It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

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

Thank you.

 

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

 

Are physicists just making up dark energy?

page: 3
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 07:05 AM
link   

Originally posted by Doc Velocity

And, yes, they DO rely too much on their limited technology and not enough on their own common sense and awareness.

— Doc Velocity

Huh? How exactly are you going to deduce the fundamental nature of the Universe through "common sense and awareness"? Can you see atomic with your eyes? Or say "Well, if I drop a marble it falls to the floor and make a KLANG! sound, so it's only common sense that atoms must behave like marbles"?




posted on Aug, 12 2010 @ 08:24 AM
link   

Originally posted by john_bmth
Huh? How exactly are you going to deduce the fundamental nature of the Universe through "common sense and awareness"? Can you see atomic with your eyes? Or say "Well, if I drop a marble it falls to the floor and make a KLANG! sound, so it's only common sense that atoms must behave like marbles"?
Exactly, applying common sense may work reasonably well for things as large as a grain of sand and larger, but at a subatomic level and smaller, as far as I can tell, common sense doesn't apply at all, just the opposite in fact. Our observations of the quantum world seem to contradict our perception of "common sense" in the macro world.

You don't have to like that, and apparently some people don't like it, but it is what it is.



posted on Aug, 13 2010 @ 03:32 AM
link   
Dark energy may have been invented to rescue up a scientist’s favorite security blanket, conservation of energy, from the garbage truck, but it just happens to be a cornerstone of my own Fractal Foam Model of Universes. And I wasn’t even aware of the term “dark energy” until my model was nearly complete.

I was looking for ways to revise the Fatio-Lesage model of gravity, which doesn’t add up mathematically. (If you’re not familiar with Fatio-Lesage, read about it.) I had already conceived the idea that the cosmic foam of our universe is the ether foam of a super-universe, and the ether foam of our universe is the cosmic foam of a sub-universe. What follows is a much-abbreviated account of my thought process over a period of weeks:


What if gravitons are waves instead of particles? Pressure waves are faster than shear waves. If light is a shear wave, and gravity is many times faster than light, then perhaps gravity is transmitted via pressure waves.

Where do pressure waves come from? Bubbles of expanding foam pop; you can hear them popping because they radiate pressure waves. The popping of ether-foam bubbles must the source of the pressure wave. When a bubble pops, one bubble becomes two; that’s in increase in the number of bubbles. More bubbles mean more space; so for space to expand, bubbles must un-pop. Bubbles un-popping goes against the flow of entropy … unless the arrow of time reverses from one universe to the next. So that’s it! Expansion of space in the sub-universe pops bubbles of the sub-universe’s cosmic foam, which is the ether foam of our universe. Pressure waves radiate in the cosmic foam of the sub-universe. Due to time inversion, from our perspective, those same pressure waves converge to a point where an ether-foam bubble un-pops, adding about 10^-105 m³ of new space to our universe. And that is what drives the expansion of our space.


Since then, I have figured out that everything in our universe is a chaotic mix of shear waves and pressure waves. All the forces result from exchange of momentum between the two types of waves. Particles consist of pairs or groups of shear waves orbiting one another at the speed of light, which converts the shear waves’ energy to the rest mass of the particle.



new topics
 
3
<< 1  2   >>

log in

join