The Naked Scientists
  • Login
  • Register
  • Podcasts
      • The Naked Scientists
      • eLife
      • Naked Genetics
      • Naked Astronomy
      • In short
      • Naked Neuroscience
      • Ask! The Naked Scientists
      • Question of the Week
      • Archive
      • Video
      • SUBSCRIBE to our Podcasts
  • Articles
      • Science News
      • Features
      • Interviews
      • Answers to Science Questions
  • Get Naked
      • Donate
      • Do an Experiment
      • Science Forum
      • Ask a Question
  • About
      • Meet the team
      • Our Sponsors
      • Site Map
      • Contact us

User menu

  • Login
  • Register
  • Home
  • Help
  • Search
  • Tags
  • Member Map
  • Recent Topics
  • Login
  • Register
  1. Naked Science Forum
  2. Profile of Soul Surfer
  3. Show Posts
  4. Topics
  • Profile Info
    • Summary
    • Show Stats
    • Show Posts
      • Messages
      • Topics
      • Attachments
      • Thanked Posts
      • Posts Thanked By User
    • Show User Topics
      • User Created
      • User Participated In

Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

  • Messages
  • Topics
  • Attachments
  • Thanked Posts
  • Posts Thanked By User

Topics - Soul Surfer

Pages: [1] 2
1
New Theories / Are we living in an Episodic Cyclic Cosmology?
« on: 21/03/2021 15:33:51 »
Are we in a Recycled Universe?
 
A new approach to solving "the antimatter problem" in our big bang cosmology opens the gate to the possibility of an Episodic Cyclic Cosmology
 

 
Introducing Antimatter
Let us first look at antimatter.  Every matter particle has its antimatter partner some neutral particles like photons can be their own antimatter partners .  When an antimatter particle meets and interacts with its matter particle the only thing that comes out if the interaction is pure energy in the form of a pair of photons, that is, no massive particles all the mass has been concerted back to energy. 
 
The most familiar particle is the electron. This is a light negatively charged particle.   Its antimatter partner is the positron a positively charged particle with exactly the same mass,  it also has exactly the opposite spin and one more important feature.  The electron is travelling normally through time, depending on its velocity, but the positron is moving backwards through time.  This is the result of strict   Charge Parity Time (CPT)  symmetry. This is the most fundamental and as yet unbroken symmetry in the universe.
 
The reverse process is also possible.  When a high energy particle interacts violently with another particle new massive particles can be created.  This happens in the earth's atmosphere when high energy cosmic rays produce intense showers of electrons and positrons. it is also the process used to investigate particles using high energy physics experiments like the Large Hadron Collider and its precursor,  the Large Electron Positron Collider which produced intense showers of particles and their antiparticles of all types by simply colliding an electron and a positron head on at an extremely high energy.    The important factor is that every particle is always created together with its antiparticle.
 
The Serious Antimatter problem in Cosmology
 
The antimatter problem in our current well accepted "big bang" cosmology is the fact that when energy is converted into matter by particle interactions at high energy, the matter is always created in matter-antimatter particle pairs, that is there are always equal quantities of matter and antimatter created during the initial stages of particle creation from the pure energy of the initial state. 
 
This is usually "explained away" by saying there must be some sort of broken symmetry between matter and antimatter under the initial conditions. However no hint of this  exists at the limit of current high energy physics. It is also true in theoretical physics the currently highly precise equations of quantum electrodynamics, which proved the existence of antimatter in the first place back in 1928, tell us that this broken symmetry does not exist.
 
This symmetry breaking idea is in some way understandable because of the success of Theoretical Physics in explaining the current standard model of particle theory in terms of gauge symmetries and symmetry breaking in the strong and weak interaction fields all the way up to thew most recently discovered Higgs Boson which gives the particles their masses and links togerther the strong and weak interactions with the electromagnetic interaction
 
The Two part universe proposed
 
In 2020 Neil Turock of the Perimeter Institute in Canada a highly respected area of fundamental theoretical Physics studies suggested that the problem could be solved without breaking the CPT symmetry if, when our big bang expansion of a matter universe happened, at the same time it created a collapsing antimatter universe containing this unwanted antimatter to be bound up in a singularity and hidden from us.  That is our expanding universe of matter also contains a collapsing universe of antimatter hidden within itself.  It is again useful to note that the converse with an expanding universe of antimatter and a collapsing universe of matter might also be true.
  here is a youtube video of the presentation note it is more than one hour long.
 
The extension of the concept to form a cyclic cosmology
 
Let us look again at this "two part universe" and consider what happens when matter collapses under its self gravity.
Several important facts are known and accepted.
 
  • A great deal of gravitational energy is released.   This is the fundamental process that creates new stars by the gravitational collapse of cold matter. 
  • If this collapse goes beyond clearly defined limits an event horizon forms and the collapsing material is for ever cut off from the universe in which the collapse takes place.
  • There is no reason to believe that the physical laws change significantly across the event horizon because even in the most violent black hole creation that of the smallest possible black holes by the symmetrical collapse of a star compressing its neutron star core into a black hole the conditions are much milder than those explored by the LHC which is claimed to explore the physics right down to fractions of a nanosecond after the initiation of the big bang.
  • The collapse of material towards the theoretical singularity can release an infinite amount of energy. This is essentially accepted and seldom stated during the description of black hole formation and it is generally assumed but not stated that something would prevent this from happening
  • Quantum mechanical interactions including those creating and destroying matter are time symmetrical  that is the direction of the arrow of time can be reversed without any change.  On this basis a full reverse of the basic arrow of time causality as an event horizon is crossed is plausible.
  • This creates the possibility that the gravitational collapse of material in an antimatter universe could in effect create and drive the expansion of a new matter universe at least as large and complex as ours. 
We have therefore created a physical reason for the start of a big bang universe and also the possibility of a cyclic process for the origin and development of universes whereby part of an older universe during its life creates new universes. 
 
I will call this process an Episodic Cyclic Cosmology (ECC) alternatively you could include the concept of the big bang cosmology with in the name by calling it an Episodic Cyclic Big Bang Cosmology  (ECBBC). However I personally prefer the former because of its greater simplicity and also because the concept of an explosion in this model is completely denied because the process may take place very quickly but it is one of cooling by the creation of a vast quantity of new matter together with cooling by the expansion of a new universe and avoids the need for arbitrary cosmic inflation processes.
 
Looking further at the collapse inside the event horizon of a rotating black hole
 
It is known and accepted that inside an event horizon space becomes "time like"  and time becomes multidimensional and "space like"  a good reference for this is the work of Roger Penrose  a good well established reference book is his book "The Road To Reality" tis book also covers several other aspects of this paper.
 
The probability that a collapsing black hole has absolutely no angular momentum is vanishingly small so all black holes are in fact Kerr black holes.  It has been proved that these collapse to form a ring singularity 
 
This is therefore a universe with a single ring dimension of space and three slightly extended dimensions of time during the collapse so it fits the requirement  Max Tegmark's chart for a universe with one dimensions of space and three dimensions of time where space and time have been exchanged.
 
I would now like to quote from a paper published in 1997 by Max Tegmark  He is another well respected and innovative thinker in the field of cosmology. 
“On the dimensionality of space-time”      By Max Tegmark   http://space.mit.edu/home/tegmark/dimensions.pdf
 

* Stable Spacetime_dimensionality.jpg (90.24 kB . 600x600 - viewed 2451 times)

Abstract. Some superstring theories have more than one effective low-energy limit corresponding to classical spacetimes with different dimensionalities. We argue that all but the (3 + 1)-dimensional one might correspond to ‘dead worlds’, devoid of observers, in which case all such ensemble theories would actually predict that we should find ourselves inhabiting a (3 + 1)-dimensional spacetime. With more or less than one time dimension, the partial differential equations of nature would lack the hyperbolicity property that enables observers to make predictions. In a space with more than three dimensions, there can be no traditional atoms and perhaps no stable structures. A space with less than three dimensions allows no gravitational force and may be too simple and barren to contain observers.
 

Additional notes
The "We are here" box in the space time dimensionality diagram shows our normal three dimensions of space and one of time 
 
The chart also shows a second area for a long lived predictable universe.   One with three dimensions of Time and one of space!  This universe is populated only by what he calls Tachyons. 

Now Tachyons are particles that always travel faster than light or backwards in time.  This could be seen as another way of describing antimatter.  So what we have is an antimatter dominated universe that has a single dimension of space and three complex dimensions of time. 

This is a specification of the later stages of a Kerr black hole containing a single dimensional ring singularity space dimension and three complex time dimensions opened up by the gravitational gradients.  This would be formed form the collapsing inside a black hole in an antimatter dominated large universe,
 
Confirming evidence of this going back nearly one century
 
In 1928  the creation and solution of the Dirac equation of the electron and the start of quantum electrodynamics required the existence of antimatter.  This equation is the most accurately known and accepted in all of physics.  Dirac said that this antimatter universe must be (virtually) fully populated with particles or our matter particles would be continually collapsing into it because of the requirements of Fermi Dirac Statistics.  The existence of antimatter in the form of the positron was proved experimentally around the same time.
 
This is also seen in the mathematics. It has been known for some time that the mathematics of the vast number of possible string theories allows for the concept of tachyons and other so called "ghost" particles that are essentially undetectable and but the possible link with antimatter has not been proposed to my knowledge.  This problem has again been largely swept under the carpet.
 
This gives very clear support going back many years for Neil Turok's proposal for a "balancing" collapsing antimatter universe. hidden in our own universe.
 
Where is this collapsing half universe of antimatter?
 
True Einsteinian relativity only applies to situations of infinite time and space.   Our universe is not infinite in time or space because it started at a particular instant in time (I will call this instant Now!) and our horizons are limited by the velocity of light.  We cannot define a location for the instant Now! because this is the origin of our space but we can know our velocity with respect to the cosmic Microwave Background because of its extreme uniformity of temperature and by virtue of the  the true velocity of all radiating objects in the universe could in theory be measured.
 
It follows that the multidimensional aspects of time are locked in this instant Now!  in the form of its compactified tiny ring singularity.   This instant is totally unobservable because the moment you move away from it, the limited velocity of light hides it from you.  This instant that is held in common by every particle within the universe wherever it is and however it is moving. 
 
In effect it contains as much mass (or mass energy) as our whole universe because every matter particle existing at any instant in the universe has its antimatter counterpart in this instant.  Conversely the few antimatter particles in our universe have matter particles in the instant Now! There is one interesting exception to this.  Most of the neutrinos in our universe are called antineutrinos to balance the weak interaction process so most of the neutrinos in Now! will be neutrinos.
 
Interesting Results in other areas if this concept is valid
 
Our universe has been measured to contain  5% Normal Matter  27%  Dark (gravitational interactions only) matter and 68% Dark energy
 
Firstly it explains most of the dark energy that must be in the universe because the moment Now! contains 50% of total mass and energy of the universe this leaves around 18% dark energy in our part of the universe.
 
The possibility of having all particle properties linked via the moment Now! in a common multidimensional time goes a long way towards providing a simple and understandable explanations of some of the mysteries of entanglement an superposition in quantum particles and may even open new doors into quantum computing approaches.
 
The favoured Symmetries of string theory  called E8xE8 also suffer from undetectable "ghost" particles like the Dirac electron quoted earlier they also require large numbers of dimensions
 
Quantum theory and cyclic processes like waves and orbits are best treated using complex numbers which splits each number into an amplitude and a phase in the repetitive cycle of the orbital or wave the total dimensionality is therefore twice the number of dimensions less on for a uniform real episodic time dimension the three dimensions of space give six complex dimensions and the two free complex dimensions of time in the moment Now! give another four making a total of eleven.  The remaining time dimension is the episodic causal and reversible time dimension that is defined by the common moment Now!
 
This reversal of the effective direction of time as we switch between the matter dominated large universe and the antimatter dominated large universe resolves the thermodynamic and information related problems of cyclic universes.
 
This recycling matter/antimatter alternate universe model offers the possibility of defining what the cosmological constant is and how it develops over time.
 
One important factor must not be forgotten whilst the  black hole implies a collapse to the limit singularity in a finite time.  The Kerr collapse is different. The initial collapse under an inverse square law releases energy at a rate equal to the reciprocal of the radius of the gravitating mass as in the Scwartschild case but as the temperature cools by matter creation and the gradual reduction in particle interactions by the establishment of the ring (or toroidal surface singularity) the dominating dimensionality of the energy release will reduce initially towards a two dimensional gravitational field which releases energy at a logarithmic rate but still tends to infinity in extremis. and finally will reach a limit in the planar approximation of a toroidal surface where the interactions become linear and there is no further release of energy.
 
By way of additional explanation,  the inverse square law of gravity and electrostatic fields is due to them being three dimensional.  This is because the energy spreading ion three dimensions is as the area of the surface of a sphere on its radius.  That is one less than its number of spatial dimensions.  For other cases:-
If we had a true four dimensional space the field would fall off as an inverse cube law
An "infinite" cylindrical field falls of as the inverse first power of the distance
That of an infinite plane is constant.
 
note particle antiparticle production at high energies will cause the mass to increase and the diameter of the singularity to shrink but will not affect the angular momentum limits of the originating event horizon.  This will drive the initial inflationary stage of the new universe.  it seems likely that the final size of the ring will approach the Planck dimensions or may even go smaller than that.  It may also be associated with the definition of the Planck constant itself.

A serious request for Peer Review
I honestly believe that this suggestion could be proved and completely change the direction of a lot of theoretical and practical physics and astronomy and am asknig for someone with a real understanding of the subject to take these fully referenced ideas apart and show me where I am wrong.

There is a great deal more evidence and references to be looked at on my website  https://iankimber.org   Go through to the main workspace via the "Evolutionary Cosmology" button to see work in progress and contact me directly.   

This work represents the first big step in my attempts to prove that like life on earth even our universe has evolved fro simple beginnings in the form of pure energy in the form of what we call the quantum mechanical vacuum trying to find a way to extend itself through time.
 

2
New Theories / Is an Evolutionary Cosmology AND a Complete theory of everything Possible?
« on: 13/12/2019 10:56:20 »
My original Question and discussion "Is an Evolutionary Cosmology Possible"  aroused quite a lot of interest. and has helped me greatly to find out where the sticking points in the arguments are, and encouraged me to create a different approach to what I am trying to get over. 

If you are a new reader you can find this via this link 

https://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=78110.new#new

It has also encouraged me enough to "go the whole hog and complete the thinking on this subject.  In the hope that it may stimulate a few more innovative minds to do some serious work on it

       "The complete Theory of everything
Here is a brief explanation on what I mean.

Many people talk about a "Theory Of Everything"  and mean a complete understanding of all the laws of physics that define how our universe works.  This is in effect only part of the story.  A true theory of everything should include a reasonable model describing how and why these physical laws exist and how and why they work together to produce our universe and any others if there are good reasons why they should exist.  This is what I will call "A Complete Theory of Everything"

What follows requires several steps of innovative thinking that work together so it is a good idea to try and read and understand all of it before nit picking on detail.

My wish is for people with a good solid knowledge and understanding of this range of subjects to analyse seriously What I am saying and find any real fundamental errors in the analysis and synthesis I propose.

3
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Is an Evolutionary Cosmology Possible?
« on: 15/11/2019 11:18:52 »
Page 1 of 10
Introduction
There are several books and papers pointing out how the main physical constants that define the properties and evolution of our universe are very finely balanced if complex atoms stars and even life itself can exist.  In his book Life and the Universe Lee Smolin suggests that it appears that these constants are very close to those needed to create the maximum number of stellar mass black holes. He goes on to suggest that this may be a hint that some sort of evolutionary process could be involved.  These initial concepts are presented in this excellent you tube Video By space time



This short note examines this possibility and aims to establish and takes in much further with more details of the possible processes involved to create a credible and disprovable hypothesis that could be expanded by others with greater skills than myself.
 
Background
Firstly a bit of background about well established current thinking in cosmology.  From observation and the extrapolation of the physical laws as currently understood our universe had a very hot smooth extreme density beginning followed by expansion cooling and the formation of atoms, stars, galaxies and a generalised stringy structure of clusters of galaxies. It will end with a slow cooling and fading into nothingness.  The origins of the universe and the values of the critical physical constants that define its evolution are in the absence of any evidence initially considered to be set randomly consequently it appears that a universe with properties like ours would be highly improbable. To get round this problem there is a tendency to think that there must be a vast number of isolated bubble universes existing in a Multiverse.  Alternatively it leaves open the possibility that there is some sort of sentient creator of universes.  Both of these approaches are very philosophically unattractive and stilted
 
Initial thinking
If a universe through its life could create other universes a totally different scenario could be imagined  furthermore if there existed among all the possibilities one (or more) ways in which a universe could create during its life other isolated universes substantially similar to itself these sorts of universes could rapidly dominate any other universes that could happen by random events and make it probable that we might find ourself in a universe of this kind.

Proposition
I propose to suggest a way in which this might be possible totally in line with current observational and theoretical physics and astronomy and also suggest that it is tractable to current and near future theoretical and practical skills and potentially disprovable and will post more on this topic shortly  however if you wish to preempt this.  current work in progress this area may be seen on https://iankimber.org .

4
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Should Theoretical particle physicists and String theorists learn chemistry?
« on: 11/12/2011 23:25:42 »
A lot of studies related to the origins of our physical laws relate to symmetry breaking as the temperature cool down from the big bang.   This is like a phase change in which structure and rules condense out of an amorphous state.

Theoretical particle physicists and String theorists tend to assume that this process is random and the laws can settle how they like.  This might be because this makes the problem much more tractable but it leads to a vast number of possible models from which it is almost impossible to identify the route that could lead to a universe with properties similar to ours and they therefor tend to think that in a "multiverse" our universe is very improbable. 

However chemists have been studying processes like this in detail at the quantum level for many years when they look at the physical chemistry of condensed matter.  They would tell you that this symmetry breaking process is far from random and relates strongly to the stability and longevity of the potential resulting structures.  This could mean that complex universes like ours are far from rare but almost inevitable. 

Isn't it time therefore that our Theoretical particle physicists and String theorists learned a bit more from the chemists.

5
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Toroidal gravitational collapse? physical laws changing with dimensions?
« on: 27/09/2010 11:47:21 »
I don't often ask questions on these pages but concentrate on answering them however this is a question that this been exercising my mind for some time and maybe one of the naked scientists themselves or their friends might like to have a go at answering it.

A lot of cosmology and astronomy is based on mathematical models.  Now the validity of these models is only dependant on the quality of the thinking involved in setting these up.  It is therefore quite possible to miss a trick if you exclude some details that could be significant.  I have been very familiar with these problems in my work as a scientific innovator over many years.  Looking at the way models are often presented in the original papers and in the more popular texts I am wondering if a significant effect has been ignored that could  produce some innovative physical situations.

Consider first some basic gravitational physics.  The gravitational  effect of  the following structures

    1  an infinite gravitating cylinder 
    2  an infinite thin gravitating planar sheet

I appreciate that these are purely theoretical structures but you will understand what I am getting at later.  We are all familiar with the inverse square law associated with a simple point or spherical lump of material that produces all the models of which we are familiar  however the infinite cylinder displays a gravitational field that is a simple inverse first power law,  Not a square law,  and an infinite sheet demonstrates a constant field irrespective of distance.  This effectively modifies the law of gravity and matter could behave very differently under these conditions.

The question is could any structures that approximate infinite cylinders or infinite planes ever happen in our universe?

Consider now the gravitational collapse of a large rotating cloud of gas etc.  As it collapses conservation of angular momentum around its main rotation axis causes its rotation to speed up  and the usual model of collapse is that the cloud tends eventually to form a disc  and eventually a sphere however it will also still possess some net angular momentum around other axes that could possibly result in a toroidal structure  (like a smoke ring).

The main question therefore is a stable toroidal gravitational collapse possible?  and What would the properties of objects like this be like?  Bearing in mind that a thin toroidal loop could approximate to an infinite cylinder and that a thin toroidal surface could approximate to an infinite plane.

I know of only one object where gravitating loops or toroids appear in the standard literature and that is in the ring "singularity" described in the model of the rotating (Kerr) type of black hole but that does indicate that a toroid must be considered as a possible result of gravitational collapse.

I have several ideas worked out for what could happen and how these relate to the universe that we observe but  to talk about these would consign this thought to the new theories area whereas this is clearly a simple question based on current science.



6
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Should physicists have a new word to describe things of an unlimited extent?
« on: 10/02/2010 20:25:39 »
Infinity is essentially a mathematical concept and its mathematical use leads to many problems of understanding when it is applied ad hoc to the physical world.  Many awkward questions on these pages are caused by the rigorous application of mathematical concepts of infinity to physical situations.

There is a television programme on infinity in the BBC horizon series starting in a few minutes time that will probably illustrate these quite well.

When I deal with infinities in a physical sense I tend to use the term indefinite rather than infinite because the true situation is usually that something will bridge the gap even though we may not fully understand it at the moment.

What do you think about infinity?

7
New Theories / New thinking on the route to a theory of everything
« on: 13/12/2009 22:46:28 »
I have already posted some of this thinking under the heading of "Evolutionary cosmology"

http://www.thenakedscientists.com/forum/index.php?topic=11668.0

Any true "Theory of Everything" must explain the origin if the observed "Big Bang" and show the true continuity if the multiverse.  The multiverse is an indefinitely nested and extended set of individual observable universes.  that includes our own observable universe within it.

It also has to show how the fundamental laws of physics originate and how they might have come to a rather fine tuned set of values.

This probably means that our observable part of the universe will during its existence create other universes in a scale invariant process like a fractal.

The most obvious source for this is the formation of black holes within our observable universe. The insides of these are "seeded" with material from our universe and could in theory form the start of a whole new universe that has evolved from our universe.

8
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / The rotational energy of a maximal rotating black hole
« on: 06/01/2009 20:20:10 »
The only really interesting sorts of black holes are those that rotate because it is virtually impossible to create one that isn't rotating.

Now this rotational energy has a maximum value for a given mass of black hole. 

Does anyone know what the maximal rotational energy of a given mass of black hole is,  how this value varies as the total mass of the black hole gets larger and how this compares with the gravitational mass energy of the black hole?

9
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / The Trouble with Physics
« on: 23/05/2008 23:16:35 »
I have just finished reading Lee Smolin's recent book  "The trouble with Physics"

I just cannot reccommend it highly enough on several counts.

It is an excellent clear and understandable book for the layman on the development of modern physics rict up to current string theory and quantum gravity from one of the most well read and unbiased experts in the area.  It goes on to analyse the philosophy and socioligy of current physics research and finds some significant weaknesses that may have caused the lack of any real progress in the last thirty years.

It will give you "entrepreneurs in physics" out there a good idea for what you really need to do to generate some innovative physics.  This is not trying to find "mistakes" in well accepted theories but in genuine innovative thinking.

10
New Theories / Evolutionary cosmology
« on: 28/11/2007 00:53:07 »
As always, if you Google something you find a lot of references for a pair of words so its best to define them first.  Evolutionary Cosmology is an idea that is now being looked at by a small number of reputable philosophers and cosmologists.  I am also particularly interested in it and have been so for many years well before others went public on it so I thought I might put some of my ideas together here.

It starts from the fact that the "big bang" cosmology has several loose ends notably what caused it and what was going on before that.

It is observed that laws of physics are very finely balanced to allow atoms, nucleosynthesis, and life to form and have certain similarities with the way things are finely balanced in a living ecosystem so what if universes spawn other universes and evolve in a physical way?

So evolutionary cosmology looks at the processes that might allow this to happen. Tries to understand what physical evolution might mean and tries to put this together in a model that fits current physical knowlwdge in a way that the whole process might be tested and verified.

11
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Has anyone seen comet 17P Holmes yet
« on: 31/10/2007 09:59:39 »
I did last night and tried to take some pictures of it.  It's really amazing!

Comet 17P Holmes is a tiny periodic comet that has been known about for about a century.  Its normally extremely faint and only observable with large telescopes.  It has just passed its closest approach to the sun on its approximately 7 year orbit.  It was first found when it had an outburst that made it visible to the naked eye.  Now 100 years later it's done the same thing again. and is as bright as a medium brightness star and easily visible to the naked eye even in urban environments.

Unusually for comets it is in a very good position for observation from the northern hemisphere visible all night and almost overhead late in the evening in the constellation of Perseus.  the following website gives lots more information about it

http://www.cometography.com/pcomets/017p.html

When I looked at it through my 8 inch telescope last night it looked just like the big picture at the start of the website with a big dim disk a brighter central portion and a very bright spot near the middle.  a small telescope or binoculars will show clearly it is a comet with the naked eye it looks like a slightly fuzzy star.  It has no tail at the moment but that is probably partly a result of the angle that we are looking at it

Unfortunately I got the focussing a bit wrong in the photos That I took of it and the although it's clearly visible the pictures are not worth posting.  I will try again if we get another clear night soon. 

If it follows a similar course to the last outburst it will probably be visible for at least a week or two.


12
New Theories / Have the laws of Physics evolved to be what we find in our universe?
« on: 02/09/2007 11:39:06 »
This is intended to be a stimulation for serious and considered replies and not someting to drag the cranks out of the woodwork.

Our planetary ecosystems are so carefully meshed together and things work so well that it was quite difficult initially to believe that they were not created by some super intelligent designer, but now all (including most of the main religions) except a few cranks accept that life has evolved from simple chemical beginnings to become what it is today.

The laws of physics also seem to be very improbable with critical constants set at finely defined levels to ensure that atoms and complex nuclear and electromagnetic chemistry can exist.

Several serious cosmologists have gone so far as to suggest that the laws of physics may have undergone some sort of process of evolution.  Notably Lee Smolin who suggests that some of the features my be to maximise the number of black holes (? other universes,  the longest lived things in our universe) that can be formed although he could see no immediate process as to how this might happen.

Can I suggest a mechanism whereby the laws of physics may have evolved to become what they are today. 

We are all familiar with quantum mechanical uncertainty and as interaction energy rises the laws pf physics tend to get more and more "fuzzy"  allowing greater departure from norms and new particles to pop out of nowhere for brief periods provided the energy balance works out OK in the long run.  We also know that in the past our universe was incredibly dense and hot but expanding and cooling.

The particle physicists talk about times when all the physical laws were united and there were "symmetry breaking processes" that caused the initially very vague laws to settle down to the ones that we have at the moment.  They seem to view this process as essentially random but maybe it isn't quite so random and the way it settles down is most likely to be a way that creates interesting "recycling" processes that tend to give structures in the universe much longer lives than the extremely brief particle particle interactions that would normally take place.  That is the laws of physics have "evolved" to create an interesting universe and such a universe is not as unusual as might be expected if the symmetry breaking processes were truly random.

13
New Theories / String theory
« on: 10/12/2006 00:20:00 »
The most successful theories of everything that are around are based on superstrings.  They depend on the existence of fundamental, short, tensioned strings or loops that can oscillate in various modes to create the particles and force fields that we experience in our universe. 

These strings have clearly defined properties (size tension dimensionality etc)but these are just taken as given and not explained in any way.

I would like to suggest that a tiny space time vortex may have these properties.  Consider a vortex in water Or a tornado the rotational energy creates a tensioned single dimension stringlike structure that could have many of the properties required and it should be possible to model vortexes like this using current fluid dynamic knowledge (extended a bit into at least four or five dimensions)

Another important point is that the basic quantum of quantum mechanics is essentially a quantum of angular momentum that describes rotation or a vortex so this could be a good starting point for a quantised real theory of everything

how do others feel about this?

14
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / An anti gravity machine for real!?
« on: 08/09/2006 11:15:59 »
This week's New Scientist has got an article in it about a new electromagnetic drive for spacecraft that could be much more efficent than the currently being tested ion motors.  

It is so way out that I double checked the date wasn't  1st April

It has been dsigned and tested and found to work by   Roger Shawyer a respected aerospace scierntist at Portsmouth University.

Apparantly the idea has been around for some time but it is the way that it works is so far off beam I still find it difficult to believe and am looking for the catch.

You feed microwave radiation into a high Q resonant cavity that is shaped.  The shape is a tapered cylindrical waveguide with one end greater than the other and the idea is to get as much energy stored in the cavity that you possibly can.  He is feeding about a kilowatt into a cavity with a Q in the region of 6,000 - 50,000.

The enegy in the cavity produces a force on the cavity along its axis and in the direction of the largest end.  He explains it as the enegy in the cavity produces a force on the walls of the cavity and the force is greater on the wider end than the narrow end so there is a net external force on the cavity.  Note, no throwing energy out the back like a rocket! the energy is entirely contained in the cavity and the force depends on how much you can get in there.

OK the force is not very great, his first prototype only produced a force of 16 millinewtons but a later model with a higher q gave 300 millinewtons,  a great deal more thrust than that produced by the recent ESA SMART-1 Ion engine.

It is claimed that in theory using a superconducting cavity of the quality used in big accelerators forces of  30,000 newtons per Kilowatt might be achieved. this is enough to lift a car!

The downside.  You are not getting something for nothing and the moment you start accelerating the object the force drops and energy is drawn from the cavity and needs to be replaced  but the device could produce a static anti gravity force very efficiently.

This is the nearest thing to an antigravity machine I have ever seen and is coming from a very reputable scientific source but I am still finding it difficult to believe.


Learn, create, test and tell
evolution rules in all things
God says so!

15
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / A rotating universe
« on: 09/06/2006 10:59:01 »
some months ago one of our regular contributors asked if the universe was rotating.  the 10 june editin of the New scientist  has some interesting comments on this.

These also seem to link into my one of my interests, The classical properties of rotating black holes and gravstars.

Learn, create, test and tell
evolution rules in all things
God says so!

16
Guest Book / Hello from soul surfer
« on: 18/01/2006 20:34:23 »
I've been on this forum for a couple of months now and am beginning to get the measure of it.  I find it interesting and plan to be around regularly for some time.  I am happy to help people out with anything that I can, and willing to explore solidly based new ideas but I won't treat trolls or loonies gently.  Genuine humour is another thing but us scientists must be a bit careful when we crack jokes to ensure that some less well educated types don't take them literally and run off with completely the wrong idea.

You can find a lot more about me by looking at my profile and web pages.

As a retired physicist and engineer it worries me some of the things that we get from younger people about the quality of their science teaching.  OK on pages like this some of it may just be a wind up but I have other verified examples of the physical sciences being taught by very poorly equipped teachers.  I think that it would be much better if quality video based instruction and simple labwork was supported by controlled ask a scientist websites like this.

If anyone wants to talk openly with me please post to this topic otherwise if you send me an email make sure that you identify the naked scientist site in your header or I might chop it unread as spam.

Learn, create, test and tell
evolution rules in all things
God says so!

17
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Discuss: Will my skin soak up the calories in skin cream?
« on: 16/04/2012 13:59:48 »
This week we find out if a liberal slathering of oil based moisturiser makes up part of our daily calorie quota. Plus we ask, are monitor screens and e.books more than your standard page turner, leaving you tossing and turning and up all night?....
Listen to this Show

or  

If you want to discuss this show, or ask a question, this is the place to do it.

18
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Heim-theory
« on: 10/01/2006 19:56:12 »
If you want to explore new theory that offers some interesting possibilities look into Heim theory

http://www.heim-theory.com/downloads/A_Abstract.pdf

there is an article on it in this week's New Scientist but they have sensationalised it a bit by concentrating on some of the more spectacular possibilities.

Heim theory as a quantum gravity theory has been around for quite a long time is being taken more seriously by the scientific world.

The most important thing that it appears to do is predict accurately the masses of the fundamental particles quite accurately which at the moment is more than any other theory of everything manages.

Learn, create, test and tell
evolution rules in all things
God says so!

19
Physics, Astronomy & Cosmology / Is there a lower limit to quantum interactions?
« on: 29/12/2005 16:56:12 »
And if so does it have any effect on cosmological models?

Gravity and electromagnetism are the long range forces that govern the operation of the large scale universe the enegy associated with their quanta are h nu  where nu is the frequency of the radiation. so low wneregy interactions imply low frequency quanta.  Now the age of the universe is reasonably well defined (around the time of the big bang) so quanta with frequecies lower than the time from now back to the big bang can't exist (yet)

Now electromagnetic interections re on the whole quite quick and nrutralised by scale but gravitational interactions on a large scale can be very slow indeed, involving interactions lasting billions of years a significant proportion of the time since the big bang. so some of the quanta that are needed to express these interactions may not have time to exist yet.

What's more looking back in time/distance these lower limits would be higher than they are now.

The effect this would have on interactions would be that some of the theoretical force between chunks of the universe would be misssing until the universe was big enough to hold the quanta (this is a bit like the casimir effect using the whole universe as a cavity)  OK the effect would be very small now and might represent a tiny part of the missing bits of the universe that are accounted for by dark matter or dark energy but extrapolating back to the beginnig it could have a big effect on the way our universe started.

Learn, create, test and tell
evolution rules in all things
God says so!

20
Geology, Palaeontology & Archaeology / Walking With Monsters - Life before dinosaurs
« on: 09/12/2005 16:05:49 »
While I applaud much of the effort used to recreate images of ancient creatures and environments, I wish they would give a more balanced view of the lifeforms around in the periods without just picking on the biggest and most aggressive beasts and the gory bits.

Mind you the saga  "When stromatolites ruled the world" would not be noted for its excitement  [:)]

Learn, create, test and tell
evolution rules in all things
God says so!

Pages: [1] 2
  • SMF 2.0.15 | SMF © 2017, Simple Machines
    Privacy Policy
    SMFAds for Free Forums
  • Naked Science Forum ©

Page created in 0.07 seconds with 61 queries.

  • Podcasts
  • Articles
  • Get Naked
  • About
  • Contact us
  • Advertise
  • Privacy Policy
  • Subscribe to newsletter
  • We love feedback

Follow us

cambridge_logo_footer.png

©The Naked Scientists® 2000–2017 | The Naked Scientists® and Naked Science® are registered trademarks created by Dr Chris Smith. Information presented on this website is the opinion of the individual contributors and does not reflect the general views of the administrators, editors, moderators, sponsors, Cambridge University or the public at large.