NOTE: THIS WAS SUPPOSED TO BE POSTED FOR THURSDAY, JULY 22ND BUT COULD NOT BE PUBLISHED BECAUSE MY COMPUTER WAS BEING OBNOXIOUS. BEAR WITH ME AS I REPHRASE A FEW THINGS THAT IVE SAID ALREADY. THANKS! - Tuesday, July 27th
P.S.: THERE WERE THREE IMAGES WITH THIS POST THAT DID NOT SUCCESSFULLY BLOG ON HERE. WILL BE UPLOADING IN THE NEAR FUTURE. ONE IS THE LIGHT-CONE, THEN THE FUTURE AND PAST LIGHT-CONE, THEN ANOTHER DIAGRAM.
So, I was sitting at the library with my friend Sam, and I finally made a prioritized list of what I need to scan (or in this case, take a pic of and upload)... What these light cones represent are points, and each of the points within that shaded region of the Future Light Cone represent an event that light will eventually be reaching or affecting, but hasn't yet. As an event occurs, it moves closer toward the center, until it ends up in the Past Light Cone, where the light has already reached and or affected it. The center represents light affecting it at that exact moment.
I was talking to Sam about the fourth dimension, and I figured I should put in here how the dimensions view each other, including the second, first, and zero.
The zero dimension is a point, and apparently it cannot see, because according to the pattern it should be able to view the 'negative one' dimension, which makes no sense at the moment.
The first dimension, which is a line, views things as points.
The second dimension, as in a flat plane, views things as lines.
The third dimension, which is us, views things as flat planes.
The fourth dimension, as in hypercubes and such, views things as three dimension objects.
It's interesting the talk about the fourth dimension because a hypercube is so strange. The way Lisa Randall described it was a bit strange, because for us to view it it would be one cube at a time, not all at once.
If we were to view a hypercube, it would look like a cube inside a larger cube, with the smaller cube expanding to the size of the large one, and a smaller one reappearing inside the cube and expanding to the large cube's size again.
-----------------
Besides alternate dimensions, I was thinking about that Garbage Can Theorem again... Or Excess Energy Theorem. Whatever you want to call it...
I was reading about how Einstein figured there was an 'anti-gravity force' but didn't know what it was that was expanding the universe, and I realized:
If another universe is what's giving us excess matter to expand, then this means that it's not dark energy as defined... Read this quote from Stephen Hawking before you read any more:
"A Brief History In Time", Page 42:
"In Friedmann's model, all the galaxies are moving directly away from each other. The situation is steadily blown up. As the balloon expands, the distance between any two spots increases, but there is no spot that can be said to be the center of the expansion. Moreover, the farther apart the spots are, the faster they will be moving apart. Similarly, in Friedmann's model the speed at which any two galaxies are moving apart in proportional to the distance between them."
This would actually fit my model PERFECTLY.
Because in reality, when you're blowing up a balloon, you can figure out what is making the balloon expand: There's only one entrance to let air in and out.
And in our universe, it could be a white hole coming into our universe from another (which doesn't have to be physically and literally connected, but it would be by an Einstein Rosen Bridge with a black hole somewhere in another universe) spitting out matter and otherwise that fills up space. It could actually be spitting space-time into our universe, (I mean, black holes can even suck up light, so who knows? You can't see if it's swallowing space-time or not..)
The last thing that occured to me at the library today was that Hawking said when the universe was infinitely dense, it was a singularity. But singularities are in black holes today. So isn't that saying that at any time another universe could form inside our own, on a smaller scale???
And if this is the case, then wouldnt that pretty much prove what nikodem poplawski said, about our universe going into the future through time, coming out of a black hole? That would make it concrete, as long as one assumes our universe is the same as others.
That means that we'd be coming out of a black hole in a larger universe, probably similar to our own.
Wow. I may have caught on to something here...
I'm gonna continue with this tomorrow, and probably upload some more pics or something.
Showing posts with label Lisa Randall. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Lisa Randall. Show all posts
Thursday, July 22, 2010
Wednesday, July 21, 2010
Questions on Black Holes and Light...
So, I read a bit more about the alternate dimensions last night, and it's funny, because Stephen Hawking says that it's impossible to visualize the fourth dimension, when Lisa Randall with other theoretical physicists have recently found out how.
Of course, "A Brief History of Time", again, was published in 1989 - 1990.
I am currently getting a TON of books, not only be Hawking, but by Feynmann and some of his lectures, too, to get some variety. Once I'm done with this book, I'm going to read into "The Day Without a Yesterday" (I can't remember the author right now) which was published in 2005. It has to do with Le-something(can't remember his name either)'s work, with all his papers stored in a university in Belgium.
Back to Hawking, what I found was possibly a way to disprove that nothing can go faster than the speed of light. When he was talking about special relativity, Hawking says that this was when Einstein came up with General Relativity, which works with Gravity... The only problem is, no one can really evaluate the formula without having all their own measurements, which is very faulty and not very sufficient.
This leads to a few questions...
Does gravity have a lot to do with what I'm doing?
Yes, it does.
Should I pay more attention to gravity?
Indubitably, yes.
And so, I'm going to study this further, because I feel that there has to be something greater out there than this formula that so many have failed to use, and it seems that there has to be something much more sufficient, accurate, and describes more than just gravity between planetary and solar bodies.
I feel that the formula needs to be tweaked somehow, and can be, but at the moment (for me, at least) there's too many unknowns. I'll have to narrow that down.
Before I can do that, I want to know what each of the symbols mean, because there's one that I'm not really sure what it is. I think it's absolute velocity, but I'm not sure. I'm going to check up on that later.
What I also think is, that there has to be a material out there that can withstand going at speeds faster than light, and that the "light cone" of an event (I just learned about this myself -- you know how everything you can see is because light reflects off of it? a light-cone is a drawing of a three-axis graph that I'll post tomorrow, that's shaped like a cone, and anything outside of the cone cannot exist, apparently.) Isn't a boundary of matter, but everything that we can see. I mean, if you think about it, air that we can't see is being touched by light obviously, but whether it's pitch black or blindingly white, you can't see the air in front of you.
That's why it brings me some questions:
Is everything really affected by light in some way?
I mean, black holes can carry light into their gravitational fields, so that means they must be even more powerful, right?
I am going to continue on this journey through A Brief History in Time, and I'll post some diagrams tomorrow, promise this time.
Of course, "A Brief History of Time", again, was published in 1989 - 1990.
I am currently getting a TON of books, not only be Hawking, but by Feynmann and some of his lectures, too, to get some variety. Once I'm done with this book, I'm going to read into "The Day Without a Yesterday" (I can't remember the author right now) which was published in 2005. It has to do with Le-something(can't remember his name either)'s work, with all his papers stored in a university in Belgium.
Back to Hawking, what I found was possibly a way to disprove that nothing can go faster than the speed of light. When he was talking about special relativity, Hawking says that this was when Einstein came up with General Relativity, which works with Gravity... The only problem is, no one can really evaluate the formula without having all their own measurements, which is very faulty and not very sufficient.
This leads to a few questions...
Does gravity have a lot to do with what I'm doing?
Yes, it does.
Should I pay more attention to gravity?
Indubitably, yes.
And so, I'm going to study this further, because I feel that there has to be something greater out there than this formula that so many have failed to use, and it seems that there has to be something much more sufficient, accurate, and describes more than just gravity between planetary and solar bodies.
I feel that the formula needs to be tweaked somehow, and can be, but at the moment (for me, at least) there's too many unknowns. I'll have to narrow that down.
Before I can do that, I want to know what each of the symbols mean, because there's one that I'm not really sure what it is. I think it's absolute velocity, but I'm not sure. I'm going to check up on that later.
What I also think is, that there has to be a material out there that can withstand going at speeds faster than light, and that the "light cone" of an event (I just learned about this myself -- you know how everything you can see is because light reflects off of it? a light-cone is a drawing of a three-axis graph that I'll post tomorrow, that's shaped like a cone, and anything outside of the cone cannot exist, apparently.) Isn't a boundary of matter, but everything that we can see. I mean, if you think about it, air that we can't see is being touched by light obviously, but whether it's pitch black or blindingly white, you can't see the air in front of you.
That's why it brings me some questions:
Is everything really affected by light in some way?
I mean, black holes can carry light into their gravitational fields, so that means they must be even more powerful, right?
I am going to continue on this journey through A Brief History in Time, and I'll post some diagrams tomorrow, promise this time.
Tuesday, July 20, 2010
In an Infinite Universe, an Infinite Amount of Stars...
So, Hawking came to the conclusion that an infinite universe could not work because we'd have an infinite amount of stars, making the sky blindingly white, all the time, especially at night, because an infinite amount of stars = infinite amount of light. So, this idea was brought down by Einstein and, instead, we now think that the universe has a barrier of some sort, or something to contain it, but that our universe is expanding at an accelerating rate because of dark energy.
This really does make a whole lot of sense considering, even if you said that different stars' lights reached us at different times, the sky would still be bright-white all the time.
Tonight I'm going to read more of it so that I can FINALLY get to the good part about the Special Relativity Formula. I was just getting into it on sunday, when I reached my family reunion, and since then, I haven't had time.
I just got back from a Paw Sox game (unfortunately they lost) :( but it was funny because everyone thought it was a half moon, when it was a Waxing Gibbous tonight. The name origins from "Waxing" meaning "building up" or "growing, and "Gibbous" meaning "almost" as in "almost full" or "almost empty".
Unfortunately, the general population doesn't pay attention to details during seventh grade science class....
But anyways, I've learned a lot about Newton in this book so far (A Brief History of Time).. I've learned that he believed that all the universe and it's matter and materials were just an illusion. When another scientist was told of his opinion, he yelled "It, I refute!" and stubbed his toe on a rock he kicked.
I didn't know Newton's Laws had so many exceptions: This is generally not very well known, and Hawking explains them vividly. This includes his theory of how time worked: That everything was at an absolute rate, relative to absolute time, in an absolute universe. Einstein shot this down when he discovered that when you go near the speed of light, objects contract, and clocks slow down. This explained that time is not absolute: Thus getting rid of the Absolute Universe theory and creating Special Relativity Theory, that the faster matter moves through space, the more mass it gains. Actually, once it goes near the speed of light, the matter can have twice or even 2.5 times the amount of mass it had before. This is quite strange when you think about it.
But when I was thinking about it, wouldn't this explain other dimensions? Going near, at, or even past the speed of light to create a hypercube, then the hypercube comes out of a white hole into the past (which to us is the present, if it was at or past this speed), and the reason we can only view some planes of it is because it is flickering and traveling through our space?
It's an interesting theory... I'll have to give it more thought.
Once again, sleep continues to prevail me, so I will post more tomorrow about alternate dimensions, and possibly even the diagram!
Thanks for the follow, Marshall!
Also, everyone, feel free to 'like' this blog on Facebook!
This really does make a whole lot of sense considering, even if you said that different stars' lights reached us at different times, the sky would still be bright-white all the time.
Tonight I'm going to read more of it so that I can FINALLY get to the good part about the Special Relativity Formula. I was just getting into it on sunday, when I reached my family reunion, and since then, I haven't had time.
I just got back from a Paw Sox game (unfortunately they lost) :( but it was funny because everyone thought it was a half moon, when it was a Waxing Gibbous tonight. The name origins from "Waxing" meaning "building up" or "growing, and "Gibbous" meaning "almost" as in "almost full" or "almost empty".
Unfortunately, the general population doesn't pay attention to details during seventh grade science class....
But anyways, I've learned a lot about Newton in this book so far (A Brief History of Time).. I've learned that he believed that all the universe and it's matter and materials were just an illusion. When another scientist was told of his opinion, he yelled "It, I refute!" and stubbed his toe on a rock he kicked.
I didn't know Newton's Laws had so many exceptions: This is generally not very well known, and Hawking explains them vividly. This includes his theory of how time worked: That everything was at an absolute rate, relative to absolute time, in an absolute universe. Einstein shot this down when he discovered that when you go near the speed of light, objects contract, and clocks slow down. This explained that time is not absolute: Thus getting rid of the Absolute Universe theory and creating Special Relativity Theory, that the faster matter moves through space, the more mass it gains. Actually, once it goes near the speed of light, the matter can have twice or even 2.5 times the amount of mass it had before. This is quite strange when you think about it.
But when I was thinking about it, wouldn't this explain other dimensions? Going near, at, or even past the speed of light to create a hypercube, then the hypercube comes out of a white hole into the past (which to us is the present, if it was at or past this speed), and the reason we can only view some planes of it is because it is flickering and traveling through our space?
It's an interesting theory... I'll have to give it more thought.
Once again, sleep continues to prevail me, so I will post more tomorrow about alternate dimensions, and possibly even the diagram!
Thanks for the follow, Marshall!
Also, everyone, feel free to 'like' this blog on Facebook!
Friday, July 16, 2010
Ideas on Dark Energy, and Two Inspiring People...
Well, I have to say, I did have the pleasure of meeting Doctor John Carlson in person, as my dad publishes (AKA The Necronomicon Press, http://www.necropress.com/) and he is one of our most dedicated customers, who has been buying my father's books since soon after my dad first started publishing, approximately thirty-something years now.
And, when I say this was a pleasure, it was the most enthralling honor I've ever come to receive.
This man, Dr. John Carlson, Ph.D, of The University of Maryland, was not only extremely helpful in answering all of my never-ending questions, but he was all-around a genuinely friendly and respectable person.
(For those of you who are not familiar with him, he is one of the most well-known archaeo-astronomers around the globe.)
Now, during this visit, he did inform me on a number of topics, including black holes, time, space-time, and what he was working on at the moment. He did then tell me of one woman, of whom he said I should look up, because she was doing alot of stuff related to what I was interested in.
So, of course, i go to Amazon, find the book he told me of, and I have just begun to read it.
I would like to share with you all a wonderful few lines from this book that really struck me as 'yes, this is the book I need to read. This is something that I can relate to.'
"When I decided to embark on this project, I envisioned a book that shares the excitement I feel about my work without compromising the presentation of the science. I hoped to convey the fascination of theoretical physics without simplifying the subject deceptively or presenting it as a collection of unchanging, finished monuments to be passively admired. Physics is far more creative and fun than people generally recognize. I wanted to share these aspects with people who hadn't necessarily arrived at this realization on their own." - Preface and Acknowledgements, paragraph 3.
This remarkable woman is named Lisa Randall, and she has written a masterpiece of theoretical and particle physics called "Warped Passages: Unraveling the Mysteries of the Universe's Hidden Dimensions".
And of course, I bought if off Amazon, being only slightly intimidated but also fascinated by the title.
I haven't gotten the chance to read much past page 23, but already it is wonderfully written and I would suggest it to anybody who is interested in the subject.
As far as my projects go, I wanted to further explain the diagram of matter moving through the black hole, the wormhole, and out of the white hole.
I was contemplating this diagram (that I've been drawing over and over since the beginning), and just a couple of weeks ago, I was sitting at my dining room table with my friend Dean, who failed to grasp an interest in the subject, but had decided to try his best to help in any way he could. Dean was tired, but I was not ready to give up... We had only been going at it for about an hour, and I still had plenty of thoughts ready to convene.
So once again, I began drawing the diagram, and all of a sudden, I realized: An Einstein-Rosen bridge may have been completely mis-thought to be a tunnel straight through the middle of a black hole to the center of a white hole, as a direct current, when really, it was the singularity that was the rip in space, meaning that the bridge connecting these two continuums could be in, essentially, an infinite amount of places relative to the first singularity.
And if this is true, this means that we have been going about this all wrong:
It doesn't have to be a straight tunnel, it could be a million light-years away and still the matter would get ther, but instead of going back in time and ending up in the same place, it would end up in a completely different area of space, maybe even in a different galaxy. The possibilities would be endless concerning what an Einstein-Rosen bridge is, eliminating the way we think about space-time tunnels and such. On earth, a tunnel is a straight route to the end, where you come out of a cave. If you go back in through that cave, it is still the same tunnel. These tunnels on earth have a physical limit to where you can go within the tunnel. Either you go forward, or you turn around and go the other way.
But with a seemingly infinite amount of space, and an extensive amount of black holes, how are we to know which are white and which are black?
And the answer could very well be:
That the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate because at the center of our universe (assuming that the universe is finite), there is a massive white hole, filling with all sorts of matter from a completely different universe... That our universe is feeding off of a supermassive black hole in another universe that is shrinking at the same rate we are growing. And this brings some alarm, because couldn't that mean that other universes are feeding off of our suppermassive black holes?
But the only way that could be answered is, how fast is the universe we're feeding off of shrinking? And does it have other supermassive black holes that other universes are feeding off of? And is it feeding off of a supermassive black hole from another universe?
If the rate that universe is shrinking is equivalent to the rate at which ours is growing, the answer would be:
That ours and this other universe are not connected to any others.
If that universe is shrinking faster than ours is growing, that means that there is another universe besides ours, and possibly even more than one other feeding off of it.
If that universe is growing too, this means it is feeding off of a universe at least the size of our universe-squared, giving it an amount of matter directly related to how much matter it has.
These explanations could potentially explain the Dark-Energy expansion, of this energy that is stretching the universe, because dark energy could actually just be raw, fresh energy, newly born from the other universe, or it could be over-used, old, and excess waste from the other universe. We could actually be a universally-sized garbage can of this other universe, for excess energies that it can no longer use to it's benefit, almost like it's a natural selection of that universe to excrete waste through a bridge between two singularities so that it will survive longer; maybe the dark energy is what Hawking radiation turns into over billions of years???
Then again, maybe this dark energy is coming from the other universe because that universe is dieing, and this is what happens when the universe ends: as if the universe excretes excess, overused, and old energies (as stated before), but in actuality the whole entire universe is coming into ours, as it fades away, and it has failed to survive on a universal scale. (If so, total epic fail.)
If we are swallowing up a whole entire other universe, this dark energy would be a total explanation of what this other universe was made of. If we go back in time, to when the universe was not expanding as quickly, we could probably analyze just what dark energy looked like (or seemed to compose of) back then. If anything has changed over billions of years, this means this used to be some sort of beneficial energy that has begun decay, and is ultimately stretching out the universe in its decaying form.
Almost as if another life-form, this other universe may have selected us as its garbage can, because we happened to be the ones attached to it since the dang black hole was formed. Or there was a star purposely formed in that spot to connect to ours just so this universe had somewhere to put its garbage.
The dark energy could have been completely harmless before it began decaying, and could have been surprisingly different. Maybe even some other life forms from this other galaxy is sending all of this old garbage to us, intentionally or not, just because, I mean, it's a black hole. It's supposed to be endless, right?
Oh boy, I just thought all this science up as I went along, after I began talking about how the singularity opposite the first one in the black hole could be anywhere.I could not be happier with the results of this post, and I can't wait to think up more next time!
And, when I say this was a pleasure, it was the most enthralling honor I've ever come to receive.
This man, Dr. John Carlson, Ph.D, of The University of Maryland, was not only extremely helpful in answering all of my never-ending questions, but he was all-around a genuinely friendly and respectable person.
(For those of you who are not familiar with him, he is one of the most well-known archaeo-astronomers around the globe.)
Now, during this visit, he did inform me on a number of topics, including black holes, time, space-time, and what he was working on at the moment. He did then tell me of one woman, of whom he said I should look up, because she was doing alot of stuff related to what I was interested in.
So, of course, i go to Amazon, find the book he told me of, and I have just begun to read it.
I would like to share with you all a wonderful few lines from this book that really struck me as 'yes, this is the book I need to read. This is something that I can relate to.'
"When I decided to embark on this project, I envisioned a book that shares the excitement I feel about my work without compromising the presentation of the science. I hoped to convey the fascination of theoretical physics without simplifying the subject deceptively or presenting it as a collection of unchanging, finished monuments to be passively admired. Physics is far more creative and fun than people generally recognize. I wanted to share these aspects with people who hadn't necessarily arrived at this realization on their own." - Preface and Acknowledgements, paragraph 3.
This remarkable woman is named Lisa Randall, and she has written a masterpiece of theoretical and particle physics called "Warped Passages: Unraveling the Mysteries of the Universe's Hidden Dimensions".
And of course, I bought if off Amazon, being only slightly intimidated but also fascinated by the title.
I haven't gotten the chance to read much past page 23, but already it is wonderfully written and I would suggest it to anybody who is interested in the subject.
As far as my projects go, I wanted to further explain the diagram of matter moving through the black hole, the wormhole, and out of the white hole.
I was contemplating this diagram (that I've been drawing over and over since the beginning), and just a couple of weeks ago, I was sitting at my dining room table with my friend Dean, who failed to grasp an interest in the subject, but had decided to try his best to help in any way he could. Dean was tired, but I was not ready to give up... We had only been going at it for about an hour, and I still had plenty of thoughts ready to convene.
So once again, I began drawing the diagram, and all of a sudden, I realized: An Einstein-Rosen bridge may have been completely mis-thought to be a tunnel straight through the middle of a black hole to the center of a white hole, as a direct current, when really, it was the singularity that was the rip in space, meaning that the bridge connecting these two continuums could be in, essentially, an infinite amount of places relative to the first singularity.
And if this is true, this means that we have been going about this all wrong:
It doesn't have to be a straight tunnel, it could be a million light-years away and still the matter would get ther, but instead of going back in time and ending up in the same place, it would end up in a completely different area of space, maybe even in a different galaxy. The possibilities would be endless concerning what an Einstein-Rosen bridge is, eliminating the way we think about space-time tunnels and such. On earth, a tunnel is a straight route to the end, where you come out of a cave. If you go back in through that cave, it is still the same tunnel. These tunnels on earth have a physical limit to where you can go within the tunnel. Either you go forward, or you turn around and go the other way.
But with a seemingly infinite amount of space, and an extensive amount of black holes, how are we to know which are white and which are black?
And the answer could very well be:
That the universe is expanding at an accelerating rate because at the center of our universe (assuming that the universe is finite), there is a massive white hole, filling with all sorts of matter from a completely different universe... That our universe is feeding off of a supermassive black hole in another universe that is shrinking at the same rate we are growing. And this brings some alarm, because couldn't that mean that other universes are feeding off of our suppermassive black holes?
But the only way that could be answered is, how fast is the universe we're feeding off of shrinking? And does it have other supermassive black holes that other universes are feeding off of? And is it feeding off of a supermassive black hole from another universe?
If the rate that universe is shrinking is equivalent to the rate at which ours is growing, the answer would be:
That ours and this other universe are not connected to any others.
If that universe is shrinking faster than ours is growing, that means that there is another universe besides ours, and possibly even more than one other feeding off of it.
If that universe is growing too, this means it is feeding off of a universe at least the size of our universe-squared, giving it an amount of matter directly related to how much matter it has.
These explanations could potentially explain the Dark-Energy expansion, of this energy that is stretching the universe, because dark energy could actually just be raw, fresh energy, newly born from the other universe, or it could be over-used, old, and excess waste from the other universe. We could actually be a universally-sized garbage can of this other universe, for excess energies that it can no longer use to it's benefit, almost like it's a natural selection of that universe to excrete waste through a bridge between two singularities so that it will survive longer; maybe the dark energy is what Hawking radiation turns into over billions of years???
Then again, maybe this dark energy is coming from the other universe because that universe is dieing, and this is what happens when the universe ends: as if the universe excretes excess, overused, and old energies (as stated before), but in actuality the whole entire universe is coming into ours, as it fades away, and it has failed to survive on a universal scale. (If so, total epic fail.)
If we are swallowing up a whole entire other universe, this dark energy would be a total explanation of what this other universe was made of. If we go back in time, to when the universe was not expanding as quickly, we could probably analyze just what dark energy looked like (or seemed to compose of) back then. If anything has changed over billions of years, this means this used to be some sort of beneficial energy that has begun decay, and is ultimately stretching out the universe in its decaying form.
Almost as if another life-form, this other universe may have selected us as its garbage can, because we happened to be the ones attached to it since the dang black hole was formed. Or there was a star purposely formed in that spot to connect to ours just so this universe had somewhere to put its garbage.
The dark energy could have been completely harmless before it began decaying, and could have been surprisingly different. Maybe even some other life forms from this other galaxy is sending all of this old garbage to us, intentionally or not, just because, I mean, it's a black hole. It's supposed to be endless, right?
Oh boy, I just thought all this science up as I went along, after I began talking about how the singularity opposite the first one in the black hole could be anywhere.I could not be happier with the results of this post, and I can't wait to think up more next time!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)