It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Are the Laws of Physics Unique to Our Universe? (A Galaxy Classic)

page: 2
<< 1   >>

log in


posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 01:11 AM

Originally posted by Astyanax

I found your post amusing, probably because my views are the exact opposite of yours.

Why do you think 'our version of physics' is purely local? Our telescopes show us a universe in which distant objects seem, by and large, to obey the laws of physics we have derived from our observations of more local phenomena. This suggests that the laws in question are universal.

Besides, what explanation would you give for a gravitational constant that varied over different tracts of spacetime, or a speed of light in vacuo that varied at different points in space? How about a reversible thermodynamics? Is there some place in the universe where entropy goes backwards?

What processes could you conceive of that would give rise to such phenomena?

In another universe, such as the ones that Smolin posits unfolding from black holes, it is quite reasonable to suspect that the laws of physics would differ from those we know--but that's another universe. We don't know of the existence of any such universes and it is quite likely that we never can know of them. But even assuming they do exist, describing the immensity of space and time we inhabit as 'local' seems a little excessive.

As to the notion that black holes are portals to somewhere else, it wasn't inspired by the Disney film; on the contrary, that notion inspired the film. Mass-energy falling into a black hole and passing beyond the hole's event horizon does, indeed, leave the universe. This is central to the theory of black holes. We can't knowledgeably answer the question 'where does it go?', not even by answering 'somewhere else', since we don't know that for sure, but it seems a likely hypothesis, no? If it isn't here, chances are it's somewhere else.

I agree with you, and like your last paragraph but I do think we will be able to "see" other universes at one point and time in the upcoming future. I don't mean see with our eyes but we will have evidence that it exists. I like the idea of black holes fueling other universes because just like everything else in our universe that means we are connected to absolutely everything, and to me that is the most important thing for humans to think about.

As for a reversal of thermodynamics, and entropy going backwards, it may sound insane but really there are lots of things that happen in current time and 100 years ago you would have been burned by a church if you thought them possible. Science constantly changes and will continue to do so, so I think the most open mind possible is the best way to approach any new subject.

The concept of time is something that messes with my head as time really does not matter. If you were to study gravitational effects of the sun on the Earth and watched it for years going round and round, and then reversed it it would look exactly the same. Time is nothing and imaginary time is actually used in a lot of physics equations.

So, could entropy go backwards? Possibly.

I think to have a closed mind (not saying you do
) is a bad thing and I notice that many, many of today's scientists are too closed minded, and to me that holds them back. You cannot solve a problem with the exact same way of thinking, because that's what gave you the problem to begin with.
So scientists have to start thinking outside the box, because that is what all the big boys, who have advance our thinking have done.

Thanks for the post


posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 09:30 PM

Originally posted by predator0187
I notice that many, many of today's scientists are too closed minded...

Are you speaking from personal experience? Are you well acquainted with 'many, many' scientists--well enough to judge how open-minded they are?

Or are you simply expressing your opinion as a layman, based on your understanding of science and scientists whom you have never met?

posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:14 PM
reply to post by Astyanax

No certainly not, My mother is a professor at a university in our city, and I have also sat in on a lot of courses that I personally do not take. I like to learn about different things because they all help you in the long run. I have met my fair share of PHD's and to me a lot are close minded.

Also quite a few enjoy their jobs strictly for the pay and do not try and keep up on their field of research. It is sad when a scientist does not enjoy and find his/her work exciting as it makes their career not worthwhile.

So yeah I know quite a few scientists, I can promise you that. I was just stating a fact that I was paying attention to how much they keep up.

I also notice that the topic of extraterrestrial life they completely dismiss because there is no "concrete" evidence. And, while I agree nothing concrete is there, there are quite a few things in science that are not "concrete," and yet we still teach and learn about them. I just do not understand why some scientists are so close minded.


posted on Jan, 23 2010 @ 10:27 PM
The Law of Gravity.
Do we know what gravity is.
Is it ether pressure.
Maxwell's Laws of Electrodynamics.
He is missing a lot for ether pressure waves.

posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 02:14 AM

Originally posted by predator0187
I have met my fair share of PHD's and to me a lot are close minded... quite a few enjoy their jobs strictly for the pay and do not try and keep up on their field of research. It is sad when a scientist does not enjoy and find his/her work exciting as it makes their career not worthwhile.

Sad? It's a damn' tragedy. But science is no different from any other profession; salarymen and dull functionaries make up the bulk of it.

I would, however, contest the view that scientists are, as a group, less open to new ideas than the average person. And I am quite certain that the best and most dedicated scientists are not just ready but eager to consider new ideas and possibilities. In that sense, you could not expect to meet more open-minded people.

But scientists do take the dissecting-kit of reason* to every concept they encounter, and anything that doesn't stand up to scrutiny is dismissed forthwith. This is, of course, entirely right and proper; but it does annoy less intelligent or well-educated people, who can't understand how their pet theory can be so quickly picked apart and tossed away.

I also notice that the topic of extraterrestrial life they completely dismiss because there is no "concrete" evidence.

Perhaps this has been your experience, but it is by no means universal. On the whole, the scientists I've discussed the matter with (mostly physics and electronics types) have been open to the idea. Biologists seem a little bit less so, which I think comes from their greater understanding of the amazing complexity and contingency of life as it has evolved on Earth.

Don't forget that the first person to question seriously why we haven't been visited by aliens was a physicist, and a very famous one: Enrico Fermi, way back in 1950. Fermi's Paradox

And, as you know, astronomers continue to search the skies for traces of life, particularly intelligent life. Some believe they are close to finding it.

There are people on this site who hate and fear science and scientists (for reasons a psychiatrist would probably be better equipped to explain than I am). These people are often eager to characterize science as a church with its own doctrine and priesthood, projecting onto it the wilful blindness of a religious institution. I believe we should refrain from encouraging such unhappy and potentially dangerous folk in their delusions.


*This is the kit that includes Occam's famous Razor

[edit on 25/1/10 by Astyanax]

posted on Jan, 25 2010 @ 08:57 PM
reply to post by Astyanax

I agree with no matter what there are people that are just going to be there for the paycheck, and some well-educated people make damn good money.

I also agree with the analogy of people vs scientists. I just think we have to think outside the box in order to progress. I also do not mean all scientists are close minded, and well, that might be a strong word, I just think scientists imaginations are what have progressed us this far.

I understand the whole reasoning point in that is what tells us to go down the route of investigation that we are usually on, I just think expanding our route couldn't hurt. Just like quantum we should be everywhere.

I have met a few scientists who tend to agree that life might be possible but I just find the majority don't. It is good to hear that you know quite a few that do, that's great.

I also know about the Fermi Paradox in that why haven't we seen them, but again whose to say we haven't. Just because we know how the Earth has made life doesn't mean that is the way the whole universe would have made it. They could be anywhere and right underneath our noses.

I also cannot stand people that dislike science, to me they are the biggest hypocrites of all because our whole world at this point is surrounded by scientific breakthroughs. Unless those people that dislike science that are living in caves they should not say anything.

Science should be what we invest the most time and money in, as that is our only future (other than destruction.) Science will save us, as it has many of times in history and science will take us many places that we have never been before. As we keep progressing we will see what the true potential is and I'm excited.

I also think those who hate science are usually religious people who think that we are all evil because we can see the world without god. Not to say all scientists think the same way, But as you stated before we have to have some sort of reasoning to think something and well there is nothing (to me) that even resembles the god from any religion.

People's biggest fears are of things they don't understand, (although I am petrified of spiders) but a lot of people do not even take time to look into things before they dismiss them. I have had many people argue evolution with me and when I ask if they have ever read/watched/learned anything on the subject they say no. Well how can you possibly have a viewpoint on something you have no idea about?

Same kind of things about religion, my whole family thinks I am a nutcase because I am an atheist. They always tell me about hell and such, and that if I do not believe that's where I am going, but when I ask if any of them ever read the bible the consensus is "no." I think it is funny that I have read the bible and my religious family members have not.
I think the bible is the best showing for atheism there is.

Sorry didn't really mean to turn this into a religious thing.

I understand what your saying and am glad that you know more open-minded people, I was just saying that if all scientists were open minded I think we would be much further in our endeavors then we are now.
We seem to have similar thoughts (I'm not sure about the religious thing as that is kind of new to this topic) and I am happy to have met someone intelligent with an open mind. See you made my Monday.



top topics
<< 1   >>

log in