Jump to content
Science Forums

The Cosmological Constant, Lamda Cdm, And The Expansion Of The Universe


freeztar

Recommended Posts

I had a dream about a month ago. I can't recall the exact details of the dream, but I was left with a pressing urgency. 

 

From what I can recall, I was speaking to Einstein. It became clear to both of us that something was missing. I also was left with the feeling that I was on the verge of discovering levitation. It was a crazy dream.

 

It has left me with an unending quest to get to the bottom of it. Obviously, this is a Herculean task and I unfortunately don't possess the mathematical prowess or understanding of QED to get even close. Hence, I am posting here in hopes that I can either make progress or dismiss it as a crazy dream.

 

The title kind of explains where I am exploring right now. The greatest blunder is also dark energy. The more I look into it, the darker it gets. But I think it holds the answer.

 

Nobody has any clue what it is, which is massively frustrating. 

 

I am hoping this thread can be a sandbox where we can toss ideas, however crazy, and hopefully get closer to an answer. 

 

I have started researching all kinds of stuff. My favorite pet theory at the moment is that gravitons exist as fundamental particles exempt from gravity itself. The absence of these particles could create levitation (or anti-gravity). I know...it sounds silly. Just throwing stuff against the wall and seeing what sticks.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Math? Here you go.


Dark energy? Here you go. http://www.scienceforums.com/topic/28443-a-universe-from-nothing-krauss/?view=findpost&p=336707

My crazy-gut-feeling on gravitons is that they don't exist. That Tesla was right to think of an ethertic substrate upon which our universe is stretched, and that this substrate accounts for both gravitational and electomagnetic feilds and feild lines. Related random "can't prove it but it makes things fit" being that photons are actually paired particles rotatating around each other on(and through) the brane between "normal" space and this etheric substrate. Makes polarisation, the duality of the photonic feild, scatter, etc make more sense to me from a geometric perspective.

 

There was another thread around here recently...this one..Where I discussed my take on some recent LIGO results in relation to the second 'here you go" above. Craig, bless his puritan understanding. cut it off with a 1980's standard model as defacto, and I'm rather too busy to dredge up and spoon feed advances from the past 5 years to show the "more complete" alternative models floating around the post-doc community now vs the 80's textbooks. Take a read, look though the various links (some are a bit dry and  others are colorful laymans). I hope it helps you in your mission from zeus.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Math? Here you go.

Dark energy? Here you go. http://www.scienceforums.com/topic/28443-a-universe-from-nothing-krauss/?view=findpost&p=336707

 

My crazy-gut-feeling on gravitons is that they don't exist. That Tesla was right to think of an ethertic substrate upon which our universe is stretched, and that this substrate accounts for both gravitational and electomagnetic feilds and feild lines. Related random "can't prove it but it makes things fit" being that photons are actually paired particles rotatating around each other on(and through) the brane between "normal" space and this etheric substrate. Makes polarisation, the duality of the photonic feild, scatter, etc make more sense to me from a geometric perspective.

 

There was another thread around here recently...this one..Where I discussed my take on some recent LIGO results in relation to the second 'here you go" above. Craig, bless his puritan understanding. cut it off with a 1980's standard model as defacto, and I'm rather too busy to dredge up and spoon feed advances from the past 5 years to show the "more complete" alternative models floating around the post-doc community now vs the 80's textbooks. Take a read, look though the various links (some are a bit dry and  others are colorful laymans). I hope it helps you in your mission from zeus.

 

Can you point me to Tesla's ideas on this? I will delve into the links you have provided. Thank you!

 

I took pre-calc twice: once in high school AP and once in college. Should I skip ahead? I remember functions (y=f(x) and all that) but maybe it couldn't hurt to refresh. And...I just answered my own question. ;) Thanks again for the link!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Can you point me to Tesla's ideas on this? I will delve into the links you have provided. Thank you!

 

I took pre-calc twice: once in high school AP and once in college. Should I skip ahead? I remember functions (y=f(x) and all that) but maybe it couldn't hurt to refresh. And...I just answered my own question. ;) Thanks again for the link!

Not offhand, but I'll put that on my backburner. You might be interested in checking out some of the references from here. timecode is kinda important so i hope it stays, but it's /watch?v=ucyBMB_PWr8&feature=youtu.be&t=5725 if the auto-scripts chop it up

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Not offhand, but I'll put that on my backburner. You might be interested in checking out some of the references from here. timecode is kinda important so i hope it stays, but it's /watch?v=ucyBMB_PWr8&feature=youtu.be&t=5725 if the auto-scripts chop it up

 

It says the video is not available, even when I manually paste the end of the URL you provided. :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

can we forget "time" for sometime ...

 

i don't understand why massive objects like sun create a "bend" in space , and is this bend the only reason why earth revolves around the sun ?

 

that doesn't look much like science ...lol

 

is that Einsteins idea of gravity ?

 

the next one is newtons idea of gravity ..

 

at least he is mentioning  some sort of force between these massive bodies ..

 

which is a good thing to think about too ...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Capital letters are your friend. :)

 

i don't understand why massive objects like sun create a "bend" in space , and is this bend the only reason why earth revolves around the sun ?

Orbits round the sun. The Earths revolution (spin) isn't caused by gravity. Gravity cause length contraction and time dilation, so one way of looking at is is object following straight paths through curved space and time.

 

that doesn't look much like science ...lol

It is. It has equations and everything.

 

is that Einsteins idea of gravity ?

Yes.

 

the next one is newtons idea of gravity ..

 

at least he is mentioning  some sort of force between these massive bodies ..

 

which is a good thing to think about too ...

Next one? Neither Newton nor Einstein had any idea what causes gravity. Both models only describe it's behaviour, not what creates gravitation.

 

Newton's description doesn't include length contraction and time dilation so only works in relatively low gravity where those effects are negligible.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

First of all , i am sorry ... English is not my first language

 

how does these Einsteins equations looks like ...

 

the only one i am familiar is the E= mc square

 

 

maybe this space fabric is made of 11 dimensions of other curled up space like they say in some documentaries ...

 

maybe that's what that keeps these massive objects in orbits

 

i keep watching these documentaries about string theories :bow:

Link to comment
Share on other sites

how does these Einsteins equations looks like ...

It looks like a complete mess, unless you're used to speaking that language.

 

maybe this space fabric is made of 11 dimensions of other curled up space like they say in some documentaries ...

 

maybe that's what that keeps these massive objects in orbits

 

i keep watching these documentaries about string theories :bow:

String theory is far from proven. You don't need extra dimensions to describe orbits, four's fine. The extra dimensions are to make it compatible with quantum mechanics.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

ok , no problems . something way too advanced for my understanding ...

 

anyway i have decided to refresh some maths from basics with the help of this

 

HELM - Helping Engineers Learn Mathematics - is a major 3-year curriculum development project to support the mathematical education of engineering students. The project is sponsored by the Higher Education Funding Council for England (HEFCE) through phase 4 of the Fund for the Development for Teaching and Learning (FDTL4).

 

http://www.personal.soton.ac.uk/jav/soton/HELM/helm_workbooks.html

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It's not hard to understand when you get used to it. It's just not how we're used to thinking about it so it seems weird to start with.

 

I don't want to discourage you from learning maths but you could understand the equations inside out and still have no understanding of what they describe. It's a different thing entirely. That doesn't mean it isn't worth learning though.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
×
×
  • Create New...