|
|
| Author |
Message |
glbrad01
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 20 Mar 2005
Posts: 105
|
 Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 11:52 am 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...
I never once mentioned a "birth" to the universe or even any phase of
"transition."
If one could travel 13.7 billion light years, or even 12 billion light
years, from the Milky Way galaxy managing to keep it in the rear view mirror
at all times, one would observe nothing more nor less than very a youthful,
or just very different, Milky Way galaxy in the distance. That is if one
could recognize it at all as having been anything like a galaxy remembering
I said that the horizons of space and time, position and velocity, at such a
distance (relative to what ever [is], not [was], there) must appear to have
squeezed together regardless of if in fact they [never] have done any such
thing, ever. The number of horizons could be infinite at that point, the
appearance would be of fewer than any infinite number and the look from more
than ten billion light years away, a look far different than any reality
whatsoever on the spot. In the final last horizon would be all the horizons
extant of the entirety of Universe. An infinite thing that last horizon of
relativity with the quality of everythingness to it, ergo nothingness to it.
Everything to it, nothing to it, including all mass of an infinity of mass
there is -- to it, therefore completely [massless]; including all time of an
infinity of times -- to it, therefore completely [timeless].
We are good at dualities. Dual characterizations. Dual technologies. There
should be no reason whatsoever to presuppose the Universe not to be the
Master of all masters at duality. At dual characterizations. At dual use.
Those distant horizons graduating in their squeeze together, relative to ten
to fourteen billion light years in distance from any and everywhere, to
finally become indistinguishable from a naked singularity of horizon in the
final -- the final relative -- horizon. That final horizon having duality of
characterization...and dual use. If it then contains within its [background]
naked singularity all of an infinite Universe of differing and even
duplicate foregrounds with all, I repeat all, of its atributes (relative,
quantum et all) then -- at once -- it would also have all the atributes
atributable to the Big Bang (including zero entropy, entropy being entirely,
absolutely, the property of the foreground as foreground (the foregrounds as
foregrounds)). All foreground frames are [inertial] frames. That final
background horizon is [inertialess] frame (light, inclusive of its velocity
in a vacuum universally, is [inertialess] frame). If you didn't get it,
missed the implication, didn't understand: One and the same [inertialess]
frame.
It's a long, long, long, a very long, way from here to the speed of light.
An infinite distance. There is no attainment of the infinity, including the
infinity of dimensions, of the Big Bang Horizon. There is no attainment of
the infinity of an infinite Universe. There is no attainment of that
particular duality, that particular multiplicity, ever. It would remain the
most distant Horizon ever on or in the distant horizon. And shooting for it,
at least in "outer space," simply puts you somewhere -- including some
when -- else than here and now; even if that has to mean a whole other
universe (losing relativity to one, gaining relativity to one, but
seamlessly....maybe. To move into the horizon here on Earth is to have it
open up from its squeezed two-dimensionality, to our three or more
dimensionality, seamlessly before us, closing, squeezing down, equally
seamlessly behind us back into two-dimensionality, while it as the distant
horizon stays ever constant to us, regardless of our position or velocity,
slowly speaking that is, unchanging in the distance -- its exact changeless,
its very [immaterial], constant distance from us. It both obviously exists
since we can and do easily observe it to exist in the distance, and yet very
certainly exists not at all. We can't touch it, we can't catch it, we can't
catch up to it regardless of anything whatsoever we do, ever. Its there, and
it isn't there).
GLB |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
T Wake
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 12:52 pm Post subject:
Re: One moment you're here, the next you're zero-point energy.
|
|
|
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_30_4foK@Cotse.NET...
| 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 ? !
|
Well, it is apparently obvious that _you_ have no idea. Also, the fact that
you *blatantly* have no idea about the concepts you are attempting to
dismantle.
What I find most amusing is, because you dont really understand anything,
your post is completely non-sensical. Read it again. Read it a few times.
Then come back and try to explain what you actually mean.
While you are re-reading it, think about the concepts you are melding
together. Think about how you "cool energy" and what is happening in the
process. Spend quite a bit of time working out what _you_ really meant when
you implied there was a more than a universe's worth of energy..
After you have done all this, come back here and try to post again.
Aww, who am I trying to kid. This is Jeff_wikiorelse_Relf. You wont try to
work out what you are talking about because you like random comments.
| Quote: | If it happened once, why couldn't it happen again ?
One moment you're here, the next you're zero-point energy.
|
Oh well. Scratch up another aspect of cosmology that Jeff is ignorant of. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T Wake
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 1:06 pm Post subject:
Re: T_Wake's instantly vanishing universe.
|
|
|
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_29_frcl@Cotse.NET...
| 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
|
Oh dear Jeff. You really are getting confused here. I am concerned that you
claim to have a BSc degree, if you _honestly_ think that the chart on that
page for one second implies temperature and time are equivalent.
When I boil water am I going back in time?
Why are the rates of change different? Why does the size of the universe (in
three spatial dimensions) affect the rate of time?
Oh yeah, I forgot. You really are that ignorant of basic physics. Let me
give you an example, which should have been obvious to you at age 12 but
appears to have been skipped. Maybe you can blame the mormons.
I put 1l of water on a stove. Its temperature is 278K. I apply enough heat
to bring the average temperature of the water to 372K in 94 seconds (this is
a thought experiment). Does that imply that 1K is equal to 1s? If so, when I
turn the heat off why does the relationship change?
Could it be, simply, that they are not equivalent?
| Quote: | 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.
|
Your strawman approach is noted.
If you want to say you don't believe in inflationary theory, then first
learn what the theory actually suggests, not what the voices in your head
say.
| 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 ?
|
No, not at all. You dont know anything about inflation so how could you pop
my "little bubble" (what ever that is supposed to mean).
Seriously, you have no idea what you are talking about. You do realise that
everyone who has even done basic high school science is laughing at you,
don't you?
| Quote: | 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.
|
You dont even know what you are trying to explain or what your argument
acutally says. You are so clueless, we need a new word....
| 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.
|
Pure brilliance. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T Wake
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 1:07 pm Post subject:
Re: StarGate is a documentory ?
|
|
|
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_30_ZmtS@Cotse.NET...
| 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.
|
I see I am not the only person to notice your glaring errors. Do you feel
that some oblique comment about Stargate is an answer? Or is this another
strawman of yours? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeff…Relf
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 1:09 pm Post subject:
Do you know how to calculate the energy of a photon ?
|
|
|
Hi T_Wake, I hate to keep explaining basic physics to you,
it bores the crap out of me, but...
The energy of a photon is cooled/reduced by the expansion of spacetime.
The CMB is now 1,088 times cooler than when it was first emitted.
It's wavelength is now 1,088 times longer... get it ?
Do you know how to calculate the energy of a photon ? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T Wake
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 1:30 pm Post subject:
Re: Do you know how to calculate the energy of a photon ?
|
|
|
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_30_iLZm@Cotse.NET...
| Quote: | Hi T_Wake, I hate to keep explaining basic physics to you,
|
Hahahahaha. That would be a first.
| Quote: | it bores the crap out of me, but...
|
Maybe if you spent some time learning the basics you wouldnt be making such
a fool out of yourself now.
| Quote: | The energy of a photon is cooled/reduced by the expansion of spacetime.
The CMB is now 1,088 times cooler than when it was first emitted.
It's wavelength is now 1,088 times longer... get it ?
|
By the way, do you know what this implies for "five" spatial dimensions?
| Quote: | Do you know how to calculate the energy of a photon ?
|
You seem to have misread the post you've replied to. This is what I wrote.
Can you look over it again please.
T Wake" <Usenet.es7AT@gishpuppy.com> wrote in message
news:vvWdncOKHfM8gzjZRVnytQ@pipex.net...>
| Quote: | "Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_30_4foK@Cotse.NET...
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 ? !
Well, it is apparently obvious that _you_ have no idea. Also, the fact
that
you *blatantly* have no idea about the concepts you are attempting to
dismantle.
What I find most amusing is, because you dont really understand anything,
your post is completely non-sensical. Read it again. Read it a few times.
Then come back and try to explain what you actually mean.
While you are re-reading it, think about the concepts you are melding
together. Think about how you "cool energy" and what is happening in the
process. Spend quite a bit of time working out what _you_ really meant
when
you implied there was a more than a universe's worth of energy..
After you have done all this, come back here and try to post again.
Aww, who am I trying to kid. This is Jeff_wikiorelse_Relf. You wont try to
work out what you are talking about because you like random comments.
If it happened once, why couldn't it happen again ?
One moment you're here, the next you're zero-point energy.
Oh well. Scratch up another aspect of cosmology that Jeff is ignorant of.
|
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Jeff…Relf
science forum Guru Wannabe
Joined: 03 Apr 2006
Posts: 114
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 1:38 pm Post subject:
There is no greater God than entropy.
|
|
|
Hi G_L_Bradford, What makes you think astronomers
don't know the difference between the angular size
( i.e. the portion of the sky ) and the actual size ?
Not even 4 year olds make that mistake.
Are you saying their caculations are wrong ? Where is their error ?
Why hasn't anyone caught it yet ?
Why would the Milky Way look " more youthful "
to someone traveling away from it ?
You wrote:
We are good at dualities. Dual characterizations. Dual technologies.
All information is comparative, relative... how could it be otherwise ?
I suspect that you're afraid of heights, afraid to zoom out.
Zoom out a bit, and you can see evolution... you're related to apes.
Zoom out a bit more and you see that you're like a lit match,
where consumption ( entropy, dissipation ) creates/destroys all that is.
There is no greater God than entropy. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T Wake
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 1:40 pm Post subject:
Re: There is no greater God than entropy.
|
|
|
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_30_cBAg@Cotse.NET...
| Quote: | Hi G_L_Bradford, What makes you think astronomers
don't know the difference between the angular size
( i.e. the portion of the sky ) and the actual size ?
Not even 4 year olds make that mistake.
Are you saying their caculations are wrong ? Where is their error ?
Why hasn't anyone caught it yet ?
Why would the Milky Way look " more youthful "
to someone traveling away from it ?
You wrote:
We are good at dualities. Dual characterizations. Dual technologies.
All information is comparative, relative... how could it be otherwise ?
I suspect that you're afraid of heights, afraid to zoom out.
Zoom out a bit, and you can see evolution... you're related to apes.
Zoom out a bit more and you see that you're like a lit match,
where consumption ( entropy, dissipation ) creates/destroys all that is.
There is no greater God than entropy.
|
Meaningless gibberish. Go to bed Jeff. You need sleep... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phineas T Puddleduck
science forum Guru
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 2:46 pm Post subject:
Re: Do you know how to calculate the energy of a photon ?
|
|
|
In article <Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_30_iLZm@Cotse.NET>, Jeff’ĶRelf
<Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
| Quote: | Hi T_Wake, I hate to keep explaining basic physics to you,
it bores the crap out of me, but...
|
I'm waiting for you to START explaining...
| Quote: | The energy of a photon is cooled/reduced by the expansion of spacetime.
The CMB is now 1,088 times cooler than when it was first emitted.
It's wavelength is now 1,088 times longer... get it ?
Do you know how to calculate the energy of a photon ?
|
SO when T Wake boils an egg, he goes back in time?
--
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 2:56 pm Post subject:
Re: There is no greater God than entropy.
|
|
|
In article <Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_30_cBAg@Cotse.NET>, Jeff’ĶRelf
<Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
<SNIPPED CRAP>
Jeff, you're not supposed to empty your talk_page, you know_that, don't
you? SNICKER
--
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 |
|
|
T Wake
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:06 pm Post subject:
Re: There is no greater God than entropy.
|
|
|
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message news:300620061556254447%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
| Quote: | In article <Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_30_cBAg@Cotse.NET>, Jeff'ĶRelf
Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
SNIPPED CRAP
Jeff, you're not supposed to empty your talk_page, you know_that, don't
you? SNICKER
|
Did I miss something? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Phineas T Puddleduck
science forum Guru
Joined: 01 Jun 2006
Posts: 759
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:08 pm Post subject:
Re: There is no greater God than entropy.
|
|
|
In article <IImdnQU75eiQ0TjZnZ2dnUVZ8qGdnZ2d@pipex.net>, T Wake
<Usenet.es7AT@gishpuppy.com> wrote:
| Quote: | "Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message news:300620061556254447%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
In article <Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_30_cBAg@Cotse.NET>, Jeff'ĶRelf
Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
SNIPPED CRAP
Jeff, you're not supposed to empty your talk_page, you know_that, don't
you? SNICKER
Did I miss something?
|
He's had a strop on and emptied his user page, after warning him about
his edits..
--
The greatest enemy of science is pseudoscience.
e=pc and 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 |
|
|
T Wake
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:11 pm Post subject:
Re: There is no greater God than entropy.
|
|
|
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message news:300620061708515217%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
| Quote: | In article <IImdnQU75eiQ0TjZnZ2dnUVZ8qGdnZ2d@pipex.net>, T Wake
Usenet.es7AT@gishpuppy.com> wrote:
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message
news:300620061556254447%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
In article <Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_30_cBAg@Cotse.NET>, Jeff'ĶRelf
Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
SNIPPED CRAP
Jeff, you're not supposed to empty your talk_page, you know_that, don't
you? SNICKER
Did I miss something?
He's had a strop on and emptied his user page, after warning him about
his edits..
|
I will check wiki now  Is this what he meant when he ranted on about
"you've won" then? That actually managed to confuse me... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
T Wake
science forum Guru
Joined: 08 May 2005
Posts: 1978
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 4:15 pm Post subject:
Re: There is no greater God than entropy.
|
|
|
"T Wake" <Usenet.es7AT@gishpuppy.com> wrote in message
news:7cGdncV2goug0DjZnZ2dnUVZ8qednZ2d@pipex.net...
| Quote: |
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote in
message news:300620061708515217%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
In article <IImdnQU75eiQ0TjZnZ2dnUVZ8qGdnZ2d@pipex.net>, T Wake
Usenet.es7AT@gishpuppy.com> wrote:
"Phineas T Puddleduck" <phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM> wrote
in
message
news:300620061556254447%phineaspuddleduck@googlemail.com_NOSPAM...
In article <Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_30_cBAg@Cotse.NET>, Jeff'ĶRelf
Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
SNIPPED CRAP
Jeff, you're not supposed to empty your talk_page, you know_that,
don't
you? SNICKER
Did I miss something?
He's had a strop on and emptied his user page, after warning him about
his edits..
I will check wiki now Is this what he meant when he ranted on about
"you've won" then? That actually managed to confuse me...
|
Just checked his talk page. Fantastic k00ksulk! Brilliant. I may suggest
his posts are removed in their entirety! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Earle Jones
science forum beginner
Joined: 20 Jun 2005
Posts: 11
|
| Posted: Fri Jun 30, 2006 10:09 pm Post subject:
Re: Entropy is the top God.
|
|
|
In article <Jeff_Relf_2006_Jun_28_DMfb@Cotse.NET>,
JeffŠRelf <Jeff_Relf@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
| Quote: | Hi Tom_Potter and G. L. Bradford,
General_Relativity is evolution on steroids... zooming even farther out.
But the hights are too much for most... including you two.
But contemplate what the word God means:
Like you're God like to the mice you raise to feed your snake,
you're God's prisoner and God to your prisoners.
Entropy is the top God because, like a lit match,
consumption ( dissipation/entropy ) creates/destroys you.
Cosmologists talk in terms of temperature/redshift, not age,
and, seeing as entropy is just Joules/Kelvin, where the Joules are constant,
entropy continually rises as the redshift drops.
So Entropy is a valid spatial dimension, no place is ever without it:
Entropy_Time_Space
Accumulated-Dissipated, Past-Future, Up-Down...
|
*
Entropy: Don't leave home without it.
earle
*
"In the beginning, there was nothing.
And God said, 'Let there be light.'
And there was light.
There was still nothing, but you could see it a lot better."
--Woody Allen |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Google
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
The time now is Sat Jan 10, 2009 3:53 am | All times are GMT
|
|
Refinance | Bankruptcy | Bikini Models | Ultimate Credit Card Guide | Credit Counseling
|
|
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
