The Origin of The Universe / S D Rodrian

From: SDR (sdrodrian_at_sdrodrian.com)
Date: 02/15/05 

Date: 14 Feb 2005 18:06:26 -0800

>From: ralph (ralph@eddlewood.demon.co.uk)
>Subject: Re: The Origin of The Universe / S D Rodrian
>Newsgroups: talk.religion.pantheism, soc.culture.usa, alt.politics.usa.misc,
>talk.politics.misc, talk.philosophy.humanism
>Date: 2005-02-14 14:40:53 PST
>In message <58087ec7.0502140922.5924aebf@posting.google.com>, SDR
><sdrodrian@sdrodrian.com> writes
>>Too late for Einstein, we begin here from the specific proposition that
>>there is no fundamental difference between "matter" and the "primordial
>>material" (some may term "scalar mass" or simply "energy") and that
>>they are but merely two levels of the same single process of
>>"matter-organization" (simply many orders of magnitude distant from
>>each other).

>I do not understand this passage. Are you aware of the equation e=mc^2?

The equation means that matter IS energy, and my passage above
obviously states that matter is energy (if you read further you
will see the purpose of the passage--setting up the solution to
the origin of energy itself). There is no dispute between Einstein
and I. The only differences are that with the latest information
I can now describe the evolution of the universe FROM energy to
matter... without having to invent some magical curtain behind
which (the Big Bang) such a transition took place.

>In it Einstein quantifies the relationship.

His famous (was it his? is another question not relevant here)
equation basically boils down to "there is a humongous amount of
energy if a bit of matter." If you read my text (where I do not
quantify the relationship either because I just do not have the
tools or the time to do so, but others may yet accomplish it to
some degree of accuracy), if you read my text you will realize
that the size of the cosmic hollow that collapsed into our visible
universe of matter was indeed as proportional in absolute size to
the resulting visible universe of matter at its core as energy
to matter in Einstein's equation (which is only an approximation,
after all). Only now you know WHY the humongous "proportion."

> I am not going to plough on through your script if you cannot
> clarify this point. -- ralph

I hope that I clarified it, and that you read the text.

S D Rodrian
http://poems.sdrodrian.com
http://physics.sdrodrian.com
http://ar.sdrodrian.com
http://music.sdrodrian.com

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Another sort of expansion?
    ... universe, you should read the paper from the Princeton ... You have to think of space in terms of potential energy, ... But the matter involved isn't fundamentally ... With life, when fully niche filled, the next large evolutionary ...
    (sci.geo.geology)
  • Re: Query about Range of validity of field equations in Quantum Field Theory
    ... you will understand everything in the universe, ...   Gravity is a word denoting several different things. ... < We have to find out why energy gets entangled and regions of it can ... times the distance it is moved; and "mass" is a quantity of matter. ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Cosmologically speaking, diamonds may actually be forever (Forwarded)
    ... If you've ever wondered about the ultimate fate of the universe, ... the current status quo between matter and its ... alter ego, radiation, will continue as the newly discovered force of dark ... It is only in the last decade that the existence of dark energy has been ...
    (sci.space.news)
  • Cosmologically speaking, diamonds may actually be forever (Forwarded)
    ... If you've ever wondered about the ultimate fate of the universe, ... the current status quo between matter and ... the dark-energy dominated universe is that matter gets to beat radiation ... It is only in the last decade that the existence of dark energy has been ...
    (sci.astro)
  • Re: Dont like the truth? Lie.
    ... the Albert Einstein Professor in Science ... on cosmology entitled Endless Universe. ... We are probably the last generation to have been taught that gravity ... Visible matter comes nowhere close to closing the Universe. ...
    (sci.space.policy)