Subscription Center
Apr 4, 2009 09:55 AM | 21
TEMPE—The first annual Origins Symposium at Arizona State University here began yesterday with a bang—a big bang, that is—as a panel outlined the theoretical and technical challenges of peering still closer to that signal event in the history of the cosmos for clues about the nature and evolution of the universe we know today.
The weekend meeting pulls together experts, including several Nobel laureates, in origins studies across all disciplines, from those concerned with outer space to the inner space of human consciousness; public presentations will follow on Monday.
“There’s only so far back we can see, and that’s about 380,000 years” after the big bang, when detection of light particles, or photons, becomes impossible because of the high energies at that time, said physicist Michael S. Turner of the University of Chicago, who moderated the panel. “Within Einstein’s theory of general relativity, the big bang is a singularity—we can’t go beyond that singularity.” He outlined five key problems to getting closer to that instant:
Walls. In principle, neutrino measurements could get to within one second of the big bang, but that hasn’t yet been demonstrated.
Horizons. The observable universe is 14 billion light-years across, and our view is limited.
Redshift. Older electromagnetic radiation traveling from the early universe is redder—it has longer wavelengths—and is harder to detect.
Particle properties. Many of the particles researchers would like to measure interact only weakly, and have short lifetimes or large masses—making them difficult to detect or to produce in experiments.
Measurement limitations. Noise and quantum limits make perfect measurements impossible.
“I got into this area a half century ago with great unease,” said physicist P. James E. Peebles of Princeton University in New Jersey. “I had no idea we’d have such success.” At the same time, there’s more work to do, he said. Theories of inflation—an early period dominated by rapid expansion of the universe—explain the characteristics of today’s observable universe. “The good news is that the theory of inflation adequately accounts for the structure that we see,” said Nobel laureate Steven Weinberg of the University of Texas at Austin. “That’s also the bad news.” Various inflation theories fit the data, showing that we do not have a complete understanding of the phenomenon. “I don’t see how we’re going to go beyond it in any reasonable time,” he said.
Some look to the potential of string theory. “Can we experimentally test what’s beyond the wall? Probably not,” said string theorist Brian Greene of Columbia University in New York. “But can we learn what’s beyond the wall [with string theory]? Probably so.”
“Inflation is remarkably consistent with every measure we can make. It just smells good. But is consistency enough?” asked Lawrence M. Krauss, the director of the Origins Initiative. “What we want is something that could falsify it [a particular model]. Gravitational waves are the greatest hope.” LIGO, the Large Interferometer Gravitational Wave Observatory, for one, will search for gravity waves, which are disturbances in the curvature of spacetime caused by the motion of matter, as will the upcoming Planck satellite. But the waves may be at problematically tiny scales. “In fact, anything that happens in the early universe that will produce a spectrum of gravitational waves that looks like inflation. It’s going to be difficult [to separate out the data]. I’m not saying impossible.” He added: “Are we at a point where certain things are empirically unknowable?”
Not to worry, countered Weinberg. Uncertainties are “the natural state of science,” he said. “There are lots of things we’re never going to be able to calculate or predict. What is important is that a theory has enough of a success that we believe it could calculate more” beyond what is possible today. “The important thing is to learn the principles.”
More News Blog: Next: Human evolution: Why people think life is a beach Previous: Olestra makes a comeback--This time in paints and lubricants, not potato chips
See what we're tweeting about
DNLee5 Suddenly feeling warm. Why? My fan isn't working. Look up, the powerlight to water heater is off. Another blackout #dispatchesDNLee
sciencegoddess So many exciting space events! May 31, a giant asteroid will be flying by Earth. http://t.co/cyokKwOJhy DNLee5 you look awesome!! :) @SuzieZUMO @arikia @maggiekb1
Deadline: Jun 30 2013
Reward: $1,000,000 USD
This is a Reduction-to-Practice Challenge that requires written documentation and&
Deadline: Jul 30 2013
Reward: $100,000 USD
The Seeker desires a method for producing pseudoephedrine products in such a way that it will be extremely difficult for clandestine che
Powered By: 
YES! Send me a free issue of Scientific American with no obligation to continue the subscription. If I like it, I will be billed for the one-year subscription.
21 Comments
Add CommentWhere does the mass of the particle come from?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNow the physicists use the Higgs mechanism to give all the
elementary particles masses.
The mechanism requires the Higgs field to be nonzero in the vacuum,
exactly like spontaneous symmetry breaking. In this case, the broken
symmetry is gauged, meaning that the field which fills all of space,
the Higgs condensate, is charged. Gauge fields become massive
when there is a charged condensate, this is called superconductivity.
/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_mechanism /
My comment.
1.
We have Vacuum.
The Vacuum is the homogeneous Space of the lowest
( the background ) level of Energy: E= 0.
The Vacuum is also the homogeneous Space of the lowest
( the background ) level of temperature: T= 0K.
The question is: “ How can the homogeneous Vacuum be broken?”.
2.
If the Vacuum is some kind of Energetic Space, so according
to the Quantum Theory it must contains only
the physical - quantum - energetic particles. We named them
“ virtual particles”. The “ virtual particles” is not a “ pure
philosophical concept “ that is never observed in practice.
The Quantum Theory says that :
“ Its effects can be observed in various phenomena
(such as spontaneous emission, the Casimir effect, the
van der Waals bonds, or the Lamb shift), and it is thought
to have consequences for the behavior of the Universe
on cosmological scales. “
/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vacuum_energy /.
3.
Question:
How can “ the virtual particles” change the homogeneous Vacuum?
The Higgs mechanism. !!!???
In 1964 Higgs had “one big idea”, which could hold a clue
to how matter in the universe got its mass in the billionth
of a second after the Big Bang.
Higgs eventually came up with his theory of the Higgs boson,
a boson that gives mass to all other subatomic particles that
happen to interact with it in a ‘Higgs field’.
The more they interact, the heavier they become.
And the ones that don’t interact don’t gather mass.
The theory could not only throw further light on the creation
of the universe, but also help explain the shape of it.
At the European Centre for Nuclear Research
(CERN) in Switzerland the protons will be smashed against
each other at great speed and as result the first Higgs boson
nicknamed the ‘God particle’ will actually observe .
???
#
In 1906, Rutherford studied internal structure of atoms,
bombarding them with high energy a- particles.
This idea helped him understand the structure of atom.
But the clever Devil interfered and gave advice to physicists
to enlarge the target. Bomb them!
And physicist created huge cannon-accelerators of particles.
And they began to bomb micro particles in the vacuum, in hoping
to understand their inner structure. And they were surprised with
the results of this bombing. Several hundreds of completely new
strange particles appeared. They lived a very little time and do not
relate to our world. Our Earth needs its real constants of nature.
But this was forgotten.
What God carefully created, is destroyed in accelerators.
And they are proud of that. They say: we study the inner structure
of the particles. The clever and artful Devil is glad. He again has deceived man.
Physicist think, that an accelerator - is first of all the presence of huge energy.
And the Devil laughs. He knows, that an accelerator - is first of all the Vacuum.
But this, he has withheld from man.
He has not explained that the Vacuum is infinite and inexhaustible.
And in infinity there is contained an infinite variety of particles.
And by bombing the vacuum, one can find centaurs and sphinxes.
But my God, save us from their presence on Earth.
========= .. ========.
Rutherford was right.
His followers are mistaken.
Why?
Imagine, that I want to plant a small apple- tree.
For this purpose I shall dig out a hole of 1 meter width and 1,20 m depth.
It is normal.
But if to plant a small apple- tree, I shall begin to dig
a base for a huge building (skyscraper),
or if to begin drill ground with 10 km. depth,
will you call me a normal man?
========== .. ===============.
Imagine a man who breaks watches on the wall.
And then he tries to understand the mechanism of the watches
by thrown cogwheels, springs and small screws.
Does he have many chances to succeed?
As many as the scientists have who aspire to understand
the inner structure of electron by breaking them into accelerators.
If not take into account the initial conditions of Genesis,
the fantasies of the scientists may be unlimited.
========== . ======== .
The Nature works very economical.
For example, biologists know 100 ( hundred ) kinds of
amino acids. But only 20 ( twenty) kinds of amino acids
are suitable to produce molecules of protein, from which all
different cells created on our planet. What are about another
80 % of amino acids? They are dead end of evolution.
The physicists found many ( 1000 ) new elementary particles in
accelerators. But we need only one ( 1) electron and one (1 )
proton to create first atom, to begin to create the Nature.
All another elementary particles (mesons, muons , bosons, taus,
all their girlfriends - antiparticles, all quarks and antiquarks…etc)
are dead end of evolution.
============.
What was before - “ the big bang” or the vacuum ?
The physicists created “ Europe’s Large Hadron Colider “
Please, look at how our physicists made this accelerator.
They made the vacuum and after they generated a big reaction
between two colliding particles in some small imitation of the
“big bang”. They didn’t make this process in the reverse.
So, what was prior in the Universe: “ big bang” or vacuum?
#
The Higgs mechanism can be considered as the superconductivity
in the Vacuum.
/ http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Higgs_mechanism /
My question:
How can “ the natural virtual particles” create superconductivity
space in Vacuum?
My answer:
Because “ the natural virtual particles” itself is energetic particles
and they create the superconductivity space therefore we are surprise
to see that this space haven’t electrical resistance.
And on my opinion this process in Vacuum connected with
gravity’s creation, with star’s creation.
===========================..
Question:
How can the homogeneous Vacuum be broken without using
“ Europe’s Large Hadron Colider “ (not by compulsions )
but using “the natural virtual particles” ?
On my opinion to solve this problem we must understand
only three thing:
1.
What Vacuum is
2.
That physical and geometrical parameters have
“the natural virtual particles” in Vacuum.
3.
What „The Law of Conservation and Transformation of Energy/ Mass"
means according to “ the natural virtual particles” .
============ . .
P.S.
Many years M. Planck was attracted with the
absolutely black body problem.
If quantum of light moving with speed c=1 falls
in area of absolutely black body ( Kirchhoff’s Vacuum
radiation /Max Laue / ) and does not radiate back,
then “ terminal dead “ comes. In order to save the
quantum of light from death Planck decided that
it is possible that quantum of light will radiate this
quantum of light back with quantum unit h=Et.
Physicists say, that Planck’s unit is one: h=1.
Having this unit h=1 photon flies with speed c=1.
This unit doesn’t come from formulas or equations.
Planck introduced this unit from heaven, from ceiling.
Sorry. Sorry.
I must write: Planck introduced this unit intuitively.
I must write: Planck introduced unit h phenomenologically
So, where does the Planck’s constant ( h) come from?
#
It is important to realize that in physics today, we have
no knowledge of what energy is. We do not have a picture
that energy comes in little blobs of a definite amount. ”
(Feynman. 1987)
So, where does the energy come from?
============ . .
Best wishes.
Israel Sadovnik. / Socratus.
http://www.socratus.com
http://www.wbabin.net
http://www.physforum.com/index.php?showtopic=2548
================..
Socratus:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe object of science is to know. We do not know a lot, but we aim to know more.
One small point. A proton is not an elementary particle.
If you believe in a god and a devil do not seek answers is science. Science is for people who know they have a very limited knowledge but seek rational explanations for what they see and experience in the universe that surrounds them.
I`m not a scientist, but doesn`t it work like this: nothing can travel faster than light, so if we were one mass just before the big bang, how can the light during the big bag have traveled slower than our planet? We shouldn`t be able to see past the physical boundaries of the universe. We can`t look in the past (as far as I know).
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisCan anyone explain in laymen terms?
Daniel--dont worry about it-- just take it on faith--- its science you know!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to this
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt's important to note that nothing in the universe TODAY can travel faster than the speed of light. The physical laws and dimensions of the universe weren't set instantly. See: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Timeline_of_the_Big_Bang#The_very_early_universe
From what I understand, the light created by the big bang was caused before the inflationary epoch.
Think of it like starting a ball rolling down a ramp made of rubber to a specific point, then the rubber gets stretched. The ball now has further to travel to reach the point. Any balls started rolling after the stretch, but toward the same point may not have to travel as far, even though they started rolling later.
Horizons. The observable universe is 14 billion light-years across, and our view is limited.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisLimited is generous, our view is like vintage point on an electron riding around the first orbit of H atom in the core of the earth. This electron sees things around it and wants ot define life in New York. The limitations of humnas cannot be better enunciated.
Humans live in slow lane, our time zone dictates that, unlike the 'light years' of universe, earth revolves around the sun in 365 days and spins on its axis in 24 hours, our life and time scale is determined by the speed of earth revolution and spinning, universe works on different time scale that of light years, at the speed of light the change or distance we move is 0.00000000…….1 of universe movements.*
*1/186,000miles/sec*60 sec*24 hour*365= 1/1.74096*10 raise to power 10
(AU (Astronomical Unit) is the average distance of the Earth from the Sun (1 AU ∼ 150 million km). Light Year is the distance that light can travel in year, which is 9.46 trillion km. )
We are an insignificant small players within a humongous jigsaw puzzle, nature and natural selection forces are working on their own humongous scale, let's know our size and stop checking birds for flu and cows for burps and farts. Our known history of 10,000 years and unknown of 100,000 is still less than fraction of a nano- second in terms of nearly infinite time of universe. Rest assure our generation for millions of years to come will rest in peace very nicely on this abode of ours.
Hi Socratus- <<The physicists found many ( 1000 ) new elementary particles in accelerators. But we need only one ( 1) electron and one (1 )
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisproton to create first atom, to begin to create the Nature.
All another elementary particles (mesons, muons , bosons, taus,
all their girlfriends - antiparticles, all quarks and antiquarks…etc)
are dead end of evolution.>>
May be you are right, that one electron and one proton to create first atom needs electro magnetic forces to keep the electron in the orbit, may all that you call ‘dead end evolution’ is creating the unseen, after all ‘gravity’ and Grand Unification, grand unified theory, may need all another elementary particles (mesons, muons, bosons, taus, all their girlfriends - antiparticles, all quarks and antiquarks…etc
<<The Nature works very economical.
For example, biologists know 100 ( hundred ) kinds of
amino acids. But only 20 ( twenty) kinds of amino acids
are suitable to produce molecules of protein, from which all
different cells created on our planet. What are about another
80 % of amino acids? They are dead end of evolution.
Don't grieve. Anything you lose comes round in another form. Rumi
Reincarnation is a reality, death is actually beginning of a 'new life' in different life forms for 4,600 trillions of our linear nuclear chromosomes ( a human body contains nearly 100 trillion cells).Death ensures distribution of our 4600 trillion chromosomes in different combination. (Dust to dust ashes to ashes)
It is the birth is the begining of endless end, where these various chromosomes governed by the number of pairs of chromosomes determine the new shape of our reincarnation. The probability of 4,600 trillions in one body is remote but we definitely come around as a small part of different forms.
(Human cells have 23 pairs of large linear nuclear chromosomes, giving a total of 46 per cell. In addition to these, human cells have many hundreds of copies of the mitochondrial genome.)
Lets know it well we are beginning of infinity, our end is our beginning our beginning is our end, this embodiment of100 trillion cell has no dates of expiry, it started with singularity and will end . These cells of ours will appear and reappear in new forms.
Socratus and the rest of you guys, leave science to scientists, and don't quit your day jobs!
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe article states:
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisHorizons. The observable universe is 14 billion light-years across, and our view is limited.
As I understand, Hubble deep field observations have been made from both the northern and southern hemispheres, observing objects nearly 13B light years away in both cases. This would seem to indicate an observational horizon 26B light years across. Surely I'm misunderstanding something basic...
But wait! Where's Philip Johnson, Michael Behe, or other representatives of/for Creationism. Pardon me: Intelligent Design. They have the answers.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf the answer to this simple question is known, I'd like to know it. I did not imply any specific suggestion. I freely admit ignorance, but not a lack of intelligence.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIf the answer to this simple question is known, I'd like to know it. I did not imply any specific suggestion. I freely admit ignorance, but not a lack of intellegence.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisWhere are the a priori universal measuring rods of space and time? If the assumed a priori spacetime continuum is expanding then are atoms expanding with it? If they are then how is relative expansion possible? Are suns and galaxies expanding also? If not are they shrinking? Is something fundamentally wrong? If objects in an inertial system travelling at very high relative velocity are shortened in the direction of travel then are atoms that make it up being flattened the faster they go? Some of these obvious questions have never been convincingly addressed. Einstein himself questioned the spacetime continuum basis of GR late in life. The only self consistent alternative is a discontinuous universe in which atoms are synchronously projected from their quantum energy equivalents that constitute a boundless and spatially indeterminate field, called the Void, to distinguish it from the vagaries of virtual particles and the vacuum.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisSpace and time are defined a posterior from creation by the relationship of the internal spherical space of the primary atom to the orthogonal linear space defined by the transmission of light from within atomic processes. Space and time are quantized according to light transmission in each synchronous projection of atomic matter that universally links atoms up externally. That is why E=mc2. There is an article at www.cosmic-mindreach.com entitled, Gravity, Quantum Relativity & System 3 that provides a direct transparent derivation of the Lorentz transformations and that offers answers to fundamental obvious questions, including the missing mass and so-called dark energy. An alternate approach to cosmology necessarily follows. Another website article Unified Theories, Fantasy & Cosmic Order is a good introduction and review of the problems associated GR and QM, and the requirements implicitly associated with an alternative discontinuous universe.
When you start with bad information, you make wrong conculsions. Big bang never happened. The universe started out cold, and will end cold. If you want to see the origin of the universe, freeze a natural uranium atom to absolute zero temperatures. For a four page outline of the origin of the universe and the theory of everything, go to http://uncle-bens-universe-2.com
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisQuote: "As I understand, Hubble deep field observations have been made from both the northern and southern hemispheres, observing objects nearly 13B light years away in both cases. This would seem to indicate an observational horizon 26B light years across. Surely I'm misunderstanding something basic..."
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisPerhaps the problem is that your question implicitly assumes an a priori space and time, when there really are no such things. Space and time are concepts derived a posteriori from creation. The continuum itself is supposed to be expanding from a point. You can think of it as being on the surface of an expanding balloon and whatever direction you look in the spacetime curves around the same analogous surface. But there are contradictions implicitly involved. See Unified Theories, Fantasy & Cosmic Order at www.cosmic-mindreach.com.
Is it possible that Everitt's (and NASA's) proof of the frame dragging effect will cause us to rethink the basis of the the Big Bang?
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisIt is possible to envisage things other than acceleration of celestial bodies to account for redshift. eg. prismatic effects as light travels to us from distant space, being deflected on its way by gravitational (and now framedragging) effects from celestial objects it passes them). Could interaction with dark matter strip shorter wavelengths from the light?
There can be other explanations than the Big Bang for the 4080 MHz CMB hum, and the temperature variations in the CMB found by the WMAP.
Cramming the whole proto-universe onto the head of a pin only to have it activated by an inflaton seems somewhat anti-Occam's Razor.
It takes an incredible amount of blind belief to credit that this whole vast universe with countless billions of galaxies was crammed into a space some twenty orders of magnitude smaller that a single proton. But I can not see that there is any option available other than a discontinuous universe where atoms are synchronously but independently projected as space frames in a cosmic movie. External linear space is then defined relative to the internal spherical space of each primary atom of hydrogen. There is no other universal measuring rod out there. All other interpretations make implicit assumptions about space and time derived from creation a posteriori. In a discontinuous universe this is not necessary. A primary interval of time is defined by the duration of each synchronous frame with respect to the transmission of light. Electromagnetic processes are the only activity within each space frame. All relative particulate motion occurs as discrete quantum jumps between space frames. That is why light is quantized. It comes to us from within atomic processes in discrete pulses, space frame by space frame.
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThere is much more in various articles at www.cosmic-mindreach.com.
Life's Is A Ubiquitous Evolution Mode
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe mode of a gene's response to organism-culture's feedback signal, i.e. "replicate without change" or "replicate with change" in case of proven augmented energy constrainment by the offspring, is the mode of Life's normal evolution, which is the mode of evolution universally.
Genes' Expression Modification
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/200/122.page#3649
Again, the scope of of genes lifehood is not just the lifehood of genes.
Genes, and Life in general, are but one of the forms of mass, of constrained energy formats. The lifehood of genes is the foundation of the subject of evolutionary biology, which is a major component of the subject of life, which is a minute component of the subject of evolution of the universe, which is the subject for which humanity seeks a unified field theory.
Since the big-bang resolution of E/m superposition ALL the energy of the universe is destined for the galactic clusters expansion plus laying down of the gravity natrix for the eventual cosmic impansion, and ALL the mass is destined to revert to energy for these ends. The mass-to-energy reversion is resisted by the mass, this resistance being the archtype of selection for survival by all materials, including life. This resistance is due, exciting to us, to the fact that - as we know from everyday experience - formation of mass requires investment of energy, that dissipates when the mass disintegrates. And as we also know from everyday experience all energy forms other than gravity end up eventually as gravity energy. This is expected since ALL the contents of the universe are manifestations of the gravity energy freed at Inflation.
And again, a unified field theory is sought since unlike the evergrowing list of specific science/technology divisions drawn by the "scientists" trade-unions like the AAAS, the universe and Earth evolve as an integrated intertwined interrelated tangled whole and not as a collection of individual divisions.
Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)
Updated Life's Manifest May 2009
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/140/122.page#2321
Implications Of E=Total[m(1 + D)]
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/180/122.page#3108
Life's Is A Ubiquitous Evolution Mode
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisThe mode of a gene's response to organism-culture's feedback signal, i.e. "replicate without change" or "replicate with change" in case of proven augmented energy constrainment by the offspring, is the mode of Life's normal evolution, which is the mode of evolution universally.
Genes' Expression Modification
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/200/122.page#3649
Again, the scope of of genes lifehood is not just the lifehood of genes.
Genes, and Life in general, are but one of the forms of mass, of constrained energy formats. The lifehood of genes is the foundation of the subject of evolutionary biology, which is a major component of the subject of life, which is a minute component of the subject of evolution of the universe, which is the subject for which humanity seeks a unified field theory.
Since the big-bang resolution of E/m superposition ALL the energy of the universe is destined for the galactic clusters expansion plus laying down of the gravity natrix for the eventual cosmic impansion, and ALL the mass is destined to revert to energy for these ends. The mass-to-energy reversion is resisted by the mass, this resistance being the archtype of selection for survival by all materials, including life. This resistance is due, exciting to us, to the fact that - as we know from everyday experience - formation of mass requires investment of energy, that dissipates when the mass disintegrates. And as we also know from everyday experience all energy forms other than gravity end up eventually as gravity energy. This is expected since ALL the contents of the universe are manifestations of the gravity energy freed at Inflation.
And again, a unified field theory is sought since unlike the evergrowing list of specific science/technology divisions drawn by the "scientists" trade-unions like the AAAS, the universe and Earth evolve as an integrated intertwined interrelated tangled whole and not as a collection of individual divisions.
Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)
Updated Life's Manifest May 2009
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/140/122.page#2321
Implications Of E=Total[m(1 + D)]
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/180/122.page#3108
Natural Selection Derives From Cosmic Expansion
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisTwo suggested editorial items:
I.
Origin And Nature Of Natural Selection
Update Concepts And Comprehension
Life is another mass format.
All mass formats are subject to natural selection.
Natural selection is delaying conversion of mass to energy fueling cosmic expansion.
Cosmic expansion is reconversion of all mass to energy.
Natural Selection Updated 2010
Beyond Historical Concepts
Natural Selection applies to ALL mass formats. Life is just one of them.
Natural Selection Defined:
Natural selection is E (energy) temporarily constrained in an m (mass) format.
Period.
Natural selection is a ubiquitous property of each and every and all cosmic mass, spin array, formats. Mass strives to increase its constrained energy content in attempt to postpone its conversion to energy and the addition of its constitutional energy to the totality of the cosmic energy that keeps fueling the cosmic expansion that goes on since the big bang.
Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)
03.2010 Updated Life Manifest
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/54.page#5065
Cosmic Evolution Simplified
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/240/122.page#4427
Gravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/260/122.page#4887
EOTOE, Embarrassingly obvious TOE, expanding the horizon beyond Darwin And Einstein
http://www.molecularfossils.com/2010/05/formal-test-of-theory-of-universal.html
============================================
Origin And Nature Of Natural Selection
Longevity Schmongevity Genes
It's Not The Procedure, But The Concept That Is Absurd
Longevity Genes Search Reflects Science Decadence
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/320/122.page#6368
A. For most centenarians, longevity is written in the DNA.
A study of people who live past 100 reveals many genetic paths to a long life.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/60772/title/For_most_centenarians%2C_longevity_is_written_in_the_DNA
B. Longevity, survival, natural selection, evolution
- Merriam-Webster OnLine
Longevity = a : a long duration of individual life b : length of life <a study of longevity>
- Longevity is about survival, which is about "natural selection", which is about energy constrainment, which is about life evolution, which is about cosmic evolution. Every mass is destined to become energy to fuel the ongoing cosmic expansion. This is why organisms and black holes etc., eat, digest energy in mass forms, to avoid-postpone conversion to energy. This is evolution, which is natural selection, which is survival, which is longevity.
- All mass formats age. Life is a mass format. Searching for longevity genes is searching for evolution genes...
C. The search for longevity genes is a reflection of the 20th-21st centuries science decadence
Its concepts and terminology reflect the abandonment of basic science for adoption of the pretentious cancerous capitalist 20th-21st century technology culture.
Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)
II.
Rethink Astronomy And The Universe
even without Quantum Unique Ergodicity, but with plain commonsense
Galactic clusters formed by dispersion, not by conglomeration. The proof of this is their behaviour, including acceleration, as Newtonian bodies.
These bodies formed at the start of inflation, when all energy was still in mass format, and the inflation was the start of reconversion of cosmic mass into energy.
Rethink
- A Basic Physics Tenet
- The Universe In Which We Live
A. Neutrino quick-change artist caught in the act
A transformation from one flavor to another confirms the elusive elementary particles have mass and suggests a need for new physics.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/59825/title/Neutrino_quick-change_artist_caught_in_the_act
B. Adopt
- Each and every particle has mass.
- Dark energy and matter YOK.
- Higgs field/particle YOK.
- Do not be afraid of embarrassingly obvious answers. Adopt space-distance in lieu of space-time.
C. And Rethink The Universe
By the presently available data our universe is a dual-cycle array.
One cycle, the present, started from singularity, with all cosmic energy in mass format, and it has been proceeding to reconvert all the mass resolved at the big bang back to energy, by expanding the cosmos, by accelerating away the galaxy clusters.
The other cycle, the cycle that led to singularity, will re-start when the expanding cosmos consumes most or all mass that fuels the expansion. Gravity will then initiate reconversion of all the energy back to mass, to singularity, again.
Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)
Cosmic Evolution Simplified
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/240/122.page#4427
Gravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/260/122.page#4887
EOTOE.Embarrassingly obvious expanding horizons beyond Darwin And Einstein.
http://www.molecularfossils.com/2010/05/formal-test-of-theory-of-universal.html
Cosmic Evolution Beyond Darwin And Einstein
Reply | Report Abuse | Link to thisNatural Selection Derives From Cosmic Expansion
Two suggested editorial items:
I.
Origin And Nature Of Natural Selection
Update Concepts And Comprehension
Life is another mass format.
All mass formats are subject to natural selection.
Natural selection is delaying conversion of mass to energy fueling cosmic expansion.
Cosmic expansion is reconversion of all mass to energy.
Natural Selection Updated 2010
Beyond Historical Concepts
Natural Selection applies to ALL mass formats. Life is just one of them.
Natural Selection Defined:
Natural selection is E (energy) temporarily constrained in an m (mass) format.
Period.
Natural selection is a ubiquitous property of each and every and all cosmic mass, spin array, formats. Mass strives to increase its constrained energy content in attempt to postpone its conversion to energy and the addition of its constitutional energy to the totality of the cosmic energy that keeps fueling the cosmic expansion that goes on since the big bang.
Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)
03.2010 Updated Life Manifest
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/54.page#5065
Cosmic Evolution Simplified
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/240/122.page#4427
Gravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/260/122.page#4887
EOTOE, Embarrassingly obvious TOE, expanding the horizon beyond Darwin And Einstein
http://www.molecularfossils.com/2010/05/formal-test-of-theory-of-universal.html
============================================
Origin And Nature Of Natural Selection
Longevity Schmongevity Genes
It's Not The Procedure, But The Concept That Is Absurd
Longevity Genes Search Reflects Science Decadence
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/320/122.page#6368
A. For most centenarians, longevity is written in the DNA.
A study of people who live past 100 reveals many genetic paths to a long life.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/60772/title/For_most_centenarians%2C_longevity_is_written_in_the_DNA
B. Longevity, survival, natural selection, evolution
- Merriam-Webster OnLine
Longevity = a : a long duration of individual life b : length of life <a study of longevity>
- Longevity is about survival, which is about "natural selection", which is about energy constrainment, which is about life evolution, which is about cosmic evolution. Every mass is destined to become energy to fuel the ongoing cosmic expansion. This is why organisms and black holes etc., eat, digest energy in mass forms, to avoid-postpone conversion to energy. This is evolution, which is natural selection, which is survival, which is longevity.
- All mass formats age. Life is a mass format. Searching for longevity genes is searching for evolution genes...
C. The search for longevity genes is a reflection of the 20th-21st centuries science decadence
Its concepts and terminology reflect the abandonment of basic science for adoption of the pretentious cancerous capitalist 20th-21st century technology culture.
Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)
II.
Rethink Astronomy And The Universe
even without Quantum Unique Ergodicity, but with plain commonsense
Galactic clusters formed by dispersion, not by conglomeration. The proof of this is their behaviour, including acceleration, as Newtonian bodies.
These bodies formed at the start of inflation, when all energy was still in mass format, and the inflation was the start of reconversion of cosmic mass into energy.
Rethink
- A Basic Physics Tenet
- The Universe In Which We Live
A. Neutrino quick-change artist caught in the act
A transformation from one ‘flavor’ to another confirms the elusive elementary particles have mass and suggests a need for new physics.
http://www.sciencenews.org/view/generic/id/59825/title/Neutrino_quick-change_artist_caught_in_the_act
B. Adopt
- Each and every particle has mass.
- Dark energy and matter YOK.
- Higgs field/particle YOK.
- Do not be afraid of embarrassingly obvious answers. Adopt space-distance in lieu of space-time.
C. And Rethink The Universe
By the presently available data our universe is a dual-cycle array.
One cycle, the present, started from singularity, with all cosmic energy in mass format, and it has been proceeding to reconvert all the mass resolved at the big bang back to energy, by expanding the cosmos, by accelerating away the galaxy clusters.
The other cycle, the cycle that led to singularity, will re-start when the expanding cosmos consumes most or all mass that fuels the expansion. Gravity will then initiate reconversion of all the energy back to mass, to singularity, again.
Dov Henis
(Comments From The 22nd Century)
Cosmic Evolution Simplified
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/240/122.page#4427
Gravity Is The Monotheism Of The Cosmos
http://www.the-scientist.com/community/posts/list/260/122.page#4887
EOTOE.Embarrassingly obvious expanding horizons beyond Darwin And Einstein.
http://www.molecularfossils.com/2010/05/formal-test-of-theory-of-universal.html