Re: Big Bang Baloney....or scientific cult? [ Apparent Red Shift ]

From: Dale Trynor (dalet_at_nbnet.nb.ca)
Date: 07/26/04 

Date: Mon, 26 Jul 2004 20:47:21 GMT

Ole D. Rughede wrote:
> "Bill Hobba" <bhobba@rubbish.net.au> skrev i en meddelelse
> news:qwKMc.15672$K53.8089@news-server.bigpond.net.au...
>
>>"Ralph Hertle" <ralph.hertle@verizon.net> wrote in message
>>news:4100B8C0.7060504@verizon.net...
>>
>>>Info Plumber wrote:
>>>
>>>
>>>[snip]
>>>
>>>
>>>>Thanks for the tip, how is this?

[snip]

>>could be performed tomorrow that invalidates it. That is very unlikely
>>given how interconnected it is with all sorts of other things we know -
>
> but
>
>>the point is it is not impossible. And we even have examples of it
>>happening in physics eg parity violation. That parity should be conserved
>>is pretty intuitive, so much so that scientists fooled themselves into
>>believing the data said it was - in fact it was not.

[snip]

Dale Trynor wrote:
Careful here, I posted some time ago on the hypothesis that if one were
to have an antimatter universe one could mirror the parity violations in
that universe in such a way that they would no longer are violations and
would simply be conserved in a way we are not privileged to observe.
Unless of course one could observe both universes simultaneously. The
hypothesis dose require that one has a chiral quantum vacuum and a type
of antigravity to allow this hypothesis to work. This is because one
needs then to allow for the creation of the alternative universe. This
is an alternative to what is now believed, that matter was simply
favored over atimatter and to paraphrase Einstein in this somewhat
altered way, god dose not simply play dice with the universe, he cheats
as well. I have never been comfortable with a violation that simply must
be, because we are here. Why should anyone rational be comfortable with it.

>>>>>
>>>>>>My intuition says that anything that is expanding at a more-or-less
>>>>>
>>>>>constant rate (or accelerating rate) must have been a singularity at
>>>>>some time in the past. Your statement above seems more like
>
> existential
>
>>>>>philosophy than hard science. There are few things in cosmology that
>>>>>have as much hard, scientific validation as the "big bang".<
>>>>>
>>>>>Intuition is not science, it is projection and wishing, just to

This is where I really disagree.
Singularities must be impossible if one has gravity and if if the time
dilating effects that are unavoidable with gravity can be shown to
contract matter in such a way that one ends up with more space.

Before you say I am crazy here is my latest attempt at a simplified
gedanken that one can use as a mathematical framework to test this
theory. And yes it lead to an initiative understanding of the big bang.
Some of you must have seen my posts before so either you ignored it or
haven't tried to seriously solve for this gedanken. I would be very
interested how me why it dose not lead you to similar conclusions.

You probably know about the Shapiro delay and how it involves how light
is delayed as it passes
by a gravitational body and if you don't look it up first. its
well documented so we can ignore details and just skip by and use our
analogy of the pole-vault
and barn gedanken that
becomes rather similar to the Shapiro delay when we have a black hole
within the barn.

Trying to keep this ridiculously simple, lets put in a time dilation of
an average of 300,000,000
times and make the barn 1 meter long where it equals 1 light second long and
our rod is some reasonable percentage of light speed where even after
Lorentz contraction it will
still measured as some reasonable amount longer than the barn. We allow
both the rod as well as
a series of light pulses to enter the
barn at about the same time and because we know the rod cannot travel
faster than the light its
only logical to expect the
rod will also take at least 1 second to
exit the outlet door as this must also be the case for the light.
Note that we will still be able to show that the longer rod
will still fit nicely within the
barn from the prospective of our outside observers and given that much
time delay they will all
have agreed that both doors
were at some time, more or less simultaneously closed. You cant do this
without the time dilation
effect within the barn as you
will get different observers disagreeing on when both doors were closed
but I wont repeat this old
stuff as I know you must
know it already and its importance to simultaneity arguments.

Ok so do you now agree that we actually have a circumstance where we can
indeed argue that a
longer rod has indeed fitted nicely within the barn for almost a whole
second.

Alternatively now it gets more tricky, even with these simplified
extremes of now trying to show
that from our rods prospective it will also measure more distance within
the barn, as now we also have Lorentz contraction effects to also
account for and they become
more significant because it is in free fall. This is because of the way
one gains speed when traveling through a gravitational lens and because
objects traveling faster measure shorter as well as measuring a shorter
path from their prospective it makes this whole thing more
complicated. So try doing this where the rod is prevented from gaining
speed relative to its
prospective of the black
hole and it will become
more obvious that it will indeed measure more distance inside the barn
than it would have
estimated before it entered. Doing this you will need to remember that
we have two ends of the
rod where we can also place observers and we need to show where both
have sufficient time to
agree that they are able to observe both doors closed and or observe
more space within the barn
than they would have originally predicted from viewing the outside of
the barn before entering.

Note that this alternative theory leads to the idea that an infinite
time dilation equals an infinite space expansion, assuming anything
infinite is ever actually approachable. This leads to the idea that
black holes will have a minimal orbit that on after passing it, all
later orbits become longer. It gives essentially the same predictions as
those given for inflation theory, if you could be inside of a black hole
when it forms.

>>Philosophical doublespeak and balderdash. I say the question of if the
>>universe is eternal is a scientific question whose answer depends on how
>>well it fits with observation - the best current thinking is it had a
>>beginning and will have an end.

[snip]

Note how the above theory suggests a multiverse much older than our
short 15 billion years and looks at how new universes are created giving
a new prospective to what is eternal.
It also predicts white holes and that could in principle put new
questions on the idea of the size of the universe.
Dale

Relevant Pages

  • Re: Big Bang Baloney....or scientific cult? [ Apparent Red Shift ]
    ... to have an antimatter universe one could mirror the parity violations in ... Unless of course one could observe both universes simultaneously. ... within the barn. ... our rod is some reasonable percentage of light speed where even after ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: What before big bang?
    ... do as an analogy to the polvalt in barn gedanken used to teach ... do a google if you dont remember it or the Shapiro effect. ... black hole inside the barn along with its time dilating effects note its ... Ok so now ask yourself what would happen if our relativistic rod were to ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: What before big bang?
    ... do as an analogy to the polvalt in barn gedanken used to teach ... do a google if you dont remember it or the Shapiro effect. ... black hole inside the barn along with its time dilating effects note its ... Ok so now ask yourself what would happen if our relativistic rod were to ...
    (sci.physics.relativity)
  • Re: Do we know where the Big Bang happened?
    ... No I do not contradict imperial data of observation and experiment. ... within the barn. ... our rod is some reasonable percentage of light speed. ... will get different observers disagreeing on when both doors were closed ...
    (sci.physics)
  • Re: Oh look at the spectacular lightning!
    ... Attempts to redefine the universe just to defend your own ... -- Maarten Wiltink ... I have since developed a theory about the origins of the barn unit of ...
    (alt.sysadmin.recovery)