On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 8:46 AM Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 22, 2019 at 5:36 PM Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Mon, Sep 23, 2019 at 1:39 AM Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> On Thu, Sep 19, 2019, 9:34 PM Bruce Kellett <bhkellet...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> On Fri, Sep 20, 2019 at 11:46 AM Jason Resch <jasonre...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> On Thursday, September 19, 2019, Alan Grayson <agrayson2...@gmail.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> What I have shown is that it's hypothetically possible to have >>>>>> countable universes wherein there are no repeats, no exact copies. AG >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> It might be imaginable but there being no duplicates of any finite >>>>> spaces within an infinite space violates the Bekenstein bound and >>>>> holographic principle. >>>>> >>>> >>>> That is simply false. The duplicates could contain no information. The >>>> Bekenstein bound applies to black holes, suggesting that if the infinite >>>> space has a finite matter density, it will close to form a BH. The >>>> holographic principle is a conjecture based on disfavoured string theory. >>>> >>> >>> Both places absolute finite limits on the information content of a >>> finite volume containing finite energy. Is this no longer a favored theory >>> in physics? >>> >> >> Holography is highly speculative. The Bekenstein bound does not apply to >> non-static universes, such as our expanding universe. >> > > The Bekenstein bound doesn't apply to universe, it applies to volumes. > Are you aware of a way to physically store infinite information in a finite > space using finite energy? > The Bekenstein bound does not apply to our Hubble volume. If you take the mean density over this volume, and the Hubble radius, you find that the amount of enclosed matter saturates the Bekenstein bound. But we are not inside a black hole.... So the bound does not apply to every volume.... If a finite region does contain finite information, then in an infinite >>> (homogeneous) space, that same finite pattern will reappear infinitely. >>> >> >> You overlook the possibility that the infinite repeats are of >> uninteresting volumes, and that the initial conditions for some volumes may >> never repeat. >> > > But that would contradict standard cosmological models, where all > variation was seeded by quantum fluctuations occurring at all scales of > expansion, such that every conceivable pattern that is possible can happen > and would happen (and infinitely often in either a spatially infinite > universe, or an eternally inflating universe). > What are quantum fluctuations? This is another of the very dubious assumptions/misconceptions built into the very foundations of inflation theory. > This is a consequence also of eternal inflation, and Guth used almost >>> identical language saying everything that can happen happens an infinite >>> number of times. >>> >> >> Guth was wrong about a lot of things. Eternal inflation is an unproven >> speculative idea. Not even inflation itself is entirely secure -- it is >> increasingly becoming to look like a solution in search of a problem. All >> of Guth's original motivations for inflation have come to very little. >> > > Wasn't it strongly confirmed by the Planck CMB measurements? > No, eternal inflation was not thereby confirmed. Some inflation models received support, and many were ruled out by the CMB data. But nothing is clearly settled. > Guth and Linde were awarded the Break Through Prize, which is even > bigger than the Nobel prize. Wouldn't that suggest there had been some > support or confirmation of the theory? > Prizes are awarded for all sorts of things. Particularly the recent prizes for speculative ideas in string theory.... > > > https://s22380.pcdn.co/wp-content/uploads/2015_TT_power_spectrum_Planck_600px.jpg > > This endeavor is a challenging one, explains Planck team member Charles > Lawrence (JPL). Cosmologists start with the splotchy CMB pattern. From that > they calculate what’s called the power spectrum, which reveals the strength > of the CMB’s fluctuations at different angular scales. (The power spectrum > is the wiggly graph at right.) The power spectrum is the cornerstone of the > whole effort: it’s this statistical map that cosmologists base their CMB > analysis on. > > The cosmologists then make some assumptions about what kind of universe > they’re dealing with — in astrospeak, they assume the standard lambda-CDM > model, which includes (1) a particular solution to the general relativistic > equations of gravity, (2) a universe that looks basically the same on large > scales and is expanding, (3) an early period of stupendous expansion called > inflation, and (4) quantum fluctuations that seeded today’s large-scale > matter distribution. > > I ask again, what are quantum fluctuations? Bruce -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Everything List" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to everything-list+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/everything-list/CAFxXSLR4BR8bh536LySkD%3Du-j58DiFrS%3Dg0Wzj5LFUrbh7xr7w%40mail.gmail.com.
