Michael Merrier
@MichaelMerrier
12 April, 06:41
Lots of the modern Physics swirls around the concept of Dark Matter and Dark Energy, meaning matter and energy that we cannot find to explain the *apparent* rotational speeds of the galaxies.
But we only see what we see. How galaxies appear to us right now may not be the way they actually are. Many recent discoveries are not reproducible with anything on the ground, so you'd need to have access to space telescopes, which themselves are single source.
While the Sun and the Moon have the same apparent size, how far is the Sun then? This is not so easy to measure, given that the Sun is a source of electromagnetic radiation in itself.
Much of the modern cosmology works around the Einstein field equations by proposing new metrics, which enable people to mathematically and theoretically investigate what would happen -type cases. But, these metrics cannot easily be shown to represent reality.
https://www.youtube.com/wa...
But we only see what we see. How galaxies appear to us right now may not be the way they actually are. Many recent discoveries are not reproducible with anything on the ground, so you'd need to have access to space telescopes, which themselves are single source.
While the Sun and the Moon have the same apparent size, how far is the Sun then? This is not so easy to measure, given that the Sun is a source of electromagnetic radiation in itself.
Much of the modern cosmology works around the Einstein field equations by proposing new metrics, which enable people to mathematically and theoretically investigate what would happen -type cases. But, these metrics cannot easily be shown to represent reality.
https://www.youtube.com/wa...
Capturing NGC891 The Sliver Galaxy With Celestron 8SE - YouTube
I pulled out my Celestron 8SE to try and use it for this galaxy. Took me almost 1 hour to get everything setup and running without problems. I had problems...
Notice: Undefined index: tg1tga_access in /home/admin/www/anonup.com/themes/default/apps/timeline/post.phtml on line 396
Michael Merrier
@MichaelMerrier
12 April, 06:54
In response Michael Merrier to his Publication
So when people dig up the Alcubierre -type warp drive publications, it is a theoretical what if scenario.
Usually, a new metric is proposed, which works with Einstein field equations. But the metrics have not been proven to actually represent the reality, it's a mathematical construct that enables (usually mathematical) investigation. People are looking at the stellar objects to see indirect verifications of what they propose.
Much of the modern day cosmology is actually built like this, a metric for black holes, a metric for going inside of the black hole, a metric for charged rotating black holes, you name it. A metric for the warp drive curving space time. A metric for black holes does not enable warp drives.
This is from the top of my head, while doing my best to avoid Maths. It's been two decades since I've read General Relativity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w...
Usually, a new metric is proposed, which works with Einstein field equations. But the metrics have not been proven to actually represent the reality, it's a mathematical construct that enables (usually mathematical) investigation. People are looking at the stellar objects to see indirect verifications of what they propose.
Much of the modern day cosmology is actually built like this, a metric for black holes, a metric for going inside of the black hole, a metric for charged rotating black holes, you name it. A metric for the warp drive curving space time. A metric for black holes does not enable warp drives.
This is from the top of my head, while doing my best to avoid Maths. It's been two decades since I've read General Relativity.
https://en.wikipedia.org/w...
Notice: Undefined index: tg1tga_access in /home/admin/www/anonup.com/themes/default/apps/timeline/post.phtml on line 396
There are some other publications that then expand to the quantum level. This opens up a plethora of possibilities, particularly when people bring up the String theory. Though here I think that using "theory" might be a misnomer.
The Quantum mechanics are based on the Schrödinger Equation. But where the equation comes from, that's an entirely different matter. For a Physicist, it is like a heat transfer equation with one marked difference: the time has now two dimensions (mathematically speaking time is a complex number in quantum mechanics). I've not heard a good justification for this up to this point. But we use it because "it works".
What exactly does a two dimensional (complex valued) time mean physically? I don't know. How could it be tested? I don't know.
Starting from that premise, how do we end up with a String theory and an urgent need of bunch of more dimensions?
The Quantum mechanics are based on the Schrödinger Equation. But where the equation comes from, that's an entirely different matter. For a Physicist, it is like a heat transfer equation with one marked difference: the time has now two dimensions (mathematically speaking time is a complex number in quantum mechanics). I've not heard a good justification for this up to this point. But we use it because "it works".
What exactly does a two dimensional (complex valued) time mean physically? I don't know. How could it be tested? I don't know.
Starting from that premise, how do we end up with a String theory and an urgent need of bunch of more dimensions?
07:16 AM - Apr 12, 2024
In response Michael Merrier to his Publication
Only people mentioned by MichaelMerrier in this post can reply
Michael Merrier
@MichaelMerrier
12 April, 07:46
In response Michael Merrier to his Publication
In String theories, some of the extra dimensions are said to be compact, and thus not observable, except due to their effect. The question is, is this scientific to begin with because their definition removes the ability to detect them in the first place?
Generally, I view the extra dimensions in these theories as mathematical workarounds. I've seen anons using some of these papers as a proof that there are more dimensions, but that's not the case.
I'm not saying there can't be more dimensions, I'm saying that the papers published about this are not the proof of it, as they use the dimensions as mathematical workarounds to get around a number of problems that appear in 3D world.
---
Going by the US patents, there has been active research on different ways propulsion techniques in the aerospace field. Alcubierre type warp drive is just one of those. Here's a patent of another one, requiring high charges.
https://patents.google.com...
Generally, I view the extra dimensions in these theories as mathematical workarounds. I've seen anons using some of these papers as a proof that there are more dimensions, but that's not the case.
I'm not saying there can't be more dimensions, I'm saying that the papers published about this are not the proof of it, as they use the dimensions as mathematical workarounds to get around a number of problems that appear in 3D world.
---
Going by the US patents, there has been active research on different ways propulsion techniques in the aerospace field. Alcubierre type warp drive is just one of those. Here's a patent of another one, requiring high charges.
https://patents.google.com...
Notice: Undefined index: tg1tga_access in /home/admin/www/anonup.com/themes/default/apps/timeline/post.phtml on line 396
