Go Back   Physics Help Forum > College/University Physics Help > Theoretical Physics

Theoretical Physics Theoretical Physics Help Forum

Closed Thread
 
LinkBack Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Nov 25th 2013, 09:26 AM   #31
Senior Member
 
Troll's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2013
Location: Under a bridge, Tampa, Florida USA
Posts: 157
Originally Posted by topsquark View Post
What does color have to do with this? And you are incorrect about the resolution comment...At this point the "smallest" component of mass that we know of is considered to be an up quark. (Yes we have electrons, etc, but they are not the primary constituents of matter.) So far as we know you can't get smaller than that so fractal mass distributions cannot happen.
Quarks are said to have colors and flavors... If there are different quarks then they must be made up of a more primitive entity.
The accelerating rate is not modeled on a parabola. You appear to be thinking of the position function of an object moving with a constant acceleration. The acceleration of the rate of expansion of the Universe due to dark energy is not constant over space.
If the expansion of the universe is accelerating then this is a parabolic function. This was distorted by the conclusions of Dr. Permutter in order to preserve the Big Bang.
You cannot traverse the path backward...all you can do is try to observe it from the light radiated by the singularity. And how would the Big Bang be an illusion? I don't understand your inference.
IF you could travel back in time to the Big Bang, I believe that you could still observe light from the "singularity" that would indicate that the big bang occurred about 3.7 billion years previous (note that my toroids would have time very much greatly compressed).
What hypothesis? The only one listed in your link refers to a photon moving faster than the speed of light, which as I mentioned in that thread cannot happen.
-Dan
My hypothesis that the universe is composed of eternally expanding toroidal fields which compress space at a single point infinitely and hold time to a stand still at the same point. Outside of this origin point time/space is less and less affected. Dark energy would be the energy fueling the expansion of these toroids. What we perceive as matter/mass would be interactions between these fields. Gravity would be our perception of this expansion. If we could step outside of space/time and observe the universe as a whole we would observe an infinitude of static toroids in an infinite space. Also any region of space/time would resolve as a single point where space is infinitely compressed and time is at a standstill... those darn fractals again!
__________________
Deception is a complex concept which the human mind is unable to resolve...

Last edited by Troll; Nov 25th 2013 at 10:31 AM.
Troll is offline  
Old Nov 25th 2013, 10:36 AM   #32
Physics Team
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Posts: 1,425
Light propagation

For a mechanism, look at the wave theory of light or electromagnetic waves in general. A changing electric field induces a changing magnetic field which in turn induces another changing electric field and so on and these changing fields propagate at the speed of light. When light is looked upon as a photon, as far as i know, no mechanism is ascribed.
physicsquest is offline  
Old Nov 25th 2013, 10:55 AM   #33
Forum Admin
 
topsquark's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: On the dance floor, baby!
Posts: 2,470
Originally Posted by Troll View Post
Quarks are said to have colors and flavors... If there are different quarks then they must be made up of a more primitive entity.
There are 6 flavors of quarks: up, down, strange, charmed, bottom, top. So far as we know each of these flavors is fundamental, ie. they are not made of something else. Colors do not really change anything about the quarks...colors are similar to charges. I don't think we would see a positively charged potassium atom to be fundamentally different from an uncharged potassium atom.

Originally Posted by Troll View Post
If the expansion of the universe is accelerating then this is a parabolic function.
This is simply wrong. If you have proof otherwise then I will retract my statement.

Originally Posted by Troll View Post
IF you could travel back in time to the Big Bang, I believe that you could still observe light from the "singularity" that would indicate that the big bang occurred about 13.7 billion years previous (note that my toroids would have time very much greatly compressed).
You said 3.7 billion years. Typo?

Originally Posted by Troll View Post
My hypothesis that the universe is composed of eternally expanding toroidal fields which compress space at a single point infinitely and hold time to a stand still at the same point.
There is no evidence that I know of for these toroidal fields that you are so keen on. At this point I'm going to say enough is enough. If you have some kind (any kind!) of evidence for these, or at least a way to measure them, then I will re-open the thread.

-Dan
__________________
Do not meddle in the affairs of dragons for you are crunchy and taste good with ketchup.

See the forum rules here.
topsquark is offline  
Closed Thread

  Physics Help Forum > College/University Physics Help > Theoretical Physics

Tags
constituent, entities, primary, universe



Thread Tools
Display Modes


Similar Physics Forum Discussions
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
The end of the universe(by eye) philipishin Special and General Relativity 1 Aug 23rd 2016 06:15 PM
Is the Universe Random? MBW Philosophy of Physics 25 Jun 25th 2016 04:48 AM
The Unobservable Universe Mandrake Special and General Relativity 8 Nov 1st 2013 06:31 PM
what is primary color and what is its significance?? kenny1999 Light and Optics 1 Sep 2nd 2009 11:42 AM
Determinism of our Universe arbolis Philosophy of Physics 6 Jul 27th 2009 11:19 AM


Facebook Twitter Google+ RSS Feed