First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
The Big Bang never happened?
Posted 2/10/15

Zoraprime wrote:


SilvaZoldyck wrote:

(I'd rather avoid actual papers because papers are hard to read if you don't have a substantial math background, and I'd rather avoid the popular press because it tends to be very bad at describing physics. So the sources I'd tend to go for on this subject are things like textbooks, physicist blogs, and lectures intended at not-graduate level audiences)


I just wanna second this opinion.

In terms of particular textbooks, the Feynman Lectures are notable for being put online for free. That said, it does go into calculus *relatively* quickly, but so long as you know the derivative is a speedometer measuring how "quick" something changes and the integral is a measure of how much something has changed, I don't think it'll be too bad. Feynman covers the relevant calculus from scratch, albeit, rather quickly. SilvaZoldyck can agree/disagree on Feynman lectures though.


I'll be sure to look into those lectures. Thanks. I'm not that great at math, but if I got a question I'll be sure to ask.
5991 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
19 / NB / US
Offline
Posted 2/10/15
Everything is in theory, really.

That's why I'm praying for some sorta time traveling machine some day, Then we'll get truly accurate historical happenings.
11497 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/10/15 , edited 2/12/15

Zoraprime wrote:

Feynman covers the relevant calculus from scratch, albeit, rather quickly. SilvaZoldyck can agree/disagree on Feynman lectures though.


Who in their right mind would ever disagree about recommending the Feynman lectures? Hell, I'm sorta sad I didn't mention them myself. I need to go through them cover to cover one of these days, but they're an excellent reference.


Ctonhunter wrote:

I'll be sure to look into those lectures. Thanks. I'm not that great at math, but if I got a question I'll be sure to ask.


Math builds on itself really, really well. So once you actually understand the concepts underneath, it's not hard to extend them.

Khan academy is a great resource for anyone wanting to learn more about math.
8345 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
24 / M / UK
Offline
Posted 2/11/15
I created the universe...
1606 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Earth
Offline
Posted 2/11/15

galaxiias wrote:

Everything is in theory, really.

That's why I'm praying for some sorta time traveling machine some day, Then we'll get truly accurate historical happenings.



And cause a time paradox in the process.
Posted 2/11/15
I think we all know who created the universe

27474 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
28 / M / Magpies nest
Offline
Posted 2/11/15

These terms keep the universe at a finite size, and therefore give it an infinite age.


This is the line that bothers me. I can't wrap my head around this topic without giving the universe both infinite size and age.
Posted 2/11/15
This doesn't explain why the universe is expanding.
Posted 2/11/15 , edited 2/11/15
Just being honest here, I have no idea what I've just read.

Physics is definitely my weakest subject as I have zero talent for maths or spatial-dimensional thinking.





Like every time I read a physics news article, there are several terminologies and key concepts that pop up in the article... that I don't understand. So I research further on those terms only to be slapped in the face with even more obscure terms or... a list of mathematical formulae. It's like a vicious cycle


WTH is a "Bohmian trajectories"???
2315 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
57 / M / Connecticut
Offline
Posted 2/12/15
A lot of physics is just theory: and if the math doesn't work they simply rework the math
Biggle 
2841 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
M / Houston, Tx
Offline
Posted 2/12/15
Come on guys, lets get real for a second-

The Big Bang has been only a theory, Nuff' said.
Sogno- 
46386 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/12/15
tbh i never really bought into the "oh everything somehow completely randomly worked out accordingly at the right place and now we have a planet with trillions of living things because of spontaneous yet exactly right mish-mash timewimey space stuff put together" lolwut
55520 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
25 / M / 風の山
Offline
Posted 2/12/15
i mean it states that it solves alot of problems, thats what made string theory so popular to begin with. if it survive hundreds of testing that tries to disprove it then it may be the new string theory. but then again, so much of physics don't really deal with it, so unless it proves to bring something major then it won't be taking over the big bang theory anytime soon no matter how accurate it is.

its like quarts, these things smaller than atoms and are possibly life changing. its still being proven today and a good majority of physicist don't believe it, which brings me to pluto, half the of the community agree on the change, but its all about the community of the people in charge, there is politics in everything,
Banned
358 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
44 / M
Offline
Posted 2/12/15
I don't care about science , I wish that shitty tv show never existed that would be better
11497 cr points
Send Message: Send PM GB Post
Offline
Posted 2/12/15

GayAsianBoy wrote:

WTH is a "Bohmian trajectories"???


Look up "bohmian mechanics", it's an alternate description of quantum mechanics that has some fans, but I can't say I'm well acquainted with it.


wolfsaiga wrote:

its like quarts, these things smaller than atoms and are possibly life changing. its still being proven today and a good majority of physicist don't believe it, which brings me to pluto, half the of the community agree on the change, but its all about the community of the people in charge, there is politics in everything,


... Quarks. The word is quarks, and no, almost NO physicist would go around saying "quarks don't exist".

Brief lesson in the history of particle physics!
There were debates about the existence of atoms basically up until 1905, when a young guy named Albert Einstein published a paper on the topic. It explained brownian motion, that is, the random motion of pollen in water based on the idea that water was made of molecules (which were made of discrete atoms)... He also published a paper that would come to be known as 'special relativity' that year, as well as a paper on the photoelectric effect that laid the foundation for quantum mechanics and won Einstein his nobel. 1905 was a good year for Einstein.

From this we get experiments like Rutherford's Gold Foil experiment where he found that atoms were made of mostly empty space except for very dense regions. We later learned that those regions were positively charged, and held most of the mass of the atom... with the electric part very not massive.

Ok, fine, so atoms exist, and the inside is very dense. So based on this we had a basic kind of prediction, the lightest element, hydrogen had a nucleus with the same charge as an electron. Helium had a nucleus with twice the charge of hydrogen, but a mass FOUR TIMES hydrogen.

So we said, "ok, the nucleus is made of smaller particles, protons, which are positively charged, and neutrons, which have no charge but roughly equal in mass to the proton". Fine, we could now explain atomic numbers in terms of proton number, and quantum mechanics was letting us explain things like these weird ideas of 'electron orbitals' (why electrons don't spin in and collide into the nucleus of an atom)

Everything sounds good until you ask the question "well... why dosn't the nucleus split apart if positive charges repel?"

"Well, if protons, and neutrons are made up of smaller particles called 'quarks' that are moderated by another particle, analogous to the photon for electromagnetism, but for a different 'force', a 'strong' force inside a nucleus".

The quark model was confirmed in the 1960s by SLAC. The last of the six 'flavors' of quarks, the "Top" quark was discovered at Fermilab in 1995. We understand matter, almost too well at this point.
First  Prev  1  2  3  4  Next  Last
You must be logged in to post.