Slashdot Mirror
The Big Bang Vs. the Big Rumble
WBUR radio in Boston hosts a talk with two physicists, Alan Guth and Neil Turok, who represent, respectively, the consensus theory of the inflationary Big Bang and an upstart theory of the initiation of the universe in the collision of two three-dimensional "branes." Turok and Paul Steinhardt developed their "Ekpyrotic proposal" out of the mathematics behind string theory. In the audio the two physicists are perhaps more respectful of one another's views than the host wishes them to be. If you ignore the "let's you and him fight" framing of the debate, you will hear some interesting physics elucidated.
This is total nonsense. Every intelligent person knows that the universe was created in a TimeCube, not a bang or a rumble, however big deluded people may think they are. You were educated stupid.
... and then they built the supercollider.
Is that like a western vs. a Jackie Chan movie (Rumble in the Bronx)?
Latoyatveeoc@verizon.net
Everybody knows the spaghetti monster create the universe, all this nonsense of bangs and rumbles is what happened in the postgenesis spaghetti fart.
For the lazy
He looks a little wimpy to be a dinosaur hunter.. And "Neil" is a little improbable as a first name, too.
Big bang must be true, because our textbooks say it is so! Next they'll be teaching Common Descent as fact too.....no wait.....
In my left hand, I hold an apple. In my right, an orange. Debate.
We're all going to die. i intend to deserve it.
It appears the once famous Flying Spaghetti Monster was found eaten to death. Only a noodly appendage remains. No word on any *burp* suspects. *Takes Tums for heartburn*
initiation of the universe in the collision of two thee-dimensional "branes."
I believe that it's the King Jame's version.
Take the cheese to sickbay, the doctor should see it as soon as possible - B'Elanna Torres, "Learning Curve"
To anyone who's got this far without having downloaded the mp3, go listen to it! It is actually quite interesting. And to anyone who's ever been lectured by Turok, don't worry, he isn't that bad when he's actually interested in what he's talking about...
Sorry. Couldn't resist.
"Win treats sysadmins better than users. Mac treats users better than sysadmins. Linux treats everyone like sysadmins."
You need an outside view to determine how the Universe started, and, last I checked, we're all inside. Great fun though. Continue. I actually heard this broadcast and enjoyed it as I've followed this for decades--since, as a kid, I bought and read a paperback titled "Frontiers of Astronomy," by Fred Hoyle, dealing with the discussion of the steady state universe model versus the big bang model. I think it was in the 60s some time. Much of science is becoming mere entertainment. Strings and branes. hahah. Good.
E Proelio Veritas.
The whole "Ekpyrotic" idea was well and thoroughly proven wrong by Andrei Linde in his work entitled "Pyrotechnic Universe".
Ever since that happened (2001) Mr. Steinhardt cannot accept that he's wrong and he still tries to make the pig fly. Since he cannot convince anybody in the academic community that the pig does fly he tries to get around that with press releases and radio shows. Good way to do science for a Princeton professor.
"Brane and brane, what is brane?
"Remember, there never were pineapple-almond cookies here."
If you don't understand the current theories, don't worry about it. But please refrain from posting while obviously drunk, 'mkay?
!ERR: Signature not found.
Undoing moderation, nevermind.
Wow,
Being a mathematician, I find it difficult to even believe in numbers, let alone BRANES.
You call **that** SCIENCE?
BTW, what was there before the branes "crashed"?
I got it: a singular supermanifold!
Pedro.
just for a second and let these guys talk.. stop injecting himself into the conversation and stop trying to cast doubt on science with the stupid comments like, "Oh look, scientists are flip-flopping on the big bang.. are you freaked out? is science supposed to work this way? some folk in the heartland will be skeptical of this."
These two scientists. Knocked heads, their branes collided....And the universe was born?
"Women are just like ninjas; They lie even when it is more convenient to tell the truth." ~ Unknown
The cosmologies described here are based on the inference that the universe is expanding in a manner proportional to the observed roughly constant redshift-to-distance ratio (Hubble constant). The idea is that as space is stretched, the wavelength of light is stretched along with it, as it transverses that space.
The problem with all these mainstream cosmologies is that observations have been made that require rather different (non-cosmological) mechanisms for redshift to exist. Halton Arp has made and detailed these observations, and the surrounding controversy http://www.amazon.com/Seeing-Red-Redshifts-Cosmolo gy-Academic/dp/0968368905. Paul Mermet is another astrophysicist that has studied the matter http://www.newtonphysics.on.ca/HUBBLE/Hubble.html.
Essentially, current mainstream cosmology is likely to be complete bunk, because it is predicated on one particular ill-founded interpretation of redshift.
Current cosmology is anything but settled. The following interesting documentary shows the perspective of astrophysicists and cosmologists that believe the mainstream view is flawedhttp://www.mininova.org/tor/360930. There definitely are quite a few observations that do not fit the mainstream cosmology.
I thought branes (hypothetically) caused the big bang, and inflation is something that happened after the big bang.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
I don't know about you, but this always leaves me tied up in knots.
How many people right clicked that one?
"The greatest obstacle to discovery is not ignorance - it is the illusion of knowledge." - Daniel Boorstin
If you want to get away from blackboard theory and consider what people actually see through telescopes, there is a strong case to be made, with many photographs of the objects in question, that many high-energy, high-redshift quasars appear to be located in close proximity to, and interacting with, low-redshift, low-energy galaxies. If indeed these observations are accurate (statistically they have a very low probability of being errors) then it's impossible to use red-shift as a metric for the "age" of the universe. And the rest of conventional cosmology also falls away. What do you get? No Big Bang, faster than light travel for rocket-ship sized objects, and other neat results.
_ stellar_heresy.html
Dr. Halton C. Arp used to be one of the premiere U.S. astrophysicists (assistant to Hubble, winner of many awards in his own right, including "best young American astronomer", plenty of publications, etc.), but after 28 years as a staff astronomer at Mount Palomar was kicked off the telescope for his heretical views about red-shift. Now he's in a self-imposed sort of exile at the Max Planck Institut fur Astrophysik in Germany, but continues to believe that his many observations are valid.
For a recent podcast interview (posted June 1) with Dr. Arp at Electric Politics, see here:
http://www.electricpolitics.com/podcast/2007/06/a
And for Dr. Arp's personal website which has quite a bit of his research online, see here:
http://www.haltonarp.com/
Brane the size of a universe and they tell me to get ready to rumble...
We do not live in the 21st century. We live in the 20 second century.
Maybe all mathematicians are actually zombies. That'd explain their relentless need for "Braaaaannessssss ..."
... right?
C'mon. I can't be the only one here who was thinking this
As for the FSM reference, I think you just found a way to sneak religion into the schooling curriculum via the mathematics conduit. Well done. I look forward to the Kansas Board of Education mandating textbook updates. I wonder if there's a correlation between Cosmic Creation Brane Theory and species extinction. Perhaps the dinosaurs discovered The One Grand Unified Brane Theorem, and were so enlightened that they all had seizures and died. Damn. That's halfway plausible. I challenge you to prove otherwise.
Sheesh, evil *and* a jerk. -- Jade
They didn't represent all sides of the debate! This is totally biased. Where is the theory of Intelligent Design represented?
== Jez ==
Do you miss Firefox? Try Pale Moon.
I used to like the ideas of string theory, but after what, 15-20 years of work, not a single observable prediction has been made by the theory. Heck, we don't even have a theory has such yet, more like a plethora of them, and a few that suggest they're all correct!
Anyone making suggestions opposing the current cosmological framework using string theory had better have something more than vague mathematical foundations if they want to convince anyone. They sure won't convince me anytime soon.
If he explores all forms and substances Straight homeward to their symbol-essences; He shall not die.
if u listen to this show regularly, as I do, living in boston, u know that the host has this irritating and moronic habit of lowering his voice and trying to invest everything with big, earthshaking importance.
he is also a right wingnut conservative. Like other NPR (national peurile rightwing radio) hosts, his right wing bias is clearly seen when a liberal caller makes some perfectly reasoanble , if not correct, suggestion, like american attacks in the mid east prior to 9/11 irritated people, or that the failure of the american auto industry is not due to workers, but due to the astonishing incompetance of ceos. when somenone makes one of these comments, he has this incredibly arrogant way of dismissing them, by ignoring the comment, and directing a question to one of his guests that implicitly dismisses the liberal callers question as idiotic. perhpahs the effort by boston university to turn its station into a profit center is driving his views.
basically the 90s version of some middlebrow magazine like readers digest or american heritage.
yeah, i really do dislike him: he has this incredible forum, and does so little with it
I'm still chosing to believe in the Big Bang and my own personal, god not included, theory of how everything was made out of nothing (which may or may not be scientifically plausable).
Mainly because I haven't bothered to try to understand this "big rumble" thing.
Just my two generic, low value coins.
Jesus this man is annoying.
If they did I hope they cleaned it up...
As everyone surely knows, the universe was created by Ponder Stibbons when an experimental Thaumic Energy Generator overloaded and the resulting blast of unconstrained thaumons (if that is what they are) produced our universe.
Posts, MyBio or Sig, may contain satire, sarcasm, bolded nouns be sardonic or even witty & be Church of SD
Brane: The same thing we do every night, try to create the world!
thanks folks, Ill be here all week.
The universe started during the first "Big Bang", an explosion occuring when Chuck Norris roundhoused Mr. T at the same time Mr. T punched Chuck Norris. The battle raging on for the next 6,000,000,000,1980 years was known as "The Great Rumble". The second big bang, when both actually hit at the same time once again, would create the phenomenon known as "the 80s".
See, we can all get along with this theory.
Ginga no Rekshiya Mata Each page.
I've no doubt that the 'real truth' if ever found will probably look significantly different from either the Big Bang or the Ekpyrotic model.
This sounds plausible and, if we learn anything from our own history, even likely.
Be that as it may, however, the models that we hold as "currently most accurate" should be well-supported by the best evidence available to date.
String Theory is not supported by very much evidence at all, and so I reject it (and its derivative claims) on those grounds.
Moving Dimensions Theory -- The New Paradigm
Don't pay attention to all thos cosmologists--they're just in it for the NSF grants.
The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions. Moving Dimensions Theory accounts for the aetherless aether. This simple postulate offers a physical model underlying and unifiying: RELATIVITY: 1) length contraction 2) time dilation 3) the equivalence of mass and energy 4) the constant velocity of light 5) the independence of the speed of light from the velocity of the source QUANTUMN MECHANICS 1) action at a distance 2) wave-particle duality 3) interference phenomena 4) EPR paradox THERMODYNAMICS 1) Time's arrow 2) Entropy STRING THEORY'S MANY DIMENSIONS / KALUZA/KLEIN THEORY 1) a fourth expanding dimension can be interepreted as many dimensions, each time it expands THE UNITY OF THE DUALITIES 1) wave/particle duality 2) time/space duality 3) energy/mass duality 4) E/B duality GENERAL RELATIVITY 1) Gravitational redshift 2) Gravity waves 3) Gravitation attraction THE SPACE-TIME BACKGROUND 1) quantum foam 2) the smearing of space and time at small distances 3) Hawking's imaginary time PARADOXES 1) MDT explains away Godel's Block Universe 2) MDT unfreezes time 3) Resolves Zeno's Paradox ONE GETS ALL OF THIS FROM A SIMPLE POSTULATE: The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions in a sphereically symmetric manner, in units of the Planck length, at the rate of c. This means that every point in three dimnesional space is always expanding into a fourth dimensional sphere with a radius of the plank length. A photon is matter caught on the surface of this quantized expansion, and thus energy is quantized. The expansion of the fourth dimension occurs at the rate of c, and thus the velocity of all photons is c. Check out the t-shirt with a simple proof of MDT: http://www.cafepress.com/autumnrangers.72464949 "The only way to stay stationary in the fourth dimension is to move at the speed of light through the three spatial dimensions. Ergo the fourth dimension is expanding at the rate of c relative to the three spatial dimenions." How sad it is that when truth stares modern physicists in the face, they must close their eyes so as to get a postdoc or raise more funds for String Theory. Moving Dimensions Theory is in complete agreement with all experimental tests and phenomena associated with special and general relativity. MDT is in complete agreement with all physical phenomena as predicted by quantum mechanics and demonstrated in extensive experiments. The genius and novelty of MDT is that it presents a common physical model which shows that phenomena from both relativity and quantum mechanics derive from the same fundamental physical reality. Nowhere does String Theory nor Loop Quantum Gravity account for quantum entanglement nor relativistic time dilation. MDT shows these derive from the same underlying physical reality. Nowhere does ST nor LQG account for wave-particle duality nor relativistic length contraction. MDT shows these derive from the same underlying physical reality. Nowhere does ST nor LQG account for the constant speed of light, nor the independence of the speed of light on the velocity of the source, nor entropy, nor time's arrow. MDT shows these derive from the same underlying physical reality. Nowhere does String Theory nor Loop Quantum Gravity resolve the paradox of Godel's Block Universe which troubled Eisntein. MDT resolves this paradox. Simply put, MDT replaces the contemporary none-theories with a physical theory, complete with a simple postulate that unifies formerly disparate phenomena within a simple context. THE GENERAL POSTULATE OF DYNAMIC DIMENSIONS THEORY The fourth dimension is expanding relative to the three spatial dimensions. If at first the idea is not absurd, then there is no hope for it. -Albert Einstein But after thirty years of the absurdity of String Theory, millions of dollars from the NSF, and billions of complementary dollars from
These two are scholastic doctors making a living by peddling their cosmogonic scenarios in the media. They may fool some of the people most of the time but their fraud does not work with this group. Freedom of Science is the most fundamental human right and it is alive and well at least at slashdot.
Must have BRANES... Must have FRESH BRANES.... Feed me BRANES... FRESH BRANES!!!
RS
Shoes for Industry. Shoes for the Dead.
Why did Alan Guth opt to appear on the show?
WBUR promised him a free lunch.
Lil' Thindime, lilting a lacrimose lament, krashes the kwaint konfines of Kokonino Kounty
A bit of nit-picking - the 200 inch Hale telescope is on Palomar Mountain.The link is to a store. The post is just spam to make money.
This theory is obviously defective, as it makes no mention of the Great Green Arkleseizure.
Saying that there is suffering in the world as a disprove of God's existence is something of a strawman.
You have this supposition that if you were all powerful, there would be no suffering, when really, if you were all powerful, you might not give a damn, and only intervene from time to time to those of your creations that prostrate themselves enough before you because it is entertaining. Please show me any phrase in any scripture of any religion where God says "Hey, I am a nice guy."
Besides, science is ultimately illogical. We already know, from science, that the universe is screwed. Our solar system will die. Our planet will be destroyed - no matter -what we do-. Yet, we keep pushing on trying to learn more, with this faith that learning more will somehow make our lives better, yet, in the end, all of it is pointless. The sun will run out of hydrogen, swell up, and consume the earth, and all these creatures you want to save are all going to die, including humanity, if we are still stuck on earth. The best science can offer is that humanity will run from star to star, planet to planet, until there are no more stars, and the game is over.
Compared to that, a dickhead God seems kinda warm and fuzzy.
This is my sig.
SWM seeks new sig for a brief fling
So how can it be redshifted coming out? The weight of the universe on the other side of us will be blue-shifting it to the same extent...
That would be Burkhard Heim's unified theory from the 1950s. His work brought up the idea that gravity comes in several varieties, only one of which is experienced by us puny beings (so far). One of his additional gravitational entities is, today, called "Dark Energy" although he named it "Quintessence." It is the other, however, which is the "elephant in the room."
Heim deduced that a messenger particle he called a "gravitophoton" could be produced by using a very intense magnetic field (>20 Teslas) to produce electron-positron pairs from the background vacuum. The gravitophoton would have two types, attractive and replusive. Sound fanatasic?!
Uh, uh! Last year, the findings of two+ years of careful experiments with rotating, superconducting disks were announced by the European Space Agency (ESA). See http://www.prweb.com/releases/2006/3/prweb364473.h tm . A non-Newtonian gravitational field has been conjured up and made to produce a measureable force in one direction and, upon accelerating the super-conducting disc in the opposite direction, have that non-Newtonian gravitational field produce a force in the opposite direction!
This makes talk about 'branes and Big Bangs idle chit-chat. Nor are these results a one-shot fluke. Two-hundred-plus runs were made, and the results studied for eight months, before the scientists doing the experiments could convince themselves that they weren't nuts! Their published work is here -- http://esamultimedia.esa.int/docs/gsp/Experimental _Detection.pdf
Of course, well-established scientists don't need to hear about this. It sort of means a lot of what they know is wrong.
Why was every post of Eukariote modded troll? He is just presenting his views on the subject. If you don't agree with his views, just state your counterarguments and explain exactly where the poster is wrong. Censoring information is never a good way of educating people, even if the information you are censoring is incorrect.
Read the rest of this comment...