I don't think you want to want to rule out dark energy. I have no idea what it is, but it seems to represent the bulk of the mass in the in the universe; therefore, it would have a great deal of influence on the gravity. If gravity is a form of energy, then dark matter matters.
Chris From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 10:27 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [RC] Dumb Question Opik's Razor Clear as a bell. Great, succinct way to explain things. OK, understanding that much now, here's my dilemma : After any explosion the energy source is depleted. None remains. The gunpowder or U-234, or whatnot, is used up. Seems to me that what propels the explosive "cloud" is momentum. The shrapnel or other residue no longer draws on a source of energy. It is self propelled, you might say. Or think of a skier. He or she pushes off at the top of a ski run. That's all the energy it takes. Not even one HP. But in a half minute the skier is zooming along at 70 MPH. Gravity does just about everything necessary. But is gravity a form of "energy" ? If it is, I have never heard of gravity described this way before. In a 3-dimensional volume there is no up or down, of course, and gravity can pull in any direction. Now, do we know that the Visible Universe is limitless or infinite in extent in every direction ? We don't have a clue. There was an astronomer / astrophysicist named Opik, think this is the correct spelling, who posited that we exist in a field of universes, like soap bubbles in a sink, each bubble a universe. Is this view testable ? Maybe it is. If it is true, then no energy source is necessary to account for acceleration. Nearby bubbles / universes are providing the impetus. The gravity would be very distended, no idea if it could be measured, but even an itty-bit per cubic X of volume and that would be sufficient, so it seems to me. Viz Cumulative effect added up over billions of years. Ergo, no need to speculate about "dark energy." You need to identify where the celestial gravity is coming from. This model is simple ( Ockham's razor ) and elegant. OK, tear it apart, see if I care. Billy <http://cdn-cf.aol.com/se/smi/2b00000227/13> PS You do realize, don't you, that I need coherence for my system of science-fiction planets ? Why else would I be so tenacious ? I don't really have feelings for the Crab Nebula or for far off galaxies discovered by Hubble, but I have proprietary interest in my dozens of imaginary worlds. ----------------------------------------------------------- message dated 10/6/2011 [email protected] writes: Actually, the pitcher's upper arm isn't traveling at 95 mph, but with the leverage of his external limb, wrist, hand, and digits he can achieve 95 mph at the tips of his fingers when the ball is released. Stick an atlatl at the end of his hand and you get even greater velocity thanks to the leverage of the atlatl. The energy that propels the object is provided by the thrower's muscles, the velocity is increased by leverage. With a universe that is expanding at an accelerating pace, we have to assume that there is some "muscle" that is still providing energy to increase the rate of expansion. Who knows, perhaps the energy source ended and a universe-sized atlatl is still whipping around because of the original energy imparted by the big bang. Chris ------------------------------------------ Christopher P. Hahn, Ph.D. Constructive Agreement, LLC <mailto:[email protected]> [email protected] P.O. Box 39, Bozeman, MT 59771 (406) 522-4143 (406) 556-7116 fax ------------------------------------------ From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of [email protected] Sent: Thursday, October 06, 2011 4:50 PM To: [email protected] Cc: [email protected] Subject: Re: [RC] Dumb Question comments below message dated 10/6/2011 3:40:58 P.M. Pacific Daylight Time, [email protected] writes: Hi Billy, On Oct 6, 2011, at 3:07 PM, [email protected] wrote: OK, assuming that much, why wouldn't simple inertia account for current observations about the accelerated speed of expansion of the universe ? That is, throw a baseball and for a time its speed is far greater than the speed of the pitcher's arm movements that released the ball. Yes, it begins to decelerate after a distance but not until X distance has been traversed. Um , yes. If for no other reason that a pitcher stands on a mound which is a foot or so higher than the playing field. Really obvious if the pitcher was standing on top of a mountain peak in the Sierras. The force of gravity would add acceleration to the speed of the ball, at least for X distance. And all this is about is the distance "X." But is a pitcher's arm really zooming along at 95 mph when getting set to throw a ball ? That is a typical speed for a ball thrown by a major league pitcher. Seems to me this is also about the multiplier effect of leverage. Billy ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Um, no. At release, the ball is moving exactly as fast as the fingers that propelled it. After that, it slows down due to friction, unless gravity is accelerating it downwards. If the universes is accelerating after "release", something is effectively "pulling" it. E -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org <http://radicalcentrism.org/> -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org -- Centroids: The Center of the Radical Centrist Community <[email protected]> Google Group: http://groups.google.com/group/RadicalCentrism Radical Centrism website and blog: http://RadicalCentrism.org
