Re: What before big bang?
From: Dale Trynor (dalet_at_nbnet.nb.ca)
Date: 09/03/04
- Next message: Morituri-Max: "Re: Nobody Can Argue Against Absolutes"
- Previous message: Bilge: "Re: QFT and Normall Ordering"
- In reply to: TomGee: "Re: What before big bang?"
- Next in thread: Bjoern Feuerbacher: "Re: What before big bang?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: Fri, 03 Sep 2004 05:56:03 GMT
TomGee wrote:
> Bjoern Feuerbacher <feuerbac@thphys.uni-heidelberg.de> wrote in message news:<ch72nf$5do$1@news.urz.uni-heidelberg.de>...
>
>>TomGee wrote:
>>
>>>Barring the validity of any steady state theory, I like to think that
>>>the BB emptied out into absolute space.
[snip]
>>So you think the universe has boundaries?
>>
>>
>
> Of course, going by my ideas about the Universe. The BB has always
> had edges as it expands into abs. space. If we had a remarkable
> flashlight that could shoot a beam of light to the edge of space, we
> would see the edge quite distinct from the abs. space just beyond the
> area to where our U. has so far expanded. The flashlight would light
> up the media sea of particles by transforming them into light, but
> since there is nothing in abs. space for the creation of light, the
> light from the flashlight would stop at the edge of our Universe.
> TomGee
> p.s. I know this is a lot of new information for anyone to get all at
> once, but please don't blow your head apart. I promise it gets easier
> from now on.
Dale Trynor wrote:
Tom, I have the feeling I haven't done a very good job of explaining
this alternative theory, otherwise you would have seen how well it
answerers just about all of your questions.
I dont have a lot of time tonight so just to get you thinking about why
matter should contract under the effects of gravity here is partially re
edited re posting of the gedanken I usually use to get people thinking
about this question.
A lump of contracted matter wont tell you much just sitting in one place
so to illustrate why matter must contract I have found it works best to
do this with moving objects ,here is how.
Using gravitational lens's and the Shapiro delay or effect
allows one to remain outside and do ones measuring and this is easy to
do as an analogy to the polvalt in barn gedanken used to teach
relativity, do a google if you dont remember it or the Shapiro effect.
The modified analogy to
the pole-valt in barn gedanken is changed so that it to also include a
black hole inside the barn along with its time dilating effects note its
similarity to the Shapiro effect mentioned above.
Now lets use some ridiculously simple math where we have a time dilation
of 300,000,000 times and a barn of only 1 meter long, we have chosen
these numbers because it easy to see that it takes 1 second for light to
travel to the out door of our barn. Shapiro delay is this sort of a
delay that deals with how gravity will slow the speed of light. Dont get
confused here I know it also bends the path but trust me it slows the
light by an additional amount and is more than if you just made the path
longer by putting a bend in its path. Hope we wont need to go into too
much detail here as I am trying to keep this very simple and clear.
Ok so now ask yourself what would happen if our relativistic rod were to
enter the barn at the same time as our light pulse and yes lets make
sure the rod is still longer than the barn even with its Lorentz
contraction taken into account so that we can more clearly show the two
are not really related.
Now we know the rod cannot travel faster than the light and we know the
light must take one second to exit the opposite door so we can easily
show that the rod will also take slightly longer than 1 second to exit.
I dont want to review the detales for the pole-valt in barn gedanken as
you should google it but one dose need to remember the extra time needed
to close the first door and the time delays required for the different
observers at both ends however in this gedanken one has almost a whole
second to talk back and forth and agree that booth doors were briefly
closed with the longer rod was wholly inside the barn.
Now its rather obvious that we have managed to squeeze a longer rod
inside the barn and we did this with a well established and tested idea
of physics. Now the hard part showing how our rod will have been able to
actually measure more space within the barn as well. Its more tricky
unfortunately and if you want to do this it helps if you will prevent
our traveling rod from gaining any extra speed relative to its
prospective of the black hole so that you can avoid dealing with all
this Lorentz stuff as it not only effects how we measure the rod but how
the rod measures remaining distances etc.
Another quick and simple analogy is where you have runners that on
entering a
tunnel suddenly slow to a walk, note how they would appear to become
closer together allowing more of them to fit within the tunnel before
they start to exit from the other end. Now note that because we have
done this by using a slower time that in their frame of reference they
never slowed down at all but are still running to their prospective.
Doing this with time allows one to show how they will measure the
remaining tunnel to be longer.
Similar analogys can be made of light entering a glass rod where its
speed is 1/2 its original value and you can show how a 1 meter long
pulse would be contained in a 1/2 meter long rod before it starts to
exit the other end.
Making these types of associations with how time is directly related to
space in a literal sense allows one to make farther predictions on the
quantum vacuum in those relationships.
This theory amongst other things leads to explaining how black holes
will have a minimal
orbit that on passing all other orbits will have become longer to the
prospective of a traveler. It results in showing how black hole
formations give the same predictions as those given for inflation theory
if you could be an observer inside of one when it formed. It also
hypothesizes white holes and shows how even iron can be returned to
hydrogen again so you can have fun with what appears like some second
law of thermodynamics violation, questions.
Tom, after you take your time to think about this I will have more to
say on just how those other predictions work as well as a bunch more
that I don't have time for now. I should remind you again that if you
dont know about and or remember the detales of the the Shapiro effect,
gravitational time dilation, or about the pole vault "" question on
spelling pole
-vault, here is probably vrong" in barn gedanken it would help if you
looked them up for a quick review otherwise you wont get this theory at
all and everything else would as a result be a waste of our time unless
you want me to review them for you here.
Dale
- Next message: Morituri-Max: "Re: Nobody Can Argue Against Absolutes"
- Previous message: Bilge: "Re: QFT and Normall Ordering"
- In reply to: TomGee: "Re: What before big bang?"
- Next in thread: Bjoern Feuerbacher: "Re: What before big bang?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
