|
|
| Author |
Message |
Phineas T Puddleduck
science forum Guru
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759
|
 Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 11:44 am Post subject:
Re: Entropy can be modeled as an expansion of spacetime over cosmological time.
|
|
|
In article <Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_29_fV6S@Cotse.NET>, Jeff’ĶRelf
<Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
| Quote: | The reported .00038 giga year age at the CMB event is
the " Sound " travel time to to the start of the Sound_Horizon;
and so was probably just some phase transition, not the birth of the universe.
|
"ERA OF RECOMBINATION"
--
The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.
Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.
Official emperor of sci.physics, head mumbler of the "Cult of INSANE SCIENCE".
Please pay no attention to my butt poking forward, it is expanding.
Relf's Law?
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approaches
the odour of roses."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
T Wake
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:14 pm Post subject:
Re: It'd be a waste of my time to try to explain every little thing.
|
|
|
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_28_9oiy@Cotse.NET...
| Quote: | Sure Eric_Gisse, You can call me, 206.525.5196.
|
Good for you. Its nice to share.
| Quote: | I woke up today at 3 pm Seattle time... went to bed around 7 am.
|
So what? No, dont answer that. I dont actually care.
| Quote: | I'm on dialup these days, which ties up the phone line.
|
Well, pay for a decent connection then.
| Quote: | I lost my only good WiFi connection when the student left for the
summer.
|
What a nightmare eh? You cant freeload a high speed connection any more. You
must be gutted.
| Quote: | Gisse, just because you don't understand what I write doesn't mean it's
wrong.
It'd be a waste of my time to try to explain every little thing to you,
so I don't even try.
|
You do bloody try to explain the minutiae of your pathetic life. That is the
problem. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T Wake
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 29, 2006 4:30 pm Post subject:
Re: Entropy can be modeled as an expansion of spacetime over cosmological time.
|
|
|
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_29_fV6S@Cotse.NET...
| Quote: | Hi G_L_Bradford, You began by telling me:
|
<snip brown, soggy, word salad>
| Quote: | Sure, if you want to model it that way, ( do you model things ? ),
|
Hahaha.
| Quote: | but it can also be modeled as an expansion of spacetime over cosmological
time.
|
Nonsense.
| Quote: | Cosmologists demarcate cosmological time in z, redshift,
or, for the media yokels, Kelvin.
|
Nonsense. _You_ have created the definition of cosmological time you are
using here - then you try to ascribe some level of respect to your idiocy
and accuse sane cosmologist of supporting you.
No one measures anything in the temporal dimension in Kelvin. You dont
understand the terms and ideas you are (ab)using here.
You can say at time X the universe had a background temperature of A Kelvin,
and at time Y it was B Kelvin. While that _does_ correlate to a change of
(A-B) Kelvin over the time elapsed, it does not "reverse" to enable you to
use Kelvin as a measure of time.
I can put a block of cold water (avg temp 278K) on to the stove and raise
the average temperature to 372K in (say) 5 minutes. This does not mean 5
minutes = 94K. More importantly, I can then put that 372K water in the
freezer and bring it back to 278K - it will probably take a different
duration (breaking the model you allude to here) and, critcally, implies
time travel.
Sadly, I suspect you dont really understand enough to understand why you are
so wrong.
| Quote: | As for your comments on communism/socialism/capitalism...
Why work for someone else ?
It's one dollar one vote... but why care if you get votes or not ?
I've got a voice via powerful labs on campus, for CPP_files/Usenet/Web.
...I can tutor for tobacco money, rolling my own.
|
Cant afford your own broadband connection though.
| Quote: | I know plenty of people who refuse to work, remaining homeless,
and going on the Food_Stamp program, or eating whatever they find.
|
Yes. Lots of people suffer like that through choice....
| Quote: | Homeless people can't own anything... nowhere to put it;
yet their homes are _Everywhere_ to a large extent.
They are rich because their society is rich... shades of Marxism ?
|
I will add socio-economic theory to the list of things about which you know
nothing.
| Quote: | You wrote:
The redshift of the observed universe has nothing to do with its
temperature.
The CMB, Cosmic_Microwave_Background, is 2.7 Kelvin,
that's the temperture of our universe, on average.
It used to be 3000 Kelvin... that's a redshift of z = 1,088.
It's not an optical illusion.
|
Hmmm. An interesting perspective on why the CMBR is the temperature it is.
You are implying it is due solely to redshift. Cosmological redshift is
caused by the recession of large scale structures in the universe.
Here, by saying the CMBR at 3K is due to recession, you completely undermine
_all_ your other models about entropy and expansion. Less than 10 days ago
you posted how the CMBR had diminished to 3K as a result of the energy
spreading out in the universe, and even provided the data to support this.
The fact your data also implied the universe was two dimension was
overlooked by you though.
Given your redshift of 1088, what part of the EM spectrum do you determine
the CMBR to be in now? (Can you show me the working out please?)
<snip more stale textual lettuce>
| Quote: | The reported .00038 giga year age at the CMB event is
the " Sound " travel time to to the start of the Sound_Horizon;
and so was probably just some phase transition, not the birth of the
universe.
|
"Probably..." You really know nothing about cosmology, do you? You have no
idea about inflation, BBT or any of the theories you are trying to re-write.
This is fantastic. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeff…Relf
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:41 am Post subject:
T_Wake's instantly vanishing universe.
|
|
|
Hi T_Wake, You imagined:
No one measures anything in the temporal dimension in Kelvin.
This is one of many charts that uses Kelvin to demarcate cosmological time:
Astro.UCLA.EDU/~wright/BBhistory.html
Redshifts and luminosity are examples of Kelvin yardsticks, I quote:
The easiest way to explore the conditions in the early universe
without calculations involving general relativity
is to consider the second law of thermodynamics.
__ Supernova.LBL.GOV/~evlinder/umass/faqm.html
If you truly believe something nearly the size of our visible universe
could almost instantly pop into existence from something that was once
sub Planck width then you must also believe it could disappear just as fast,
....both ideas are absurdities, sci-fi gone perfectly mad.
As I said, the reported .00038 giga year age at the birth of the CMB
is just the " Sound " travel time to to the start of the Sound_Horizon;
and was likely due to some phase transition, not the birth of the universe.
You told me:
You have no idea about inflation,
BBT or any of the theories you are trying to re-write.
What's the matter T_Wake, am I popping your little bubble ?
Best evidence suggests an ever-constant cosmological constant, w = -1.
Nothing else, no catastrophic event, could reasonably explain
the visible universe's uniformity and lack of a center of gravity.
Re: Your freezing-heating examples,
No matter if you freeze or heat, the total entropy always went up,
a constant amount of energy gets dispursed over a wider area, cooling it.
The CMB has cooled 1,088 times since it's birth,
giving it a red-shift of 1,088 and a wave-length 1,088 times larger,
....further proof that spacetime is expanding. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yt56erd
science forum Guru
Joined: 13 May 2005
Posts: 313
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 8:30 am Post subject:
Re: T_Wake's instantly vanishing universe.
|
|
|
Jeff...Relf wrote:
| Quote: | Hi T_Wake, You imagined:
No one measures anything in the temporal dimension in Kelvin.
This is one of many charts that uses Kelvin to demarcate cosmological time:
Astro.UCLA.EDU/~wright/BBhistory.html
|
fucking simplistic, uneducated window licking retard. you have looked
at Astro.UCLA.EDU/~wright/BBhistory.jpg and thought it meant something
different. you are such a worthless cunt.
| Quote: | Redshifts and luminosity are examples of Kelvin yardsticks, I quote:
The easiest way to explore the conditions in the early universe
without calculations involving general relativity
is to consider the second law of thermodynamics.
__ Supernova.LBL.GOV/~evlinder/umass/faqm.html
If you truly believe something nearly the size of our visible universe
could almost instantly pop into existence from something that was once
sub Planck width then you must also believe it could disappear just as fast,
...both ideas are absurdities, sci-fi gone perfectly mad.
As I said, the reported .00038 giga year age at the birth of the CMB
is just the " Sound " travel time to to the start of the Sound_Horizon;
and was likely due to some phase transition, not the birth of the universe.
|
babbling cunt. stop talking s**t. nothing you have posted there is
either self-fucking-consistent or logical.
flush your head down the toilet you mong.
| Quote: | You told me:
You have no idea about inflation,
BBT or any of the theories you are trying to re-write.
What's the matter T_Wake, am I popping your little bubble ?
Best evidence suggests an ever-constant cosmological constant, w = -1.
Nothing else, no catastrophic event, could reasonably explain
the visible universe's uniformity and lack of a center of gravity.
Re: Your freezing-heating examples,
No matter if you freeze or heat, the total entropy always went up,
a constant amount of energy gets dispursed over a wider area, cooling it.
The CMB has cooled 1,088 times since it's birth,
giving it a red-shift of 1,088 and a wave-length 1,088 times larger,
...further proof that spacetime is expanding.
|
fucking idiot. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yt56erd
science forum Guru
Joined: 13 May 2005
Posts: 313
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 8:38 am Post subject:
Re: T_Wake's instantly vanishing universe.
|
|
|
Jeff...Relf wrote:
| Quote: | Hi T_Wake, You imagined:
No one measures anything in the temporal dimension in Kelvin.
This is one of many charts that uses Kelvin to demarcate cosmological time:
Astro.UCLA.EDU/~wright/BBhistory.html
Redshifts and luminosity are examples of Kelvin yardsticks, I quote:
The easiest way to explore the conditions in the early universe
without calculations involving general relativity
is to consider the second law of thermodynamics.
__ Supernova.LBL.GOV/~evlinder/umass/faqm.html
If you truly believe something nearly the size of our visible universe
could almost instantly pop into existence from something that was once
sub Planck width then you must also believe it could disappear just as fast,
...both ideas are absurdities, sci-fi gone perfectly mad.
As I said, the reported .00038 giga year age at the birth of the CMB
is just the " Sound " travel time to to the start of the Sound_Horizon;
and was likely due to some phase transition, not the birth of the universe.
You told me:
You have no idea about inflation,
BBT or any of the theories you are trying to re-write.
What's the matter T_Wake, am I popping your little bubble ?
Best evidence suggests an ever-constant cosmological constant, w = -1.
Nothing else, no catastrophic event, could reasonably explain
the visible universe's uniformity and lack of a center of gravity.
Re: Your freezing-heating examples,
No matter if you freeze or heat, the total entropy always went up,
a constant amount of energy gets dispursed over a wider area, cooling it.
The CMB has cooled 1,088 times since it's birth,
giving it a red-shift of 1,088 and a wave-length 1,088 times larger,
...further proof that spacetime is expanding.
|
by the way Refl_cunt. if your fucking image implies that t a T then
explain the fact that 10^-35 sec = 10^27K and 100 sec = 10^9K, yet
t=3x10^11seconds = 10^5K.
can your cunt-like brain see the fucking flaw here.
you are so fucking retarded you must need assitance to frigging breathe. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeff…Relf
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 8:58 am Post subject:
StarGate is a documentory ?
|
|
|
Crank_Hunter, _BfkxWK, B Googlegroups.COM
.00, Mozilla_4_0_compatible_MSIE_6_0_Windows_NT_5_1_NET_CLR, Jun 30, 1.38 A, BP6Of2
Hi Crank_Seeker, You asked me:
By the way Refl_cunt. if your fucking image implies that t a T
then explain the fact that 10^-35 sec = 10^27 K and 100 sec = 10^9 K,
yet t=3x10^11 seconds = 10^5 K.
Can your cunt-like brain see the fucking flaw here ?
you are so fucking retarded you must need assitance to frigging breathe.
I don't believe universes pop in existence in 10 ^ -35 seconds,
last giga years, and then pop out of existence just as quickly.
You believe it does, of course,
but then you also believe StarGate is a documentory.
A constant cosmological constant has been observed for the last
8 to 12 billion years... I see no reason to assume it wasn't ever thus. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yt56erd
science forum Guru
Joined: 13 May 2005
Posts: 313
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 9:05 am Post subject:
Re: StarGate is a documentory ?
|
|
|
Jeff...Relf...Cunt...Extraordinaire wrote:
| Quote: | Crank_Hunter, _BfkxWK, B Googlegroups.COM
.00, Mozilla_4_0_compatible_MSIE_6_0_Windows_NT_5_1_NET_CLR, Jun 30, 1.38 A, BP6Of2
Hi Crank_Seeker, You asked me:
By the way Refl_cunt. if your fucking image implies that t a T
then explain the fact that 10^-35 sec = 10^27 K and 100 sec = 10^9 K,
yet t=3x10^11 seconds = 10^5 K.
Can your cunt-like brain see the fucking flaw here ?
you are so fucking retarded you must need assitance to frigging breathe.
I don't believe universes pop in existence in 10 ^ -35 seconds,
last giga years, and then pop out of existence just as quickly.
You believe it does, of course,
but then you also believe StarGate is a documentory.
A constant cosmological constant has been observed for the last
8 to 12 billion years... I see no reason to assume it wasn't ever thus.
|
well,well. there is a surprise. i notice you were too fucking thick to
read what i wrote and answered the cunting question you thought made
you sound clever.
fucking retard.
you havent got a fucking clue. you dont know what you are talking about
but you STILL keep fucking talking. go and f*** yourself until you have
even the slightest idea about physics. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeff…Relf
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 9:13 am Post subject:
Crank_Seeker's phallus is a wee fallacy.
|
|
|
Hi Crank_Seeker, You obsession with the word cunt makes me believe
your phallus is a wee fallacy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
yt56erd
science forum Guru
Joined: 13 May 2005
Posts: 313
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 9:18 am Post subject:
Re: Crank_Seeker's phallus is a wee fallacy.
|
|
|
Jeff...Relf...Pathetic...Cunt wrote:
| Quote: | Hi Crank_Seeker, You obsession with the word cunt makes me believe
your phallus is a wee fallacy.
|
aww, poor pee wee relf. were the questions i asked too hard for you?
its ok dickface. we all appreciate your mental fucking problems and how
you cant do the basics of science.
when you insult me does it make you go all hard.... you are still a
pathetic whining little cunt. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeff…Relf
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 9:56 am Post subject:
Kadiatcha_Girrl... What happened to your bots ?
|
|
|
|
Hi Crank_Seeker ( Kadiatcha_Girrl ), What happened to your bots ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phineas T Puddleduck
science forum Guru
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:27 am Post subject:
Re: T_Wake's instantly vanishing universe.
|
|
|
In article <Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_29_frcl@Cotse.NET>, Jeff’ĶRelf
<Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
| Quote: | Hi T_Wake, You imagined:
No one measures anything in the temporal dimension in Kelvin.
This is one of many charts that uses Kelvin to demarcate cosmological time:
Astro.UCLA.EDU/~wright/BBhistory.html
Redshifts and luminosity are examples of Kelvin yardsticks, I quote:
The easiest way to explore the conditions in the early universe
without calculations involving general relativity
is to consider the second law of thermodynamics.
__ Supernova.LBL.GOV/~evlinder/umass/faqm.html
If you truly believe something nearly the size of our visible universe
could almost instantly pop into existence from something that was once
sub Planck width then you must also believe it could disappear just as fast,
...both ideas are absurdities, sci-fi gone perfectly mad.
|
No one cares what you think
| Quote: | As I said, the reported .00038 giga year age at the birth of the CMB
is just the " Sound " travel time to to the start of the Sound_Horizon;
and was likely due to some phase transition, not the birth of the universe.
You told me:
You have no idea about inflation,
BBT or any of the theories you are trying to re-write.
What's the matter T_Wake, am I popping your little bubble ?
Best evidence suggests an ever-constant cosmological constant, w = -1.
Nothing else, no catastrophic event, could reasonably explain
the visible universe's uniformity and lack of a center of gravity.
|
Just like your Einstein debacle, you have no idea and think that you
can just repeat the same bs ad nauseum
| Quote: |
Re: Your freezing-heating examples,
No matter if you freeze or heat, the total entropy always went up,
a constant amount of energy gets dispursed over a wider area, cooling it.
The CMB has cooled 1,088 times since it's birth,
giving it a red-shift of 1,088 and a wave-length 1,088 times larger,
...further proof that spacetime is expanding.
|
--
The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.
e=pc / p=hk
Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.
Official emperor of sci.physics, head mumbler of the "Cult of INSANE SCIENCE".
Please pay no attention to my butt poking forward, it is expanding.
Relf's Law?
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approaches
the odour of roses."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phineas T Puddleduck
science forum Guru
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:31 am Post subject:
Re: Crank_Seeker's phallus is a wee fallacy.
|
|
|
In article <Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_30_JdJW@Cotse.NET>, Jeff’ĶRelf
<Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
| Quote: | Hi Crank_Seeker, You obsession with the word cunt makes me believe
your phallus is a wee fallacy.
|
Hi Jeff_Relf, your obsession with mangling cosmology makes us believe
your brain is a wee fallacy.
--
The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.
e=pc / p=hk
Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.
Official emperor of sci.physics, head mumbler of the "Cult of INSANE SCIENCE".
Please pay no attention to my butt poking forward, it is expanding.
Relf's Law?
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approaches
the odour of roses."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeff…Relf
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:52 am Post subject:
One moment you're here, the next you're zero-point energy.
|
|
|
Hi T_Puddleduck, Re: Astro.UCLA.EDU/~wright/BBhistory.html
Do you have any idea how much energy it would take to
create the negative pressure needed to cool
an entire universe's worth of energy ( and then some, no doubt )
from 10 ^ 32 Kelvin to 10 ^ 10 Kelvin in just one second ? !
If it happened once, why couldn't it happen again ?
One moment you're here, the next you're zero-point energy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phineas T Puddleduck
science forum Guru
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:55 am Post subject:
Re: One moment you're here, the next you're zero-point energy.
|
|
|
In article <Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_30_4foK@Cotse.NET>, Jeff’ĶRelf
<Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
| Quote: | Hi T_Puddleduck, Re: Astro.UCLA.EDU/~wright/BBhistory.html
Do you have any idea how much energy it would take to
create the negative pressure needed to cool
an entire universe's worth of energy ( and then some, no doubt )
from 10 ^ 32 Kelvin to 10 ^ 10 Kelvin in just one second ? !
If it happened once, why couldn't it happen again ?
One moment you're here, the next you're zero-point energy.
|
Read the question he asked fuckwit, and stop pretending you have ANY
fucking clue about physics. Mr B.Wiki
--
The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.
e=pc / p=hk
Jaffa cakes. Sweet delicious orangey jaffa goodness, and an abject lesson why
parroting information from the web will not teach you cosmology.
Official emperor of sci.physics, head mumbler of the "Cult of INSANE SCIENCE".
Please pay no attention to my butt poking forward, it is expanding.
Relf's Law?
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approaches
the odour of roses."
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
The time now is Sat Jan 10, 2009 4:22 am | All times are GMT
|
|
Myspace Layouts | Libros Electronicos | Libros Electronicos | Bankruptcy | Hummer
|
|
Copyright © 2004-2005 DeniX Solutions SRL
|
|
Other DeniX Solutions sites:
Electronics forum |
Medicine forum |
Unix/Linux blog |
Unix/Linux documentation |
Unix/Linux forums
|
Powered by phpBB © 2001, 2005 phpBB Group
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
Forum index
»
Science and Technology
»
Physics
»
Relativity
