Competing cosmologies

Study matter and its motion through spacetime...

Moderators: Calilasseia, ADParker

Re: Competing cosmologies

#41  Postby Scott Mayers » Jan 28, 2020 6:26 pm

Macdoc wrote:Mayers is a just a gadfly with an agenda.

Brane theory certainly would support either a bang or a bounce...but nothing supports a steady state. :coffee:


How can you assert that 'nothing' supports a steady state theory? Contrary to the implication that expansion supports the Big Bang, as is always asserted without contrast, is that the Steady State does accept this (though not necessary at its core definition). The major arguments targetted against the Steady State are all about APPEARANCES of a different physical REALITY at greater distances. Thus the interpretation of the Cosmic Background Radiation as being presumed proof of a HOT origin. This requires an indepth education on how one goes from observation and then the logic used to draw conclusions that leads us to an accepted contradictions. You can argue that fossils can help support evolution. But the physics now of the fossilized rock and the past reality of whatever the creatures were of the past are all OF the SAME physics. This is NOT the case with the Big Bang observational interpretations.

If you awoke from a nightmare, you don't presume the image of the dream actually was a divorced from actual phyics. While it might be possible without us being able to tell, the more rational presumption is to assume the observation of this dream is itself a likely illusion. Yet, why is it okay to accept the weirder interpretation of what we see at greater distances to represent the accurate image of the past as having different physical realities than of those we witness up close? If you can't find one, then you stop at the description alone. It isn't necessary to postulate some story to justify the image as the Big Bang does.


We'd need a digression into those paradoxes that begun with Zeno in order to look at the problems of the theory.

[As to any 'agenda' I might have, what's your own 'agenda' for posting the thread? Were you just 'tweeting' something you want applause and agreement for? Or were you hoping to bait others who disagree so that you might be entertained by insulting them in some cheap saddistic way?]
Scott Mayers
 
Name: Scott Mayers
Posts: 74

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Competing cosmologies

#42  Postby newolder » Jan 28, 2020 6:48 pm

The competing cosmologies of the OP have absolutely no connection to any steady state ideas because no steady state is observed from the surface of last scattering (seen in the cosmic microwave background) to today. Instead, the debate here is over the required number of "shuttlecock" shapes to build a more successful model. In the Hawking-Hartle no boundary model - underpinned by the Wheeler-de Witt equation - one shuttlecock suffices. In Turok et al a second shuttlecock is invoked to satisfy CPT symmetry constraints.

We need a digression into Zeno's paradoxes in the physics forum like we need a cock in the eye. :roll:
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 7321
Age: 1
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#43  Postby Scott Mayers » Jan 28, 2020 6:51 pm

Spearthrower wrote:
Destroyer wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:
Hawking's position is an attempt to appear 'novel' within the context of the Big Bang theory due to the politics involved.


The politics involved.

HA!

Not the evidence, the scientific discourse, the years of research... no, it's political - but only because you want to politicize it so you can pretend it's not scientific.


I think that you are doing Scott Mayers a disservice here, Spearthrower. What he is saying is precisely as science stands today: observation tells us that the universe is expanding i.e., from a very specific point in time. This is the inflation model of the universe based upon observation, the big bang model. However, the maths in quantum physics leads to an infinite universe i.e., the steady state model. Both are based upon observation, but they do not agree.



Admittedly, this isn't just based on the posts in this thread but on the preceding posts Scott made on this subject and many others before.

I haven't posted much here. And though I've already forgotten you as the same troll from merely two threads where I hurt your poor feelings on my judgement on those playing D&D [and something that I actually was speaking to others you have no inkling of who nor what I was speaking about specifically, given I at least have respect of their own anonymity!], I challenge you to stop and look at what you are writing and compare it to what I've said. I've kept myself in check regardless of your insults before. Or are you also just entertained for saddistic insults? You seem rather immature for this site.
Scott Mayers
 
Name: Scott Mayers
Posts: 74

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#44  Postby Scott Mayers » Jan 28, 2020 7:17 pm

newolder wrote:The competing cosmologies of the OP have absolutely no connection to any steady state ideas because no steady state is observed from the surface of last scattering (seen in the cosmic microwave background) to today. Instead, the debate here is over the required number of "shuttlecock" shapes to build a more successful model. In the Hawking-Hartle no boundary model - underpinned by the Wheeler-de Witt equation - one shuttlecock suffices. In Turok et al a second shuttlecock is invoked to satisfy CPT symmetry constraints.

We need a digression into Zeno's paradoxes in the physics forum like we need a cock in the eye. :roll:

Okay. ?? What's your credentials and proof of your superior capacity to know better?

[And don't forget your name and number. We can always use more tell-it-like-it-is speakers of the real truth today. Maybe I'll even call you up personally so you can teach me which theories are just fake news or not? :ask: ] :roll:

Zeno's paradoxes are significant to the history of theoretical physics. They help demonstrate things related to spacial limits.

And stating 'no evidence' on the Steady State model exists is odd considering even Einstein was working one of his own before he died. While much of the physicists today may dismiss this, but it was the Standard Model in favor in the past for good reasons.
Scott Mayers
 
Name: Scott Mayers
Posts: 74

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#45  Postby campermon » Jan 28, 2020 7:45 pm

Oh dear.

:coffee:
Scarlett and Ironclad wrote:Campermon,...a middle aged, middle class, Guardian reading, dad of four, knackered hippy, woolly jumper wearing wino and science teacher.
User avatar
campermon
RS Donator
 
Posts: 17437
Age: 51
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#46  Postby Spearthrower » Jan 28, 2020 8:05 pm

Scott Mayers wrote:
I haven't posted much here. And though I've already forgotten you as the same troll from merely two threads where I hurt your poor feelings on my judgement on those playing D&D [and something that I actually was speaking to others you have no inkling of who nor what I was speaking about specifically, given I at least have respect of their own anonymity!], I challenge you to stop and look at what you are writing and compare it to what I've said. I've kept myself in check regardless of your insults before. Or are you also just entertained for saddistic insults? You seem rather immature for this site.



Yes, you started calling people 'trolls' when you got upset because no one was genuflecting to you. You started on this website by being demeaning, condescending, and snotty to groups of people, and you really only built up from there. You made your own bed, Scott.

Given how you laud your own intellectual abilities, it is amusing to once again see you type absolutely meaningless sentences that wander all over the place, to employ lowest common denominator personal attacks, and to misspell so many words. I take it that sentence composition isn't part of your 'foundational thinking' program?

Incidentally, if you want to go the route of using personal attacks, it might be better if you tailor unique ones to each person you intend to attack as your suite of responses seems rather limited - surely not everyone can be 'saddistic' (sic) and 'immature'?

Scott - I think everyone knows who you are, so you can stop playing games. You've been pegged. Well, let's be honest - you pegged yourself. Blow your own trumpet all you like, but it really just comes down to public masturbation.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 27965
Age: 44
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#47  Postby Spearthrower » Jan 28, 2020 8:12 pm

Scott Mayers wrote:Okay. ?? What's your credentials and proof of your superior capacity to know better?

[And don't forget your name and number.


Why is this important to you?

Considering how much you yammer about logic, you don't seem even sparsely equipped with it.

The capacity to know better insofar as a discussion forum entails is the quality of the written post, not the academic achievements of the poster.

And on that note, you don't appear to have given out your number, address, academic qualifications etc. although you did engage in some fantastical and apparently contradictory renditions:

Scott Mayers wrote:My own background is self-taught although all science and math courses I have taken places me in the top 99th percentile. I don't believe it is necessary to go to University anymore given this day of the Internet and while I respect science, I don't respect the politics of the institutes and how our system here in Canada favors what is called, “multiculturalism” in our laws.


Scott Mayers wrote:I'm versed in formal logic, like propositional, predicate, boolean, and computer logic,.... and in general, something you might find in an advanced course on 'discrete math', if you get this far in a science education. I aced my maths and sciences where I have taken them, utilizing mathematical calculus, physics, chemistry, and biology. I have most sources available to me at home with a reference library of science texts of multiple sources and include much of the classics from the philosophical works of the Greeks to the works of the heroes in science of modern times.


You spend an inordinate amount of effort on this self-eulogizing, but the truth is Scott that people here are very competent at seeing through blagging and bullshit artists.

The two paragraphs above suggest you are a farce, a parody, a sham - a guy on the internet pretending to be something to impress strangers so he can conversationally bully them into accepting his poorly conceived and barely legibly presented ideas.

Over yourself get.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 27965
Age: 44
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Competing cosmologies

#48  Postby Spearthrower » Jan 28, 2020 8:12 pm

newolder wrote:The competing cosmologies of the OP have absolutely no connection to any steady state ideas because no steady state is observed from the surface of last scattering (seen in the cosmic microwave background) to today. Instead, the debate here is over the required number of "shuttlecock" shapes to build a more successful model. In the Hawking-Hartle no boundary model - underpinned by the Wheeler-de Witt equation - one shuttlecock suffices. In Turok et al a second shuttlecock is invoked to satisfy CPT symmetry constraints.

We need a digression into Zeno's paradoxes in the physics forum like we need a cock in the eye. :roll:



One cock in the eye, please.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 27965
Age: 44
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#49  Postby Spearthrower » Jan 28, 2020 8:26 pm

Incidentally, I just self-taught myself Welsh and I'm proud to say that I came out in the top 99th percentile.

Sugno ar hynny
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 27965
Age: 44
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#50  Postby newolder » Jan 28, 2020 8:44 pm

Scott Mayers wrote:...

Okay. ?? What's your credentials and proof of your superior capacity to know better?

[And don't forget your name and number. We can always use more tell-it-like-it-is speakers of the real truth today. Maybe I'll even call you up personally so you can teach me which theories are just fake news or not? :ask: ] :roll:

Zeno's paradoxes are significant to the history of theoretical physics. They help demonstrate things related to spacial limits.

And stating 'no evidence' on the Steady State model exists is odd considering even Einstein was working one of his own before he died. While much of the physicists today may dismiss this, but it was the Standard Model in favor in the past for good reasons.


campermon wrote:Oh dear.

:coffee:


Indeed. :coffee:
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 7321
Age: 1
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#51  Postby campermon » Jan 28, 2020 8:53 pm

Scott Mayers wrote:
And stating 'no evidence' on the Steady State model exists is odd considering even Einstein was working one of his own before he died.

Can you cite Einstein's evidence please.

:thumbup:
Last edited by campermon on Jan 28, 2020 9:20 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Scarlett and Ironclad wrote:Campermon,...a middle aged, middle class, Guardian reading, dad of four, knackered hippy, woolly jumper wearing wino and science teacher.
User avatar
campermon
RS Donator
 
Posts: 17437
Age: 51
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#52  Postby felltoearth » Jan 28, 2020 8:54 pm

Fix your quotes Campermon.
"Walla Walla Bonga!" — Witticism
User avatar
felltoearth
 
Posts: 14076
Age: 53

Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#53  Postby newolder » Jan 28, 2020 8:57 pm

Spearthrower wrote:Incidentally, I just self-taught myself Welsh and I'm proud to say that I came out in the top 99th percentile.

Sugno ar hynny


Suck a donkey? :???: (Sry, mai Velsch iz vay, vay russtee.)

But first, one must catch the donkey but one needs to halve the separation before reaching the beast but one needs to halve that distance in order to get halfway there but ... Without a consideration of the time taken to achieve these steps, one would argue wrongly that the donkey will never be reached. Stupid Zeno. (As I'm sure you are already aware.)
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 7321
Age: 1
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#54  Postby newolder » Jan 28, 2020 9:05 pm

campermon wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:
newolder wrote:
And stating 'no evidence' on the Steady State model exists is odd considering even Einstein was working one of his own before he died.


Can you cite Einstein's evidence please.

:thumbup:


Sure. Before the 1920s and Hubble's observations, there was no evidence that the Universe was anything other than an infinite expanse of stars in a steady state of relative motion and Einstein's equations were unstable to gravitational collapse or expansion without an extra cosmological constant term to maintain the balance. After Hubble, the Universe was observed to be expanding and Einstein declared the constant term redundant (his biggest blunder). After 1998 when the rate of expansion was found to be accelerating, a small and positive cosmological constant term was required again - i.e. his biggest blunder wasn't even a mistake.
Last edited by newolder on Jan 28, 2020 10:49 pm, edited 1 time in total.
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 7321
Age: 1
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#55  Postby Spearthrower » Jan 28, 2020 9:10 pm

newolder wrote:
Spearthrower wrote:Incidentally, I just self-taught myself Welsh and I'm proud to say that I came out in the top 99th percentile.

Sugno ar hynny


Suck a donkey? :???: (Sry, mai Velsch iz vay, vay russtee.)


It's ok... if you're self-taught, you get to always be in the top 99th percentile, so your Welsh is basically perfect.


newolder wrote:But first, one must catch the donkey but one needs to halve the separation before reaching the beast but one needs to halve that distance in order to get halfway there but ... Without a consideration of the time taken to achieve these steps, one would argue wrongly that the donkey will never be reached. Stupid Zeno. (As I'm sure you are already aware.)



Worse, the donkey wouldn't want to be associated with someone performing such absurdities and would galumph off royally fucking up the paradox.
I'm not an atheist; I just don't believe in gods :- that which I don't belong to isn't a group!
Religion: Mass Stockholm Syndrome

Learn Stuff. Stuff good. https://www.coursera.org/
User avatar
Spearthrower
 
Posts: 27965
Age: 44
Male

Country: Thailand
Print view this post

Ads by Google


Re: Competing cosmologies

#56  Postby campermon » Jan 28, 2020 9:11 pm

newolder wrote:
campermon wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:
newolder wrote:
And stating 'no evidence' on the Steady State model exists is odd considering even Einstein was working one of his own before he died.


Can you cite Einstein's evidence please.

:thumbup:


Sure. Before the 1920s and Hubble's observations, there was no evidence that the Universe was anything other than an infinite expanse of stars in a steady state of relative motion and Einstein's equations were unstable to gravitational collapse or expansion without an extra cosmological constant term to maintain the balance. After Hubble, the Universe was observed to be expanding and Einstein declared the constant term redundant. After 1998 when the rate of expansion was found to be accelerating, a small and positive cosmological constant term was required again - i.e. his "greatest mistake" wasn't even a mistake.


:thumbup:
Scarlett and Ironclad wrote:Campermon,...a middle aged, middle class, Guardian reading, dad of four, knackered hippy, woolly jumper wearing wino and science teacher.
User avatar
campermon
RS Donator
 
Posts: 17437
Age: 51
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#57  Postby newolder » Jan 28, 2020 9:14 pm

felltoearth wrote:Fix your quotes Campermon.

Still needs a bump. ;)
I am, somehow, less interested in the weight and convolutions of Einstein’s brain than in the near certainty that people of equal talent have lived and died in cotton fields and sweatshops. - Stephen J. Gould
User avatar
newolder
 
Name: Albert Ross
Posts: 7321
Age: 1
Male

Country: Feudal Estate number 9
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#58  Postby campermon » Jan 28, 2020 9:20 pm

felltoearth wrote:Fix your quotes Campermon.


:whistle:
Scarlett and Ironclad wrote:Campermon,...a middle aged, middle class, Guardian reading, dad of four, knackered hippy, woolly jumper wearing wino and science teacher.
User avatar
campermon
RS Donator
 
Posts: 17437
Age: 51
Male

United Kingdom (uk)
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#59  Postby Scott Mayers » Jan 29, 2020 10:52 pm

Spearthrower wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:
I haven't posted much here. And though I've already forgotten you as the same troll from merely two threads where I hurt your poor feelings on my judgement on those playing D&D [and something that I actually was speaking to others you have no inkling of who nor what I was speaking about specifically, given I at least have respect of their own anonymity!], I challenge you to stop and look at what you are writing and compare it to what I've said. I've kept myself in check regardless of your insults before. Or are you also just entertained for saddistic insults? You seem rather immature for this site.



Yes, you started calling people 'trolls' when you got upset because no one was genuflecting to you. You started on this website by being demeaning, condescending, and snotty to groups of people, and you really only built up from there. You made your own bed, Scott.

Given how you laud your own intellectual abilities, it is amusing to once again see you type absolutely meaningless sentences that wander all over the place, to employ lowest common denominator personal attacks, and to misspell so many words. I take it that sentence composition isn't part of your 'foundational thinking' program?

Incidentally, if you want to go the route of using personal attacks, it might be better if you tailor unique ones to each person you intend to attack as your suite of responses seems rather limited - surely not everyone can be 'saddistic' (sic) and 'immature'?

Scott - I think everyone knows who you are, so you can stop playing games. You've been pegged. Well, let's be honest - you pegged yourself. Blow your own trumpet all you like, but it really just comes down to public masturbation.

I've been rather fair and can only guess that whatever deluson you ARE trolling me for is proving to be reflecting upon your own perception of yourself. I say X and regardless what X is, you seem to see some kind of fraud, deception and conspiratorial threat.

Hmmm.....tell me what you see below:
a test of reflex.jpg
a test of reflex.jpg (169.37 KiB) Viewed 300 times


Definition of "Troll": one who tries to do whatever it takes to prevent another to pass some point without some extorted demands.

You appear a bit scared of my presence here. I must have something you fear might be convincing? I mean if you didn't feel I have the capacity to be intellectually competent, why so you seem so threatened?
Scott Mayers
 
Name: Scott Mayers
Posts: 74

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

Re: Competing cosmologies

#60  Postby Scott Mayers » Jan 29, 2020 10:59 pm

campermon wrote:
Scott Mayers wrote:
And stating 'no evidence' on the Steady State model exists is odd considering even Einstein was working one of his own before he died.

Can you cite Einstein's evidence please.

:thumbup:

I won't be wasting too much time on this given the 'love' here. But see: Einstein's Lost Theory Uncovered
Scott Mayers
 
Name: Scott Mayers
Posts: 74

Country: Canada
Canada (ca)
Print view this post

PreviousNext

Return to Physics

Who is online

Users viewing this topic: No registered users and 1 guest