Brontoforumus Archive

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Advanced search  

News:


This board has been fossilized.
You are reading an archive of Brontoforumus, a.k.a. The Worst Forums Ever, from 2008 to early 2014.  Registration and posting (for most members) has been disabled here to discourage spambots from taking over.  Old members can still log in to view boards, PMs, etc.

The new message board is at http://brontoforum.us.

Pages: 1 [2]

Author Topic: Best Bang Since the Big One  (Read 2109 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Büge

  • won't give you fleaz
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65304
  • Posts: 10062
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #20 on: November 17, 2010, 06:58:46 AM »

Wrong ism. That's solipsism.
Logged

Classic

  • Happens more often than you'd think.
  • Tested
  • Karma: -58471
  • Posts: 7501
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #21 on: November 17, 2010, 07:24:56 AM »

More of a pan-solipsism,
probably based on the idea that reality is fundamentally limited in how we can understand it and as a result the best way to describe reality is the way that gives us the best model for it. i.e., Accurate is "accurate enough" rather than absolutely accurate because absolute accuracy isn't something we can (always or even often) guarantee.

No. back to sleep Classic.
Logged

Catloaf

  • Tested
  • Karma: 14
  • Posts: 1740
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #22 on: November 17, 2010, 07:54:57 AM »

Wrong ism. That's solipsism.

Whoops, that's what I get for trying to think in the morning sans pills and caffeine.
Logged

Pacobird

  • Just fell off the AOL cart
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65482
  • Posts: 1741
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #23 on: November 17, 2010, 08:46:10 AM »

If Hawking describes it differently in BHoT, which I have not read, I will gladly bow to his expertise.  But for my part, the universe is defined as such because it has matter.  The empty vacuum between that matter is just that: a vacuum, not part of the universe per se, which resulted from the Big Bang.

Thinking about it like that, there isn't necessarily any problem with the idea that beyond the edge of the universe lies endless vacuum.
Logged

Bal

  • Cheerful in the face of nuclear armageddon
  • Tested
  • Karma: 62
  • Posts: 3861
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #24 on: November 17, 2010, 09:14:27 AM »

That's actually wrong. For one thing, there is no such thing as a true vacuum. That's more or less what quantum physics is all about, but even if a "true vacuum" what you have in there is space. Space is a thing unto itself. The theory of early universal spatial expansion is there to describe and explain the fact that, given current data on the age of the universe and its apparent size, it has to have, at some point, expanded faster than the speed of light. The problem here is that nothing can "move" faster than light (see: relativity), however space can EXPAND faster than the speed of light.

This is a useful analogy that is wrong in almost ever fundamental sense. Imagine that all matter, planets, stars, etc, is suspended in a three dimensional grid at fixed points. The grid is space, if you expand the area between each point on the grid the things suspended within, for all intent and purposes, move apart, however that are not, technically speaking, moving at all.  This allows for the size of the universe and the distribution of the matter therein to be what it seems to be without violating general or special relativity.

The "Light curtain" some of you seem to be referring to is actually just what is known as the "Observable Universe". This is the bubble of universe from which light will eventually reach Earth. Everything beyond this bubble will never reach us because of the accelerating expansion of the universe.

What defines the interior of the universe is space and physical law. There is no "outside" that we could comprehend, because it's not even nothing, it's way beyond what we would consider nothing, and even if there was something, say a border universe we could hop over to, you'd probably instantly die because the laws of physics there would almost certainly be different, and we depend on those laws every second of the day, which there might not even exist.
Logged

Classic

  • Happens more often than you'd think.
  • Tested
  • Karma: -58471
  • Posts: 7501
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #25 on: November 17, 2010, 09:18:23 AM »

...
But we have no special reason to believe that different fundamental particles would coalesce from a similar but different expansion event, do we?
Does my question even still make sense?
Logged

Bal

  • Cheerful in the face of nuclear armageddon
  • Tested
  • Karma: 62
  • Posts: 3861
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #26 on: November 17, 2010, 09:34:17 AM »

Your question doesn't make sense because the pre-bang universe wasn't a "collection" of anything, it was one huge super particle in which all of the fundamental forces (electromagnetic, strong and weak nuclear forces, and gravity) were crammed together into one "superforce" that, for the brief moment that this ultra hot, ultra dense thing existed, held it together. The answer to whether THAT can or would happen again, or even all the damn time, is that we have no reason to believe that it wouldn't, given the theories of how it came about to begin with (which are myriad and I'm not going to get into them because even physicists don't really have a strong enough theory on the table for that one). That's one of the reasons we try these mini-bangs, because they might tell us, through the forces released, what might have caused it to begin with.
Logged

NexAdruin

  • Tested
  • Karma: 6
  • Posts: 1549
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #27 on: November 17, 2010, 09:42:08 AM »

Thanks, Bal, for clearing that up. I am not good at explaining this sort of thing, even though I'm fairly confident in my grasp of it.
Logged

Pacobird

  • Just fell off the AOL cart
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65482
  • Posts: 1741
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #28 on: November 17, 2010, 10:04:28 AM »

Awesome; thanks.

I am not totally sure I grasp this yet but I will think more about it!
Logged

Bal

  • Cheerful in the face of nuclear armageddon
  • Tested
  • Karma: 62
  • Posts: 3861
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #29 on: November 17, 2010, 10:11:33 AM »

A good thing to keep in mind when contemplating things like this is that even the experts have to use abstracts and analogies to explain them in anything other than pure mathematics because humans have literally no frame of reference for this shit.
Logged

Büge

  • won't give you fleaz
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65304
  • Posts: 10062
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #30 on: November 17, 2010, 10:15:55 AM »

Hence the brilliance of A Brief History Of Time. Particle spin make sense with playing cards, and relativity can be expressed with a graph.
Logged

Classic

  • Happens more often than you'd think.
  • Tested
  • Karma: -58471
  • Posts: 7501
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #31 on: November 17, 2010, 11:03:18 AM »

"collection"
I don't think I ever used that word to describe the singularity. You describing forces differentiating also sounds familiar, but I guess my memories glossed over that and start with the... energy? pre-matter? coalescing into fundamental particles and building and when you mentioned physics coming about I kind of conflated the two.
Logged

Bal

  • Cheerful in the face of nuclear armageddon
  • Tested
  • Karma: 62
  • Posts: 3861
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #32 on: November 17, 2010, 12:16:44 PM »

Mostly the big bang resulted in hydrogen and helium and the four fundamental forces, and that's it. Everything else formed later due to gravitational forces and nucleogenesis. 
Logged

Büge

  • won't give you fleaz
  • Tested
  • Karma: -65304
  • Posts: 10062
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #33 on: November 17, 2010, 12:46:08 PM »

Mostly the big bang resulted in hydrogen and helium and the four fundamental forces, and that's it.

And time.
Logged

Bal

  • Cheerful in the face of nuclear armageddon
  • Tested
  • Karma: 62
  • Posts: 3861
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #34 on: November 17, 2010, 12:49:52 PM »

That's what the "Mostly" was for. I don't want to get into the potential dimensions and particles that also came into being around then.
Logged

Rico

  • Tested
  • Karma: 18
  • Posts: 1916
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #35 on: November 17, 2010, 12:52:33 PM »

I am disappointed that this thread title was used outside of Lust.
Logged

Classic

  • Happens more often than you'd think.
  • Tested
  • Karma: -58471
  • Posts: 7501
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #36 on: November 17, 2010, 01:48:10 PM »

That's what the "Mostly" was for. I don't want to get into the potential dimensions and particles that also came into being around then.

Fermions. Man, those things are nuts.
Logged

R^2

  • Not in the game.
  • Tested
  • Karma: -61931
  • Posts: 5164
    • View Profile
Re: Best Bang Since the Big One
« Reply #37 on: November 17, 2010, 02:38:14 PM »

I'm the one making all of you exist and have horrible lives.
You dick!

In my defense, you're all doing it to me as well.
:nyoro~n:

Logged
Pages: 1 [2]