Dwarf Galaxies Call Standard Model Into Question

page: 7
7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join

posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 12:00 PM
link   
Vacuum creation of particles in free space followed by annihilation has never been observed.

Firstly the best vacuum created on Earth is something like 10^-12 mbar... at Room temperature this works out at about 10^10 particles per cubic meter.

This is not exactly vacuum, and besides, in order to measure the location of said particle when it is created you require there to be some detector material. Thus such an experiment would not be in vacuum at all.




posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 12:08 PM
link   
lemme put it this way:
if youd compare the energy contained in a certain volume of "theoretically" empty space, and a solid block of a material of your choice the same size, the space would have a crapload magnitutes more energy than a lossfree conversion of said block of matter(excluding the ammount of energy provided by the QF allso present in that volume) into energy.

so you have something you have a whole lot of, and something that makes a compareable tiny part of the whole in total.
how is it logical to assume that the tiny, instead of the compareably absolutely huge part, is the driving factor?

this doesent really sound plausible to me.

/edit: btw, big bang and stuff. there was no "matter" in the beginning, right?
its more likely that matter is just a byproduct of space and the QF contained within.
edit on 26-6-2014 by Dolour because: couldnt resist...



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 01:04 PM
link   
a reply to: ErosA433

exactly what I think as well !
edit on 26-6-2014 by KrzYma because: (no reason given)



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 01:10 PM
link   
a reply to: Dolour



even if you could remove all matter from it, space would still be full of all kinds of frequencies we refer to as quantum fluctuations. and you cant get rid of THAT by any means.


sure, but not before Big Bang




if youd compare the energy contained in a certain volume of "theoretically" empty space, and a solid block of a material of your choice the same size, the space would have a crapload magnitutes more energy than a lossfree conversion of said block of matter(excluding the ammount of energy provided by the QF allso present in that volume) into energy.


and how do you know that? math again, right? calculus in a theory...



posted on Jun, 26 2014 @ 04:32 PM
link   

originally posted by: KrzYma
sure, but not before Big Bang

when no matter existed either.


and how do you know that? math again, right? calculus in a theory...

well if you deny uncertainty, wich is accounted to QF...

/edit: (bc im in a good mood) id like to point out that the concept of frequency being the origin of everything is found throughout the globe.
in the hindu-religion kali "roared" the univere into existance.
the bible claims, in beginning there was the "word" of god.
the examples are numerous...
edit on 26-6-2014 by Dolour because: couldnt resist...



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 03:06 AM
link   
a reply to: Dolour

I deny uncertainty because of why it was invented

EM wave is not a particle, it has length and direction
Making a point photon of it takes those properties away and uncertainty is created.

You however need it in your point Universe mathematical expressions.

BTW: I do not deny the quantize structure of Universe, I deny only dualities, probabilities and spontaneous creation



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 03:12 AM
link   
this throws it more into question if you ask me:

phys.org...

essentially we may have the speed of light wrong. if we do all theories derived from it in any way as well as measurement of stellar distances and so forth have to be adjusted or even discarded.



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 03:14 AM
link   

originally posted by: ErosA433
Vacuum creation of particles in free space followed by annihilation has never been observed.

Firstly the best vacuum created on Earth is something like 10^-12 mbar... at Room temperature this works out at about 10^10 particles per cubic meter.

This is not exactly vacuum, and besides, in order to measure the location of said particle when it is created you require there to be some detector material. Thus such an experiment would not be in vacuum at all.


that type of vacuum has nothing to do with the quantum vacuum.



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 08:37 AM
link   

originally posted by: KrzYma
I deny uncertainty because of why it was invented

i really dont care for the "intend", only the result.
nuclear power wasnt "intended" to be abused as weapon either...



EM wave is not a particle, it has length and direction
Making a point photon of it takes those properties away and uncertainty is created.

any explanation of why the accepted, and mind baffling concept of duality of wave and particle needs to be overthrown?
only bc a laserpointer experiment causing an interference pattern?
since one could argue quite alot of reasons, like since you force the photon one or another way, it chooses to act wavelike before interacting with your obstacle...


You however need it in your point Universe mathematical expressions.

far, far from correct.
i need it bc microchips have prooven certain quantum effects to exist.
did you know your smartphone wouldnt work without the considerance of tunneled electrons?
...wich leads to how the observed(! im not talking believe, but experiments implying the conclusion) tunnel effect is explainable if not through uncertainty?


BTW: I do not deny the quantize structure of Universe, I deny only dualities, probabilities and spontaneous creation

i dont think its spontaneous at all, we just dont understand the mechanic behind it.

mircochip development has pretty much shown that propabilities are a factor that needs to be considered, when planning a circuit with structural broadness of only a couple nanometers.
i dont know the cause, but i wouldnt be so fast dismissing it, due to the weired effects observed.
edit on 27-6-2014 by Dolour because: moar typos



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 10:40 AM
link   

originally posted by: ErosA433
a reply to: Nochzwei

Just appears to me that time dilation effects that are already known would be in effect and you can calculate it as is already known.

The universes clock as measured in terms of frequency shift, I am not sure what would be different to the older GR determination of the experiment.

I suspect lifting by 1 meter would not give any kind of frequency shift that is measurable beyond the systematics of the experiment. The other thing here is that there are lasers around the world that are tuned to hyperfine splittings, allowing them to be used to selectively ionize an isotope of interest, where it can then be collected.

These are some of the most accurately frequency tuned lasers that exist, or at least a very good benchmark... I don't think that height differences between the different sites that perform this, is really a factor in the tuning... as i suspect any effect is extremely small, if there is an effect at all.
If you assume for approximation purposes that, the earth is a homogeneous sphere. Now if you draw time compression curves as a series of concentric circles from the surface closely bunched together near the surface and gradually with greater annular space as you go up and place the light source on the different curves. Since the light source is moving thru space and this movement is highly complex, since earth spins about its axis, the earth around the sun, the sun in turn around the galaxies center, and maybe he galaxy also sins around its central axis. What may be true for a freq measurement at one instant in time ( date ,hour, year) may be different from other. Furthermore this will be true for earth, yet different for other planets and stars in the galaxy.



posted on Jun, 27 2014 @ 10:47 AM
link   
a reply to: Dolour



any explanation of why the accepted, and mind baffling concept of duality of wave and particle needs to be overthrown?


because wave is a wave and not a particle



i need it bc microchips have prooven certain quantum effects to exist. did you know your smartphone wouldnt work without the considerance of tunneled electrons?


why do a transistor works...
is it quantum mathematics or electric property of semiconductor material ?
(jump to 19:25)





new topics
top topics
 
7
<< 4  5  6   >>

log in

join