First Cause

[Subduction Zone]

Now, now let's not stink up the sand box.

She started it

Seriously she has made claims, I would merely like to see the evidence that support her claims. Worse yet she tried to imply that I reject Relativity when Relativity implies an expanding universe. In fact Einstein did not like that aspect of his theory. When others pointed out that his theory predicted an expanding universe he made what he called "My biggest blunder". by inventing the Cosmological Constant. Now it is thought that the CC may help explain how dark energy works.

Einstein's 'Biggest Blunder' Turns Out to Be Right

 

[sandy whitelinger]

She started it

Seriously she has made claims, I would merely like to see the evidence that support her claims. Worse yet she tried to imply that I reject Relativity when Relativity implies an expanding universe. In fact Einstein did not like that aspect of his theory. When others pointed out that his theory predicted an expanding universe he made what he called "My biggest blunder". by inventing the Cosmological Constant. Now it is thought that the CC may help explain how dark energy works.

Einstein's 'Biggest Blunder' Turns Out to Be Right

woosahhhhh. I want to hear what she has to say. You might know, is string theory tied into space time continuum?

 

[Subduction Zone]

woosahhhhh. I want to hear what she has to say. You might know, is string theory tied into space time continuum?

I seriously do not know that much about string theory. From my understanding it is not even a proper theory yet since it has not been tested in anyway. But I would like to hear here side too. I did object about the "don't you accept relativity" barb when relativity was the source of an expanding universe.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

I seriously do not know that much about string theory. From my understanding it is not even a proper theory yet since it has not been tested in anyway. But I would like to hear here side too. I did object about the "don't you accept relativity" barb when relativity was the source of an expanding universe.

I think it all relative... depending on how you look at it. A matter of perspective.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

Well, then you have a lot of imagination.

I think it is obvious that space time continua cannot, by their very definition, expand. Why? Because expansion needs a space time context in order to make sense. It is an increase of space in a certain unit of time. Therefore, not at all applicable to space time itself.

Ciao

- viole

After pondering a bit I've decided any movement satisfies my delusion here. Yet I wonder how straight line movement allows me to be here to have this conversation.

 

[metis]

So if there were a time line would it look something like this: Singularity, "something," natural world.

No, it would more be a time-line with no beginning and no end.

 

[metis]

So, infinity includes "not-things?"

There's no way of determining what it may all include. Thus far, most cosmologists I've read tend to think that sub-atomic particles may always have existed at the least, but it's hypothetically possible at least that if string theory were to be correct, then maybe even these stings minus sub-atomic particles may have existed.

IOW, they tend to think that there was always a "something(s)", but defining that "something(s)" is all but impossible to do objectively. I guess that where religious faith can come in.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

There's no way of determining what it may all include. Thus far, most cosmologists I've read tend to think that sub-atomic particles may always have existed at the least, but it's hypothetically possible at least that if string theory were to be correct, then maybe even these stings minus sub-atomic particles may have existed.

IOW, they tend to think that there was always a "something(s)", but defining that "something(s)" is all but impossible to do objectively. I guess that where religious faith can come in.

It helps me, religious or not. Its a comundrum.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

No, it would more be a time-line with no beginning and no end.

Where does the Big Bang fit into this spacetime scenario?

 

[metis]

Where does the Big Bang fit into this spacetime scenario?

As one little event in one little speck in time about 13.7 billion years ago, which is almost as old as I am.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

As one little event in one little speck in time about 13.7 billion years ago, which is almost as old as I am.

And on the other side of this speck?

 

[metis]

And on the other side of this speck.

No one can tell for sure. It's like "What's going to happen tomorrow?". Some people may think they know, but the reality is that they can't.

As one who's been in science all my adult life, I'm very used to not knowing.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

No one can tell for sure. It's like "What's going to happen tomorrow?". Some people may think they know, but the reality is that they can't.

As one who's been in science all my adult life, I'm very used to not knowing.

Can string theory explain a singularity?

 

[metis]

Can string theory explain a singularity?

Not likely, unless one goes about it in an indirect way. It may relate, but only as likely a "side-bar".

BTW, one major piece of evidence for singularity is that the "expansion" is relatively uniform, although there is one "indentation" on one "side". IOW, the expansion process was not 100% uniform, which is what we should expect to see-- no real surprise.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

God first, universe after. God is the first cause.

God (presumably) and the singularity were present before the universe. There is no cause and effect before the universe. At best we could say they were together in the singularity.

 

[sandy whitelinger]

There is no expansion of the Universe. Can you imagine something like a spacetime continuum expanding?

Ciao

- viole

Space seems flat which allows us to exist in the form we percieve. As spacetime approaches a singularity it curves until it reduces to a point. Moving away from a singularity it expands and flattens.

 

[metis]

There is no cause and effect before the universe.

As I mentioned before, most cosmologists, according to researcher Leonard Susskind, do believe cause & effect did exist before the BB, such as what is hypothesized in brane theory and string theory, for just two possibilities.

 

[Polymath257]

I'm saying cause and effect began at the same time.

And perhaps began at the same time as time itself.

 

[Polymath257]

As I mentioned before, most cosmologists, according to researcher Leonard Susskind, do believe cause & effect did exist before the BB, such as what is hypothesized in brane theory and string theory, for just two possibilities.

This is because they work in a multiverse model. There still would be no cause or effect before the multiverse though.

 

[Polymath257]

Well, then you have a lot of imagination.

I think it is obvious that space time continua cannot, by their very definition, expand. Why? Because expansion needs a space time context in order to make sense. It is an increase of space in a certain unit of time. Therefore, not at all applicable to space time itself.

Ciao

- viole

Well, if you have two time dimensions, it might be possible.