Doug wrote:
Sorry I haven’t responded to previous posts; I just had minor surgery
(doing fine) and being high on vicodin isn't much of an advantage in
an this kind of discussion.
No, but it makes it a lot of fun to watch Yellow Submarine :)
Julia
Been There, Done That
Doug wrote:
Charlie wrote:
On the contrary, I'd say it's a positive boon!
I imagine it affects different people different ways. It makes me
feel groggy and slightly nauseous.
I'm sorry!
One of the scripts I got after my surgery last fall (I had 2 different
painkillers) included a bit
Going back to basics, it seems to me that our experience with orbital
mechanics for spacecraft and satelites and our use of the slingshot
effect to propel interplanetary missions to the outer solar system
are pretty good evidence that we have a good theory and a good grasp
of it.
Well,
Dan wrote:
As an aside, the first results of GP-B will be given at the APS meeting in
April. My guess is that they are not earth shatteringor they'd be
pre-announced in the press.
I just spoke with someone who spent a good deal of time on that project and he
seems to agree with you.
On 13/02/2007, at 3:07 PM, Doug wrote:
Dan wrote:
As an aside, the first results of GP-B will be given at the APS
meeting in
April. My guess is that they are not earth shatteringor
they'd be
pre-announced in the press.
I just spoke with someone who spent a good deal of time on
Charlie wrote:
On the contrary, I'd say it's a positive boon!
I imagine it affects different people different ways. It makes me feel groggy
and slightly nauseous.
--
Doug
___
http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
On 13/02/2007, at 5:43 PM, Doug wrote:
Charlie wrote:
On the contrary, I'd say it's a positive boon!
I imagine it affects different people different ways. It makes me
feel groggy and slightly nauseous.
Coincidentally, that's precisely how physics makes me feel...
Charlie
Original Message:
-
From: Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:36:35 -0800
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: Endless Universe Made Possible By New Model
Klaus wrote:
Yup, but we've got indirect evidence already.
Not really. All we've got is that some of our
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Saturday, February 10, 2007 12:56 PM
Subject: Re: Endless Universe Made Possible By New Model
Original Message:
-
From: Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Fri, 09 Feb 2007 18:36:35 -0800
To: brin
Klaus wrote:
Yup, but we've got indirect evidence already.
Not really. All we've got is that some of our pet theories don't work without
it. That type 1A su
As for direct evidence, we don't have any at all. Not even for gravity. All
we notice is that things keep falling to the ground, and
Why egotistical? Science is not about uncovering mysteries and truths,
it's about modeling observation. The Big Bang does a very good job of
that.
As long as the universe is 74% mysterious dark energy, for which there
is no
direct evidence.
Yup, but we've got indirect evidence
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Doug
Sent: Tuesday, February 06, 2007 10:31 PM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: Endless Universe Made Possible By New Model
Dan wrote:
Actually, atoms, protons, neutrons, pions, etc
Dan wrote:
Actually, atoms, protons, neutrons, pions, etc. are not orbital in nature.
Are there similarities in structure?
Why egotistical? Science is not about uncovering mysteries and truths,
it's about modeling observation. The Big Bang does a very good job of
that.
As long as the
- Original Message -
From: Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Friday, February 02, 2007 2:29 PM
Subject: Re: Endless Universe Made Possible By New Model
On 03/02/2007, at 1:44 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
-Original Message-
From
Rob wrote:
AFAICT it is all meta-physics and only nominally related to reality as
we know it.
Like Charlie, I am not a physicist. Unlike Charlie, I have even less
background to speculate from. So if anyone has even specks that might
edify me I would be interested. I find the whole idea of
Original Message:
-
From: Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 07:29:10 +1100
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: Endless Universe Made Possible By New Model
On 03/02/2007, at 1:44 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED
Original Message:
-
From: Doug [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Sat, 03 Feb 2007 12:33:41 -0800
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Subject: Re: Endless Universe Made Possible By New Model
Rob wrote:
AFAICT it is all meta-physics and only nominally related to reality as
we know it.
Like Charlie
On 04/02/2007, at 6:48 AM, Robert Seeberger wrote:
I think the key new idea is given in this paragraph:
At the turnaround, each fragmented patch collapses and contracts
individually instead of pulling back together in a reversal of the Big
Bang. The patches become an infinite number of
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 5:19 PM
Subject: Re: Endless Universe Made Possible By New Model
Finally, what if Wheeler is right about the universe. :-)
[Guessing]
Delayed Choice?
xponent
Anthropic
- Original Message -
From: Charlie Bell [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Killer Bs Discussion brin-l@mccmedia.com
Sent: Saturday, February 03, 2007 5:36 PM
Subject: Re: Endless Universe Made Possible By New Model
Still, it doesn't seem to change anything we know about the
expansion
phase
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charlie Bell
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:55 PM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: Endless Universe Made Possible By New Model
On 01/02/2007, at 1:20 PM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote
On 03/02/2007, at 1:44 AM, Dan Minette wrote:
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:brin-l-
[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Charlie Bell
Sent: Wednesday, January 31, 2007 8:55 PM
To: Killer Bs Discussion
Subject: Re: Endless Universe Made Possible By New Model
On 1/31/2007 9:35:28 PM, Charlie Bell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On 01/02/2007, at 2:13 PM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
IOW, will the daughter universes be as favorable for life as ours,
or
will they be random iterations?
Very tiny, almost unmeasurably small, bits of our universe are
On 01/02/2007, at 10:22 PM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
Heh!
I'm thinking more along the lines of Pi, C, or Planks Constant having
differing values.
I know that's what you meant, but it still seems to be a wrong-way-
round argument. Even if those constants were different, whatever the
On 2/1/2007 7:33:42 AM, Charlie Bell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On 01/02/2007, at 10:22 PM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
Heh!
I'm thinking more along the lines of Pi, C, or Planks Constant
having
differing values.
I know that's
what you meant, but it still seems to be a wrong-way-
On 02/02/2007, at 11:02 AM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
Wellthat is pretty much what I was getting at, that chemistry
might not be possible in some configurations. Or that even atoms might
not be possible.
WRT that, I think it is a valid question.
Sure, but there will also be many many
http://www.spacedaily.com/reports/Endless_Universe_Made_Possible_By_New_Model_999.html
A new cosmological model demonstrates the universe can endlessly
expand and contract, providing a rival to Big Bang theories and
solving a thorny modern physics problem, according to University of
North
On 01/02/2007, at 1:20 PM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
This cycle happens an infinite number of times, thus eliminating any
start or end of time, Frampton said. There is no Big Bang.
Um... I thought Big Bang theory doesn't rule out a prior Big Crunch.
What they're doing is presenting a new
On 1/31/2007 8:54:36 PM, Charlie Bell ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
On 01/02/2007, at 1:20 PM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
This cycle happens an infinite number of times, thus eliminating
any
start or end of time,
Frampton said. There is no Big Bang.
Um... I thought Big Bang theory
On 01/02/2007, at 2:13 PM, Robert G. Seeberger wrote:
IOW, will the daughter universes be as favorable for life as ours, or
will they be random iterations?
Very tiny, almost unmeasurably small, bits of our universe are
favourable to life. This whole fine tuning set of arguments strikes
30 matches
Mail list logo
