and here we r asking timeless questions in PHD thread
Science Universe
|
|
 Dec 1 2009, 11:48 PM
|
 
Senior Member
3,037 posts Joined: Dec 2007 From: 6-feet under  
|
|
Quote|
|
|
|
|
Dec 2 2009, 12:21 AM
|
 
Staff
25,802 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang
|
QUOTE(deeplyheartbroken @ Dec 1 2009, 07:05 PM) Don't forget on the elusive dark matter & dark energy This is another area that is not fully understand on and still remain as like mystery. |
|
|
Dec 2 2009, 01:04 AM
|
Senior Member
3,385 posts Joined: Aug 2006 From: Sao Paolo, Brazil 
|
QUOTE(cherroy @ Dec 2 2009, 12:21 AM) This is another area that is not fully understand on and still remain as like mystery. Dark energy and dark matter actually belongs in that area of mystery. Everything without solid proof is mere theoratical or hypothetical. Even with what we know now, there are limitless of things there is yet to be discovered and learned. Basically we know nothing. We are just observing. |
|
|
Dec 2 2009, 12:08 PM
|
Senior Member
3,592 posts Joined: Oct 2005
|
QUOTE(maranello55 @ Dec 2 2009, 01:04 AM) Dark energy and dark matter actually belongs in that area of mystery. Everything without solid proof is mere theoratical or hypothetical. Even with what we know now, there are limitless of things there is yet to be discovered and learned. Basically we know nothing. We are just observing. no, dark matter and dark energy as placeholders for stuff that are yet undiscovered.dark matter and dark energy must exist otherwise some physic theory/equation falls apart. so either a) yes, dark matter/energy exist and is yet undiscovered b) our physicist are wrong in several of their equations (which would not be too surprising) |
|
|
Dec 2 2009, 01:57 PM
|
|
Staff
25,802 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang
|
Dark energy need to come in to ''equal" the equation, if not it is hard to explain the gravitational pull with universe expanding.
In theory gravitational pull should pull all the planet, galaxy to nearer and nearer and come together, but in actual fact, and observation, universe is expanding, which galaxy become further away each other, (after the big bang), so dark energy need to come in. |
|
|
Dec 3 2009, 11:16 AM
|
|
Senior Member
3,385 posts Joined: Aug 2006 From: Sao Paolo, Brazil
|
QUOTE(lin00b @ Dec 2 2009, 12:08 PM) no, dark matter and dark energy as placeholders for stuff that are yet undiscovered. They have found dark matter/energy. They just dont know what is their make up yet. Like what cherroy said, it is responsible for the expanding of the universe. dark matter and dark energy must exist otherwise some physic theory/equation falls apart. so either a) yes, dark matter/energy exist and is yet undiscovered b) our physicist are wrong in several of their equations (which would not be too surprising) And yes, perhaps physicists are wrong somewhere in their calculations but it is part of the journey of discovering the truth - by making errors. They are right many times though, otherwise u will not be flying on planes or posting in forums here thru the internet. |
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 3 2009, 02:00 PM
|
|
Staff
25,802 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang
|
QUOTE(maranello55 @ Dec 3 2009, 11:16 AM) They have found dark matter/energy. They just dont know what is their make up yet. Like what cherroy said, it is responsible for the expanding of the universe. I don't think the work 'found' is right.And yes, perhaps physicists are wrong somewhere in their calculations but it is part of the journey of discovering the truth - by making errors. They are right many times though, otherwise u will not be flying on planes or posting in forums here thru the internet. Just with observation data has showed universe is expanding which contradict to gravitational around, then for current theory to be have a balance point, there must be some energy/matter influence it. While they don't know about it, so they called it 'dark' energy/matter. Just like how to find a planet, as planet doesn't shine (like star/sun), we will never able to see it, but you can 'find' or suspect there is a planet if you see comet path, or whatever distort phenomena being turned when passing on some points, aka you never will see a planet but only can come out with 'finding' there is a planet by surrounding behaviour. |
|
|
Dec 3 2009, 08:15 PM
|
|
Senior Member
3,592 posts Joined: Oct 2005
|
QUOTE(cherroy @ Dec 3 2009, 02:00 PM) I don't think the work 'found' is right. corrent, dark matter/energy was not found as of today.Just with observation data has showed universe is expanding which contradict to gravitational around, then for current theory to be have a balance point, there must be some energy/matter influence it. While they don't know about it, so they called it 'dark' energy/matter. Just like how to find a planet, as planet doesn't shine (like star/sun), we will never able to see it, but you can 'find' or suspect there is a planet if you see comet path, or whatever distort phenomena being turned when passing on some points, aka you never will see a planet but only can come out with 'finding' there is a planet by surrounding behaviour. but rather than concede that their equations/theory was limited/crippled/wrong, they decide to put a placeholder called "dark matter/energy" to balance the equation out. same as how string theory needed around 11 dimensions to make the maths work. and i dont think the finding planet method is analogous with dark matte/energy issue here. |
|
|
Dec 3 2009, 11:45 PM
|
|
Staff
25,802 posts Joined: Jan 2003 From: Penang
|
QUOTE(lin00b @ Dec 3 2009, 08:15 PM) corrent, dark matter/energy was not found as of today. Fair enough.but rather than concede that their equations/theory was limited/crippled/wrong, they decide to put a placeholder called "dark matter/energy" to balance the equation out. same as how string theory needed around 11 dimensions to make the maths work. and i dont think the finding planet method is analogous with dark matte/energy issue here. Planetory finding is based on physic that is proven physically. Big bang, string theory, steady state theory, dark energy/matter are something that difficult to prove upon and remain as hypothesis theory. Until the theory can be rebuffed, it remains the main stream theory of physics as human kind needs some explanation on the question, currently is big bang theory. |
|
|
Dec 4 2009, 12:13 AM
|
|
Senior Member
1,814 posts Joined: Jan 2003
|
Note: Dark matter and energy refer to 2 vastly different things.
Dark matter is 'needed' to explain why galaxies appear to stay in one piece, when it seems that they would break apart Dark energy is the 'reason' behind the acceleration of the expansion of the universe (as far as we can see anyway). We've got candidate solutions as to what it actually is, but we won't know until we manage to observe something. QUOTE but rather than concede that their equations/theory was limited/crippled/wrong They do actually, except that they have no idea how to go beyond the current equations, and there has been plenty of extensions to current theories which after looking at experimental fits, did not work. This post has been edited by bgeh: Dec 4 2009, 12:16 AM |
|
|
Dec 8 2009, 12:14 AM
|
|
Senior Member
774 posts Joined: Nov 2008
|
 Even if the equation is wrong, it won't be wrong this far |
|
|
Dec 8 2009, 01:28 AM
|
|
Senior Member
3,592 posts Joined: Oct 2005
|
i see it as: how can it be correct if its off by so much?
|
|
|
Dec 8 2009, 01:49 AM
|
|
Senior Member
774 posts Joined: Nov 2008
|
The equation is far from perfect, yes it is. Dark matter & dark energy is just a term representation. Just like Higgs Boson, the so called god's particle. It is not yet totally proven, but something is there nevertheless.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Dec 8 2009, 01:58 AM
|
Senior Member
1,810 posts Joined: Mar 2007
|
QUOTE(deeplyheartbroken @ Dec 8 2009, 01:49 AM) The equation is far from perfect, yes it is. Dark matter & dark energy is just a term representation. Just like Higgs Boson, the so called god's particle. It is not yet totally proven, but something is there nevertheless. Could be a possibility. Considering that scientists spent over 100 years looking for a giant planet X that was pertubing the orbit of Uranus and Neptune, when it turned out that they had inaccurately estimated the masses of the 2 planets in the 1st place. Future advances will definitely shed more light on this |
|
|
Feb 2 2012, 11:09 AM
|
 
VIP
3,713 posts Joined: Nov 2011 From: Torino
|
QUOTE(communist892003 @ Aug 4 2009, 02:47 AM) [...] Personally, I like your Skeptical Inquiring Skills and your thought-provoking Predictions explained about "How Does the Universe Work?" with your fascinating concepts. If you have been wondering it philosophically all in this 18-month period, let’s talk about it on how it may have reached the advanced stage in the process. To be frank, where did you learn to be such a good Skeptical Inquirer?My answers (some say speculation, I believe to be true) are as follows: » Click to show Spoiler - click again to hide... « In order to promote your fascinating concepts about the Universe to the scientific community or PhD School, each of your explanation, to be subject to scientific testing, shall, in principle, be falsifiable. To be falsifiable simply means to be testable. By contrast, an untestable explanation would be one whose falsity could not be observed or detected by any conceivable test or constructable instrument. So, to test an explanation or concept at the most basic level, we tend to begin by proposing and devising a set of experimental conditions under which we predict that something will occur if the explanation is correctly plausible. If the predicted outcome fails to occur within the observation period, we normally conclude that the explanation is probably inappropriate at the moment of observation. Therefore, would you be so kind as to enlighten us that, “Under what conditions would we be willing to set aside the explanation on the grounds that it is false?” |
. |
|
Feb 2 2012, 11:16 PM
|
|
VIP
3,713 posts Joined: Nov 2011 From: Torino
|
QUOTE(nccnsc @ Feb 2 2012, 09:56 PM) We can't explain these cause we as human cannot move beyond the boundaries of the universe And you implied that you can't explain these, because you cannot move beyond the boundaries, of the universe,And when you can't explain these, What kind of these are these that you can't explain? And as you cannot move beyond the boundaries of the universe, that's like what? And when you could move beyond the boundaries of the universe, then what will happen? |
| Change to: |  0.0208sec
 0.68
 5 queries
 GZIP Disabled
Time is now: 29th November 2025 - 12:23 PM |
All Rights Reserved © 2002- 2025 Vijandren Ramadass (~unite against racism~)
Powered by Invision Power Board © 2025 IPS, Inc.