 - 08/21/12 03:25 PM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: socratus]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
Quote:
According to the picture emerging from the WMAP satellite,
a mysterious antigravity force is accelerating the expansion
of the universe.


thats interesting, socratus
perhaps the mysterious antigravity force is just gravity from the surrounding universes.
_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#44892 - 08/21/12 03:45 PM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
Quote:
Do you accept the conservation of energy


where has that law been violated , is it in this thread or the other discussion where laser cooling was being discussed?

you do understand the term troll dont you?

I dont know why you cant accept that the momentum of a photon
could slow an atom.

because that is all that is happening.



_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#44893 - 08/21/12 04:00 PM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: paul]
socratus Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 06/20/08
Posts: 415
Originally Posted By: paul
Quote:
According to the picture emerging from the WMAP satellite,
a mysterious antigravity force is accelerating the expansion
of the universe.


thats interesting, socratus
perhaps the mysterious antigravity force
is just gravity from the surrounding universes.


The gravity of our universe run down . . in every direction . .
According to your opinion the reason ' is just gravity from the surrounding universes. '
How many ' surrounding universes' ( as a russian matreshka )
can be ? 2 . . .3 . . .7 . . .10 . . . .Infinite ?
Isnt better to take Kaku conclusion:
' If it continued for billions or trillions of years,
the universe will inevitably reach a big freeze '

Top
#44895 - 08/21/12 04:44 PM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: socratus]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
I have no idea how many.
all the universes combined might just be particles of some atom.

everything seems to form a spherical shape , because of gravity.

but , galaxies seem flat.

this is because time.

we see a flat solar system , flat galaxies , you have mentioned a flat universe.


when we finaly get to look at a motionless atom we may see a flat atom.



what we see in our little short billionth of a second lifetimes
compared to the universes lifetime just appears flat to us , actually it is spinning really fast , so fast that everything looks like a sphere.

I cant see that the universe would freeze , I cant see a reason
unless theres some scientist out there pointing a laser beam into the atom that we are inside of.









_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#44897 - 08/21/12 05:01 PM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: Orac]
Bill Offline
Megastar

Registered: 12/31/10
Posts: 1858
Loc: Oklahoma, USA
Originally Posted By: Orac
The second point is the ideal gas las is a crock of rubbish here try wiki in particular go down to the "Deviations from real gases" section. (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ideal_gas_law)

Actually the ideal gas law works just fine, if you use it appropriately. Engineers use it all the time when they are working on systems that use limited variations in temperature, pressure, and volume. It has almost always been used in those situations. It works great for steam engines, but not necessarily in the boiler, that involves a phase change and you may have to use other approximations. For limited areas it is a useful approximation. When you get outside those limits forget it.

Bill Gill
_________________________
C is not the speed of light in a vacuum.
C is the universal speed limit.

Top
#44898 - 08/21/12 06:02 PM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: paul]
socratus Offline
Senior Member

Registered: 06/20/08
Posts: 415
Originally Posted By: paul
I have no idea how many.
all the universes combined might just be particles of some atom.

everything seems to form a spherical shape , because of gravity.

but , galaxies seem flat.

this is because time.

we see a flat solar system , flat galaxies ,
you have mentioned a flat universe.


when we finaly get to look at a motionless atom we may see a flat atom.



what we see in our little short billionth of a second lifetimes
compared to the universes lifetime just appears flat to us ,
actually it is spinning really fast , so fast that everything looks like a sphere.

I cant see that the universe would freeze ,
I cant see a reason unless theres some scientist out there
pointing a laser beam into the atom that we are inside of.

At first the universe as a whole was totally freeze
The particles was also freeze and flat ( potential state =
= circle form: c/d=pi=3,14 )
Later the situation in a local place was changed
( vacuum polarization/fluctuation )
The reason of this fluctuation is a freeze-particle,
who behave itself according to the quantum laws.
The universe in local place is not T=0K now.
==..

Top
#44902 - 08/21/12 11:35 PM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: Bill]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: Bill

Actually the ideal gas law works just fine, if you use it appropriately. Engineers use it all the time when they are working on systems that use limited variations in temperature, pressure, and volume. It has almost always been used in those situations. It works great for steam engines, but not necessarily in the boiler, that involves a phase change and you may have to use other approximations. For limited areas it is a useful approximation. When you get outside those limits forget it.

Bill Gill


I should have said it can be useful Bill like any approximation but it isn't accurate as you note in many situations especially the ones Socratus seems all bent out of shape about being the open universe.

Your answer is correct as usual :-)


Edited by Orac (08/22/12 12:09 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#44903 - 08/21/12 11:41 PM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: socratus]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: socratus
At first the universe as a whole was totally freeze
The particles was also freeze and flat ( potential state =
= circle form: c/d=pi=3,14 )
Later the situation in a local place was changed
( vacuum polarization/fluctuation )
The reason of this fluctuation is a freeze-particle,
who behave itself according to the quantum laws.
The universe in local place is not T=0K now.
==..



Something like this Socratus?

http://phys.org/news/2012-08-big-theory-chill.html

Google "Quantum Graphity"

I dislike the theory but it's a testable idea and within the next few years science will put it to the axe because it makes testable predictions.
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#44904 - 08/21/12 11:56 PM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: Orac]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Socratus unlike others you have at least made efforts to read and understand. So lets see if I can get you a bit futher along.

Lubos Motl did a really good article on why quantum mechanics has to be complex and linear. It has some heavy mathematics but the mathematics is not essential to the understanding.

Read around the mathematics and see if you can follow the science logic of how and why QM works.

The last few paragraphs spell it out for you very neatly and concisely.

http://motls.blogspot.com.au/2012/08/why-quantum-mechanics-has-to-be-complex.html

Feel free to ask about anything you don't get.
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#44905 - 08/22/12 12:05 AM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: paul

I dont know why you cant accept that the momentum of a photon
could slow an atom.


Ther are so many problems with this I ain't touching it unless you are prepared to do some reading.

THAT IS IT HAS BEEN EASILY PROVED EXPERIMENTALLY WRONG AND WHY IT REQUIRES QM COOLING TO GET CLOSER TO ABSOLUTE ZERO THAN CAN BE DONE BY CLASSICAL MEANS.

Your start point you need to understand is "helicity" and "chirality" of matter.


Until you read and understand what that means and implies your answer is nonsensical.

See without those spins we have no gravity, no strong and weak forces and everything stops working and all matter flies apart ..... OOPS.

Still want to not have quantum spins??

See thats whats interesting about Bose-Enstein condensates is that matter starts acting not like normal matter.

And this is my last attempt to get you across the void as I am more than happy to ignore you.


Edited by Orac (08/22/12 12:29 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#44908 - 08/22/12 12:50 AM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
Quote:
Ther are so many problems with this I ain't touching it unless you are prepared to do some reading.


I suppose your saying that the guys in the video are not really showing / telling us / acting out the truth about how the atoms are being slowed down.

when he says that the frequency of the laser light must match the frequency of the atom in order for the atom to be able to absorb the photon , he was just kidding.

these guys need to sit down and have a good talk / lecture from you so that you can tell them how wrong they are and so that you can set them straight on how to accomplish what they have already accomplished , right?

thats the way I see it anyway , if they dont really know what they are talking about they shouldnt be allowed to play with such dangerous stuff.

they could cut the world in half with that
extremely hot (1 watt)laser.

Quote:
I am more than happy to ignore you.


that sounds like a great idea.


_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#44913 - 08/22/12 01:17 AM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Last go ...

What they are saying is correct at some level what they are not doing is talking about the quantum side of things.

At a Quantum level you have stuff spinning binding the matter together that is the energy that gets released by a nuclear explosion if you want some scale of how much energy we are talking about.

Like anything that spins there are vibrations in that spinning and add in our friendly sub atomic particles that are spinning doing there QM thing they have quite a bit of vibration because there position is not well defined.

That QM vibration is part of the larger molecule vibration you are talking about which is the classical measurable statistic you call temperature.

So they are correct laser cooling slows the macro molecule vibration but it has also the ability to slow the QM vibration within the atom which is very different to classical cooling which has no such ability.

I am sure if you think about this it makes perfect sense and in some ways you probably knew all this you just hadn't put it all together.

You are correct the macro molecule vibration is a large part of the statistic of temperature but there is a much larger energy involved in binding atom together you are ignoring and generally we only see that energy in a nuclear blast.
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
#44915 - 08/22/12 01:33 AM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: Orac]
paul Offline
Megastar

Registered: 03/21/06
Posts: 4135
Quote:
You are correct


see, now dont you feel much better.

Quote:

the macro molecule vibration is a large part of the statistic of temperature but there is a much larger energy involved in binding atom together you are ignoring and generally we only see that energy in a nuclear blast.


we were not discussing what binds atoms together now were we?

we were discussing mass , and how mass can not be finite.

we have shown that kinetic energy can be lost!

the fact that the atom absorbs the photon
and the atom also slows proves that kinetic energy was lost , not transfered , not converted , lost.

if the kinetic energy of the photon and the atom would not have been lost , it would be at that point that we should get worried about violating laws.

but everything worked just as physics expected it to.

at some point in time , something gave that photon its kinetic energy.

like when the sun is used in a solar sail.

the only difference is that the solar sail does not vibrate at the same frequency / wavelength as the photons , so they bump the sail and bounce off , giving momentum to the sail.

the motion of the mass of the sail is its kinetic energy.

_________________________
3/4 inch of dust build up on the moon in 4.527 billion years,LOL and QM is fantasy science.

Top
#44916 - 08/22/12 02:26 AM Re: Flatness Problem: To call a spade a spade. [Re: paul]
Orac Offline
Megastar

Registered: 05/20/11
Posts: 2819
Loc: Currently Illinois, USA
Originally Posted By: paul

we were not discussing what binds atoms together now were we?

we were discussing mass , and how mass can not be finite.


Unfortunately those two things are linked you have accepted mass equivalence.

Even the universe at 0K has enoromous energy so long as there is still matter. Turn all the remaining matter into an atomic bomb and you will get some idea how much.

Heat is a trivial amount of the energy in the universe and that is the point you are missing do you know how much matter was converted in the atomic bombs on Japan?


Originally Posted By: paul

we have shown that kinetic energy can be lost!

the fact that the atom absorbs the photon
and the atom also slows proves that kinetic energy was lost , not transfered , not converted , lost.



It was transferred Paul I had to create the laser light that took an incredible amount of energy and the energy the laser absorbed from the molecule it was cooling ends up as heat in the laser cavity.

So the kinetic energy was transfered to heat in the laser cavity and the whole process took far more energy than it removed from the molecules.

Thats why I couldn't cool the whole universe in this way it would take more energy than there is the universe to cool the universe and the heat from the laser cooling it would have to go somewhere.


There is no energy lost in laser cooling infact as with almost any process we do it is quite inefficient there is far more energy injected into the system than is used and there is quite alot of waste.

This why Bill S was asking you where the energy was going in laser cooling because it's important you realise the energy is specifically going somewhere even if you open end the laser at one end the energy absorbed from the molecule ends a photon in space so space inherits the energy absorbed it doesn't disappear.

That photon travelling thru space has energy and therefore via energy mass equivalence it has mass and nothing changed in the universe your molecule got a liitle colder and shed some mass your photon got some energy and gained mass but the mass of the universe remained EXACTLY THE SAME.

Follow the logic ... heat has to go somewhere whatever cools loses mass whatever took the heat away gains mass net result for the universe is no change in mass.

The only way the universe could lose mass is if it lost energy to something outside the universe and that was the argument Stephen hawking tried to maek with black holes even we can show that doesn't even work.


Edited by Orac (08/22/12 02:40 AM)
_________________________
I believe in "Evil, Bad, Ungodly fantasy science and maths", so I am undoubtedly wrong to you.

Top
Page 1 of 5 1 2 3 4 5 >



Newest Members
debbieevans, bkhj, jackk, Johnmattison, RacerGT
865 Registered Users
Sponsor
Facebook

We're on Facebook
Join Our Group

Science a GoGo's Home Page | Terms of Use | Privacy Policy | Contact Us
Features | News | Books | Physics | Space | Climate Change | Health | Technology | Natural World

Copyright © 1998 - 2016 Science a GoGo and its licensors. All rights reserved.