E=mc²

if you look at a huge field of wheat. it looks homogeneously and isometricly planted of wheat. but at close range, no wheat plant is like the other, and from a satellite or plane you can see beyond the borders of this field. maybe it's an adacent barley field, or ... yet another wheat field :(

you're saying the same thing, but at different scale:

the universe has a (flat) saddle shape and is isometric, and homogeneous: same distance, and same structures no matter what direction you look.

but not for small distances (< 10-25 million light years) or >20 billion light years. no body knows (as sun said) what there is beyond these 20 billions l.y. but there's many unconclusive signs that it's a different universe.

I totally agree THE , there was only one force which quickly broke into different kind of energies, but still I talking about precursor of that on singular force. I have not seen the edge of the Universe, however, some of the satellite telescopes have. Universe is not edgeless. However, there are different theories about what forms the edge. Is it the dense electromagnetic field or is it the light speed horizon (that the limit which is more that 14 billion light years away & light cannot reach us from there)

I heard somebody talking about dark matter, well that person is completely lost my drift. I think he needs to read my post again. I repeat 'This X is some entity which was present before big bang & was responsible for release of massive energy which converted into weak force, strong force, gravity & dark energy (controversial though) & also matter & anti matter. Most the matter & antimatter was nullified each other with only a fraction of matter left which was responsible for creation universe. Dark matter is a very heavy thing with very strong gravity.

I repeat X which I have suggested has speed faster than light & is capable of traveling between Universes which itself is against physical laws. Because one of the proposed theory of universe says that the edge of universe is so dense with electromagnetic field that even light cannot cross it. Dark energy is physical. It is a a form of energy which was formed as one of the many forces like strong force , weak force & gravity after the big bang. Dark energy essentially is a physical entity. And my 'X' factor is nothing of that sort.

Mind is faster than light.. While reading this message MIND wish to go beyond 7 skies and comes back. For Light to reach earth it takes something called 8 minutes.

Now Change the Theory ( It is still a theory...)

to E=mM2. Whereas small m is the mass and Big M is the MIND. Only with MIND one understand the Universe. With Just science One can not do anything other than sending a rocket in the So called Space.

In Universe Everything is Moving ...

And we are all Packed in the 7 skies and Earth surrounded by 7 skies and First Sky is blue or variation of blue.

With this Physical body nothing can be Achieved.. We need MIND... The MINS that influence Matter... and Beyond that...

Now the SPACE starts after 7 skies..

black hole or dark matter or dark energy. somthing that has nergy/mass = gravity between this galaxy and us.

Yes, the reddish arc is the lensing effect due to a black-hole on the way of light..:)

agree with knight returns. we can't pick up dark mater/energy per se, but we can see it's physical effect:

gravitational bending of light (space time curving)

have a look at the lensing effect:

http://talk.galaxyzoo.org/objects/AGZ0000jdk

or

it's from my zoounivers collection, so donno if you'll be able to see the pics.

it can Thelonius! in a parallel univers where the gravity is much weaker (versus the strong and electroweakforces) than in our univers. but it will be a very fast expanding universe, condemned to expand so fast that even quarks might not have "time!!" to aggregate into hadrons.

Dark matter behaves like matter..in the sense that it provides enough gravitation to give higher rotation rates to galaxies and keeping the cluster of galaxies from spreading out fast.

Some possible dark matters may be neutrinos with mass, undetected brown dwarfs, white dwarf stars and black holes etc.

So, they are not non-physical entity. They do exist but cannot be picked up by us.

this 'X' is the dark energy. but it is physical too. only it doesn't interact easily with the known matter. it is "elusive" for our current detector instruments but it still abide by the physical forces we know, like gravity, and it is infalting the universe. even supersymtric particle where bosons we know are fermions and vice versa, abide to the physics we know (electroweak, strong, gravity)

what do yu mean by non physical? energy is physical.

at particle scale, particles behave like both states: mass and energy at the same time (young's interference experiment using the double split).

you can't predict where the particle is exactly (heisenberg uncertainty principle).

U are right the big bang was neither big nor bang. It was a small blob which exploded & there was no air for any audible 'bang'. It was a silent cracking of a subatomic partcle.

People are talking about Science and Technology.. About Big Bang and taught Universe was created by Big Bang. But every creation created in silence right from sperm and womb cell combination and growth of Plant.

Either something from outside (weak forces or dark energy) is pulling them outwards or something is pushing the galaxies outward with a steady force. And the Universe is expanding like a balloon which after initial resistance is inflating freely & hence the acceleration. I think the force which is inflating this ballon of universe is "X" which is a non physical entity.

Yes drsam. I agree void is not empty and if energy is being converted into mass, something is being converted into energy. My postulation is that energy is an intermediate stage of conversion of non physical entity into physical entity (like prion & viruses represent the intermediate stage of living & nonliving entities). The reason I wouldn't accept model of a static or pulsating universe is because universe is not only expanding but it is accelerating outwards. there can be only two explanations for that.

is there an origin for the universe?

stephen hawkings doesn't rule out the possibility of a big-bang being very common: if you have a flat land, and dig a huge hole in this land, you will have a hole, but also a pile of soil you removed from that hole.

similarly, you can build a complete universe out of nothing. void is not empty. it is a very dinamic place where particles and their anti-particle counterpart are created and annihilated constantly.

drsam, The Big Bang has been discussed many a times at length here..

http://www.qatarliving.com/node/1970524

You could refer this thread for more info.

I will read 'cosmic landscape'.I have read about dark matter & dark energy.Also about the delicate off balance between matter and antimatter, but this is all post 'Big Bang' and about a universe which almost always fall in line for speed of light. I am proposing a theory for the conditions before the origin of Universe.

Second one is cuter......although too much of cleavage.

very nice subject.

to make long things short, read Leonid Susskind "the cosmic landscape"

einstein's concept of the universe was a static one. a static universe would collapse under it's own gravity. so einstein introduced a constant that negate the gravity. after hubble proved that galaxies are moving, there was no more need of this constant. eistein said of this constant "my biggest scientific mistake". well he was wrong! this constant do exist and is pulling the universe apart at an increasing rate.

all the things we see/feel around us makes less than 5% of the universe! with 25% being dark matter, the remaining 70% being this dark energy that pulls the univers apart.

Thanks for appreciation.

MM that's a very cute pic.

We should blame whom ?

atleast ... '' We don't know what was in Einstein Mind '',

correct my brother.

4) Einstein was hardcore anti Nazi & that was one of the reason why he was so much glamorized by 'allies'. In fact the evidence of E=mc2 was first produced by a German scientist who was working with uranium to produce a heavier element. When he got these results, first thing he did was write to Einstein and the next thing Einstein did was writing to Roosevelt and the result was Hiroshima & Nagasaki.

5) But Einstein was a very honest person. He always had problems with authorities & in fact, when he completed his college, none of his professor gave him a reference.So he has to start with a very insignificant boring job.

And about Einstein

1) He used to play violin & was quite popular amongst fairer sex right from his college days

2) He was a cheat husband & was a big time MCP

3) Although he has suggested the basic idea of the E=mc2, the mathematics of this formula was done by someone else.In fact Einstein's first wife was also a physicist & earlier she used do all his mathematical calculations.

hahaha, my friends. Even I am not a physicist. But origin of Universe is something which interests me distraction. In fact, when I went through the complete history of evolution of E=mc2, I realized that most of the contributors who led to development of this equation were people like tax collector of Paris (who was guillotined during French revolution), a pastor (who was never accepted in scientific community because of his connection with God). So I thought maybe I can also give a theory.

God rules over the unknown and unexplored...as soon as the unknown becomes known, God's domain shrinks further to the remaining unknown area left.

Till some 1000 years back, people believed God made the earth, sun and moon. Now that almost everyone knows about the Big Bang model, people are talking about God causing the Big Bang!!

Did you guys know what's 'quantum fluctuations' and why it may have occured?

Did someone notice him feeling guilty ..

The Lonious "Many things happen without a cause."

Would really appreciate if you can list out some of those please?

He was mortal and a man. So, like most men, he must have had thoughts of women on his mind..

Also,some of his actual letters reveal him as a womaniser and philanderer :O)

Really !

Then , so common with many on the street ...

The e=mc2 is applicable the within first sky... Or its Applicable after 7 skies. The first sky is beautiful and decorated with stars. Just imagine rest of the skies.

We don't know what was in Einstein Mind. If he Could have believed in 7 skies as the Vibgyor demonstrates very often to human beings as there are 7 skies above the Head... Then Einstein could have been correct if he believed so.

As long as Einstein Was alive everyone use to mock him. After his death they used to pick all his papers and said he is correct. He needs just one pencil and paper and GOD taught him the New Langauge e= mc2.

"..not everything must have a reason."

Hail Thelonius the Wise..

It is exactly this which allows us to "believe" have faith and be different. Thus complementing each other in this beautiful world.

QL doesnt seem to be the right place for it I guess. Try talking to people with similar background and who are active in the field.

Was it weed arrack or ale last night?

physics?