Gamma ray excess not from dark matter

Milky Way centre has about 1000 pulsars

Study matter and its motion through spacetime...

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Re: Gamma ray excess not from dark matter

#21  Postby newolder » May 16, 2017 8:55 pm

I'm sorry, I fell asleep waiting for a coherent reply.
Night all. :yawn:
Geometric forgetting gives me loops. - Nima A-H
User avatar
newolder
THREAD STARTER
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 3843
Age: 6
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Gamma ray excess not from dark matter

#22  Postby DavidMcC » May 17, 2017 11:20 am

Sorry, I made a cock-up of the editing last night, and it looked as ifI was saying your words!. It's been corrected now.
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14048
Age: 63
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Gamma ray excess not from dark matter

#23  Postby crank » May 18, 2017 7:31 pm

newolder wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:
newolder wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:...
I was referring to their own words about how the idea came to them in a motorway traffic jam! Of course, they don't mention that in published papers, but certainly did in a TV interview - it was their words, not the journalist's.

The RS1 model is not concerned with universe creation.

So why did R&S talk about brane collisions causing big bangs?

Where did they do this? (Perhaps you are thinking of Paul Steinhardt & Neil Turok and their ekpyrotic model. :dunno:)

I've enjoyed a lot of Steinhardt's lectures on this and other subjects. One of the things he mentions fairly often is that their brane model could be easily refuted by observations that were not too far off. That was from a number of years ago. Do you know what I'm talking about and if so, what became of it? I can go dig up the youtube links if needed.
“When you're born into this world, you're given a ticket to the freak show. If you're born in America you get a front row seat.”
-George Carlin, who died 2008. Ha, now we have human centipedes running the place
User avatar
crank
RS Donator
 
Name: Sick & Tired
Posts: 10317
Age: 2
Male

Country: 2nd miasma on the left
Pitcairn (pn)
Print view this post

Re: Gamma ray excess not from dark matter

#24  Postby DavidMcC » May 19, 2017 5:12 pm

crank wrote:
newolder wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:
newolder wrote:
The RS1 model is not concerned with universe creation.

So why did R&S talk about brane collisions causing big bangs?

Where did they do this? (Perhaps you are thinking of Paul Steinhardt & Neil Turok and their ekpyrotic model. :dunno:)

I've enjoyed a lot of Steinhardt's lectures on this and other subjects. One of the things he mentions fairly often is that their brane model could be easily refuted by observations that were not too far off. That was from a number of years ago. Do you know what I'm talking about and if so, what became of it? I can go dig up the youtube links if needed.

No matter how enjoyable they may be , it doesn't make them correct. A lot of sci-fi is enjoyable, but it is stll fantasy.
May The Voice be with you!
DavidMcC
 
Name: David McCulloch
Posts: 14048
Age: 63
Male

Country: United Kigdom
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Gamma ray excess not from dark matter

#25  Postby Calilasseia » May 19, 2017 9:19 pm

crank wrote:
newolder wrote:
DavidMcC wrote:
newolder wrote:
The RS1 model is not concerned with universe creation.

So why did R&S talk about brane collisions causing big bangs?

Where did they do this? (Perhaps you are thinking of Paul Steinhardt & Neil Turok and their ekpyrotic model. :dunno:)

I've enjoyed a lot of Steinhardt's lectures on this and other subjects. One of the things he mentions fairly often is that their brane model could be easily refuted by observations that were not too far off. That was from a number of years ago. Do you know what I'm talking about and if so, what became of it? I can go dig up the youtube links if needed.


I covered the papers from these two authors on multiple occasions in the past.

One of the predictions of the Steinhardt-Turok model, is that the spectrum of primordial gravitational waves is blue-shifted, i.e., biased toward short wavelengths. If our new collection of gravitational wave detectors pick up primordial gravitational waves, analyse them, and find no bias toward short wavelengths, it's back to the drawing board for S&T. On the other hand, if a biased spectrum is found, in accordance with the specifications in their papers, they pick up a Nobel for predicting it in advance. As far as I'm aware, their model is the only model making this prediction about primordial gravitational waves, and thus provides an acid test to determine whether their model is plain, flat, wrong, or provisionally onto something big.

If you want the technical meat, I covered it here, as well as in several other posts.
Signature temporarily on hold until I can find a reliable image host ...
User avatar
Calilasseia
Moderator
 
Posts: 20981
Age: 55
Male

Country: England
United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Gamma ray excess not from dark matter

#26  Postby theropod » May 19, 2017 11:58 pm

... which is why eLISA needs to be put on station ASAP! Simple detection is not nearly informative enough about the fine details of these phenomena.

RS
17 years off-grid and counting.

Sleeping in the hen house doesn't make you a chicken.
User avatar
theropod
RS Donator
 
Name: Roger
Posts: 6860
Age: 63
Male

Country: USA
United States (us)
Print view this post

Previous

Return to Physics

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest