The direction of time and entropy are irrelevant.
Jeff…Relf
Nowhere on Wiki even CLAIMS temperature is a dimension.
With Lambda_CDM and the _Observed_ w = -1, i.e. an ever-constant lambda,
you can determine the age, width, and temperature range
of the universe in a time/entropy-symmetric way,
so that the direction of time and entropy are irrelevant.
That means it's possible to equate units of time to both length
and temperature/entropy,
...so temperature/entropy is the fifth spatial dimension,
as no place was, is, or will-be completely without it.
ESA's Planck_Surveyor might well conclude that
eons passed from the Planck-length transition to the start of the CMB.
Timberwoof
JeffŠRelf <Jeff...@Yahoo.COM> wrote:
Planck_Surveyor. Is that sort of like the ESA's Plank mission? What's
with the underbar?
in any case, you appear to be basing all of your scientific word-salad
on what you hope Planck will reveal. What happens if its observations
don't support your hypothesis?
--
Timberwoof <me at timberwoof dot com> http://www.timberwoof.com
Erwin Moller
Dear Jeff,
Some free advise:
If you are trying to say something average mortals can actually understand,
try this:
1) Explain what you are talking about.
2) Give a definition of all jargon mumbo-jumbo you use. Like what is
Lambda_CDM and w. And why entropy is the fifth dimension.
3) Give us an idea which degrees in
physics/astronomy/astrophysics/warptechnology we must have to join the
discusion.
Maybe if you try that, you'll take away the feeling I get your posting is
semi-scientific bull.
If you are sincere and not a nutcase, please learn to post in a way that
makes sense.
In the meantime I take the liberty to label you a nutcase.
Best regards,
Erwin Moller
Jeff…Relf
before WMAP and SNLS came out with their current results.
It takes both CMB and supernovae studies to really nail down w = -1 .
Likewise, I predict w = -1 will hold up far beyond 13.7 billion years ago.
SNAP would help a lot, studying supernovae and weak gravitational lensing
from but we won't be seeing anything from them unitl 2015... at best, see:
SNAP.LBL.GOV/Flyby2Bb.gif
SNAP.LBL.GOV/brochure/satellite.html
SNAP.LBL.GOV/science.html
WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Supernova_/_Acceleration_Probe
The Planck_Surveyor will help my case, of course,
if it rules out Cosmic_Inflation via the lack of gravity waves, as I expect.
Only time will tell, of course.
CrankHater
Jeff...Relf wrote:
> Hi Timberwoof, I thought lambda was constant back in 2003,
idiot
T Wake
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff...@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_200...@Cotse.NET...
> Hi T_Puddleduck, You wrote:
>
> Nowhere on Wiki even CLAIMS temperature is a dimension.
>
> With Lambda_CDM and the _Observed_ w = -1, i.e. an ever-constant lambda,
> you can determine the age, width, and temperature range
> of the universe in a time/entropy-symmetric way,
> so that the direction of time and entropy are irrelevant.
Pointless word salad.
> That means it's possible to equate units of time to both length
> and temperature/entropy,
> ...so temperature/entropy is the fifth spatial dimension,
> as no place was, is, or will-be completely without it.
Gibberish spawned from an almost complete lack of understanding.
> ESA's Planck_Surveyor might well conclude that
> eons passed from the Planck-length transition to the start of the CMB.
Irrelevant to your original claim about temperature being a spatial
dimension.
By the way, if temperature is spatial you need to remodel all the
fundamental forces and explain for their observed propagation somehow.
Please feel free to do this.
T Wake
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff...@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_200...@Cotse.NET...
> The Planck_Surveyor will help my case, of course,
> if it rules out Cosmic_Inflation via the lack of gravity waves, as I
> expect.
> Only time will tell, of course.
Can you remind me what the Plank Surveyor is looking for please? You see,
obviously foolishly, I thought it was a CMBR surveyor. (Based on
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_Surveyor and
http://www.rssd.esa.int/index.php?project=PLANCK&page=exec_summ )
Can you also remind me (and others) what equipment the craft will have to
measure gravity waves?
Also, as an aside, do you understand the difference between the "Big Bang"
theory (about t=0 events) and inflation. Do you know which one predicts
gravity waves in the manner you describe?
I realise all of this is probably quite pointless. You wont answer any
questions with _anything_ other than meaningless gibberish and you actually
don't know the difference between the t=0 event and subsequent inflation.
David Ewan Kahana
> "Jeff.Relf" <Jeff...@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
> news:Jeff_Relf_200...@Cotse.NET...
>
> > The Planck_Surveyor will help my case, of course,
> > if it rules out Cosmic_Inflation via the lack of gravity waves, as I
> > expect.
> > Only time will tell, of course.
>
> Can you remind me what the Plank Surveyor is looking for please? You see,
> obviously foolishly, I thought it was a CMBR surveyor. (Based on
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Planck_Surveyor and
> http://www.rssd.esa.int/index.php?project=PLANCK&page=exec_summ )
>
> Can you also remind me (and others) what equipment the craft will have to
> measure gravity waves?
>
Planck, of course, can't measure gravity waves directly, but
there is hope that the mission will measure the anisotropies
in the polarization of the CMBR as well as the fluctuations
in temperature.
The polarization of the CMBR is expected to be
coupled to gravity waves propagating in the early
universe. The mechanism is that gravity waves distort
spacetime locally in the directions transverse to
their direction of propagation, and thus produce an
effectively anisotropic medium for the light to travel
through. It's well known that Thomson scattering in an
anistropic medium can lead to polarization of the
scattered light.
Ordinary density fluctuations can also produce
polarization, but it turns out that one possible polarization
pattern, B-modes, cannot be generated by density
fluctuations, while E-modes can be generated either
by density fluctuations or by gravitational waves.
In what many people think is the most likely scenario,
ordinary density waves provide the dominant contribution
to the CMBR anisotropies. So if a relatively large polarisation
is found in the E-modes, and a very much smaller one
in the B-modes, it will be an indirect signal of gravitational
waves and a confirmation of the standard picture.
It's probably an overstatement to say that inflationary
models would be ruled out by a different observed pattern,
though. There is model dependence in the predictions.
David
(See, for example, http://prola.aps.org/abstract/PRL/v78/i11/p2054_1)
Jeff…Relf
If you are trying to say something average mortals can actually understand,
try this: 1. Explain what you are talking about.
Much of what I wrote was explained previously in the thread,
in replies to the people asking me questions.
You asked: What is Lambda_CDM and w. And why entropy is the fifth dimension ?
Lambda_CDM is the standard model of cosmology.
CDM stands for _Cold_ dark matter, as opposed to _Hot_ dark matter.
Cold dark matter is slow-moving, non-relativistic mass
which can only be detected by it's gravitational effects. I quote:
Most of the mass of the Milky Way is in dark matter,
forming a dark matter halo of an estimated 600-3000 billion solar masses
which is concentrated towards the Galactic Centre.
__ WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Milky_Way
__ Arxiv.ORG/abs/astro-ph/0506102
Lambda is part of General_Relativity's Field Equations,
originally inserted by Einstein to model a steady-state universe.
At the 10 ^ 8 light year scale,
the observable universe is uniform and has no center of gravity.
w is the equation of state of dark energy, i.e. pressure divided by density.
w = -1 means the observable universe will always expand at a constant rate,
irregardless of it's density.
WMAP's March 2006 report, mentioning projects like SNLS, says w = -1,
which means Lambda is Dark_Energy and is
the scaler to the metric tensor that describes
the vacuum energy density of the observable universe at scales larger
than 10 ^ 8 light years.
Because lamda has always been observed to be constant,
I posit a model where it's always constant.
This means that the age of the universe can be demarkated in years,
light-years or Joules per Kelvin of available energy... entropy.
In this model, both time and entory are symmetric,
meaning the model doesn't care wich direction they point.
i.e. both entropy and time are _Spatial_ dimensions.
The entropy and time dimensions are pseudo-directional
because randomness is always pseudo-random.
w = -1 means eons passed between
the time the observable universe first passed the Planck length transition
to when it became almost as large as it is today,
when the first-observable light of the cosmos created today's CMB.
CMB means Cosmic_Microwave_Background,
and represenst the current temperature of the observable universe,
2.7 degrees Kelvin.
The observable universe was once Planck temperature,
1.41679 * 10 ^ 32 degrees Kelvin.
Cosmic_Inflation, on the other hand, says dark energy was some 27 times
larger back then, and it took only .00038 billion years, not eons.
You concluded: I take the liberty to label you a nutcase.
Flame on... see where that gets you.
neverbetter
Jeff...Relf wrote:
> HI Erwin_Moller, You told me:
>
> If you are trying to say something average mortals can actually understand,
> try this: 1. Explain what you are talking about.
>
> Much of what I wrote was explained previously in the thread,
> in replies to the people asking me questions.
Which thread would that be? It appears to me that the post that Erwin
replied to was the first in this thread.
Jeff…Relf
Much of what I wrote was explained previously in the thread,
in replies to the people asking me questions.
and NeverBetter asked me:
Which thread would that be ?
It appears to me that the post that Erwin replied to was
the first in this thread.
This thread is _Huge_, it should look like this:
Google.COM/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/7e52f9505f78d756/c9a720b827b82a6f
It it doesn't then you're not threading correctly... shame on you.
Marc
You are the one who should feel shamed, dude. Look where you
are cross-posting to - or didn't you know you are cross-posting?
Perhaps you are reading this in the physics group, but we are
reading them over in Talk.Origins also, where your comments
do look the way NeverBetter and I see them. 11 posts in this
thread and soon to be twelve. And you aren't citing the material
from above in the thread, are you? So the thread is in *your* mind.
By the way, what is "huge"? 1000 posts? 1500 posts? 2200posts?
Even more perhaps??
Hey - "UC".... do you know anything about physics terminology???
(signed) marc
.
T Wake
news:Jeff_Relf_200...@Cotse.NET...
>
> If you are trying to say something average mortals can actually
> understand,
> try this: 1. Explain what you are talking about.
>
> Much of what I wrote was explained previously in the thread,
> in replies to the people asking me questions.
You misuse the word "explain." You use it to mean "I posted all manner of
nonsense," when everyone else uses it to mean other things...
<snip>
> At the 10 ^ 8 light year scale,
Really? Did you make this up?
> the observable universe is uniform and has no center of gravity.
Well, for once Jeff is _almost_ correct. Viewed from an abstract
observational point there is not a centre of the universe. There is no need
to add in the words "of gravity." The universe has no centre.
If you use the term "obserable universe" then there is (especially for the
pedants amongst us) a slightly different definition. This is why "observable
universe" is rarely used in scientific texts.
However, this is a separate debate and you have already demonstrated a lack
of understanding.
<snip>
After the head rush you must have got from being "broadly" correct there,
you felt the need to spout total nonsense for the rest of the post.
> This means that the age of the universe can be demarkated in years,
> light-years or Joules per Kelvin of available energy... entropy.
Ok, how old is the _universe_. I want the answer in Years and JK^-1 .
> In this model, both time and entory are symmetric,
> meaning the model doesn't care wich direction they point.
> i.e. both entropy and time are _Spatial_ dimensions.
Nonsense. Gravity and the use of standard candles (amongst others) imply
there are three spatial dimensions. You still havent learned what is
"special" about spatial dimensions.
> The entropy and time dimensions are pseudo-directional
> because randomness is always pseudo-random.
Gibberish. One does not support the other.
> The observable universe was once Planck temperature,
> 1.41679 * 10 ^ 32 degrees Kelvin.
Stop saying "degrees Kelvin." It is silly.
> Cosmic_Inflation, on the other hand, says dark energy was some 27 times
> larger back then, and it took only .00038 billion years, not eons.
Well, no it doesnt.
> You concluded: I take the liberty to label you a nutcase.
>
> Flame on... see where that gets you.
>
You are still a nutcase. Sadly you are nutcase who doesn't quite accept how
little he knows about anything.
Can I suggest you read
http://arxiv.org/PS_cache/astro-ph/pdf/9901/9901124.pdf - this is an very
well written, easy to understand introduction to cosmological inflation.
--
In proper science, we do not have the luxury of Relf's Law
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approachs
the odour of roses." (Phineas T Puddleduck to Jeff Relf)
T Wake
news:Jeff_Relf_200...@Cotse.NET...
>
> It it doesn't then you're not threading correctly... shame on you.
>
Well, remember the maxim that software should be broad in what it will
accept and strict in what it outputs.
Jeff…Relf
You told me:
Well, remember the maxim that
software should be broad in what it will accept and strict in what it outputs.
How does the failure to contruct threads meet you maxim ?
I won't cite RFCs, you wouldn't understand them if I did,
but I will say that it's obvious
that the Message_IDs in the _References_ line define the thread,
not the titles or anything else.
I showed what the thread _Should_ look like:
Google.COM/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/7e52f9505f78d756
T Wake
--
In proper science, we do not have the luxury of Relf's Law
"Bullshit repeated to the limit of infinity asymptotically approachs
the odour of roses." (Phineas T Puddleduck to Jeff Relf)
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff...@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_200...@Cotse.NET...
> Hi T_Wake, Re: Newsreaders that can't construct threads,
> You told me:
>
> Well, remember the maxim that
> software should be broad in what it will accept and strict in what it
> outputs.
>
> How does the failure to contruct threads meet you maxim ?
If you had read the thread properly, you would be able to see I was talking
about _your_ complaints regarding other people's messages. (Remember when
you complained because _you_ were convinced my KNode wasn't using a
proportional font....)
> I won't cite RFCs, you wouldn't understand them if I did,
You would be surprised.
> but I will say that it's obvious
> that the Message_IDs in the _References_ line define the thread,
> not the titles or anything else.
So, that was not what I was talking about. Both outlook express and KNode
thread your abortive attempts at USENET posts.
> I showed what the thread _Should_ look like:
>
> Google.COM/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/7e52f9505f78d756
>
>
What about the thread in news://talk.origins ? Surely you are well versed in
USENET etiquette to realise the considerations _you_ should take when you
cross post. I am sure your drivel is as off topic in TO as it is in
news://sci.physics - not that you will worry about that. As long as _you_
are happy, the rest of the world can suffer.
All this ignores your abject reluctance to answer the questions people ask
about your fantasy-land physics and your obscure desire to mung every URL
you output.
neverbetter
I'm not reading this in sci.physics, I'm reading it in talk.origins and
this is what it looks like:
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/c5fc686001363ab7/6df5fb14eaac31c2#6df5fb14eaac31c2
Jeff…Relf
what you called: a very well written, easy to understand
introduction to cosmological inflation.
Like you, everything it knows about cosmology is pre-1998,
SNLS and WMAP's March 2006 report ruled out most models of inflation.
I think I'll be doing some reading on cosmological inflation soon
from the link below, not 9901124.PDF.
www.RSSD.ESA.INT/SA/PLANCK/docs/Bluebook-ESA-SCI(2005)1_V2.pdf
But first I'd like to know the Scale_Factor of the CMB, z = 1088, given w = -1
WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Comoving_distance
From www.Physics.Montana.EDU/faculty/cornish/PRL01302.pdf it seems that
the " distance to the last scattering surface " is 28 Giga_Parsecs.
or 91 billion light-years. ( i.e. the distance to the birth of the CBM )
Jeff…Relf
I'm not reading this in sci.physics, I'm reading it in talk.origins
and this is what it looks like:
http://groups.google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/c5fc686001363ab7/6df5fb14eaac31c2#6df5fb14eaac31c2
Interesting...
I didn't know Google threads were restricted to one newsgroup like that,
I thought it was just following the Message_IDs wherever they went.
I should submit a bug report to Google.
Edward Green
They probably consider it a feature.
Marc
Jeff...Relf wrote:
> Hi T_Wake, Re: Newsreaders that can't construct threads,
> You told me:
............. SNiP
> I showed what the thread _Should_ look like:
> Google.COM/group/sci.physics/browse_frm/thread/7e52f9505f78d756
That's *not* what a thread should look like.
What is that? Maybe 190 posts after you reply to me (if you do!)
and it took two bloody weeks to get there?
Talk.Origins gets threads every few days that go 100+ posts in
a day, and sometimes over 200 in a day.
If you call a thread "huge" when it isn't even 200 posts, then you
should
stay well away from threads like UC's "birds and dinosaurs" thread -
"KT boundry event" [sic] - of course, you *should* stay away anyway!
.. .google.com/group/talk.origins/browse_frm/thread/009f5e8c98db2d22/#
While UC is an idiot, he does show you what a huge thread can look
like.
(signed) marc
.
Eric Gisse
This is a PEBKAC-class problem.
Jeff…Relf
I didn't know Google threads were restricted to one newsgroup like that,
I thought it was just following the Message_IDs wherever they went.
I should submit a bug report to Google.
and Edward_Green replied:
They probably consider it a feature.
Double take... talk.origins is a moderated group.
It only makes sense that if you look at a thread from within
a moderated group, you only see articles passed by
the moderator of that group.
The moderator could reject a post based on the thread itself.
But Talk.Origins is not as pendantic as that.
The inability to see the enire thread is a _Bug_,
and I bet I could convince Google to make the change... if I wanted to.
T Wake
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff...@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_200...@Cotse.NET...
Because it doesn't do what _you_ think it should? Typical relfish nonsense.
T Wake
news:Jeff_Relf_200...@Cotse.NET...
>
What?
> But Talk.Origins is not as pendantic as that.
If it works on one group it should work on them all. Your opinion of TO is
not relevant.
> The inability to see the enire thread is a _Bug_,
No it isnt. It shows the whole thread on the appropriate server. If some one
replies to your messages and they go to alt.jeff.is.insane would you expect
them to appear in a thread list on sci.physics?
Jeff, your desire to warp everything is getting out of hand. One day you
will be grown up enough to accept that sometimes you _have_ to follow the
accepted standards. (i.e. get a shower)
> and I bet I could convince Google to make the change... if I wanted to.
Bet you cant.
Eric Gisse
Hows that crusade to get everyone on Wikipedia to do editing just like
you going?
Victor Eijkhout
> --
Interesting. Why did you put the whole post in the signature?
Victor.
--
Victor Eijkhout -- eijkhout at tacc utexas edu
ph: 512 471 5809
Jeff…Relf
Hows that crusade to get everyone on Wikipedia
to do editing just like you going ?
I let them remove all the carriage returns,
I can't fight 10 admins all at once... some of them are pretty high-level.
I might offer to write a diff routine for them that
compares 80 character chuncks instead of lines.
Their current diff is sensitive to extra spaces and lines... it shouldn't be.
This was the last thing I wrote to WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/User:Jpgordon
WikiPedia.ORG/wiki/Special:Contributions/Jpgordon
Hi Jpgordon, Imagine my surprise last Saturday
when, glancing at the top-left front page
of the New York Times, the fist line I read was:
Wikipedia is the online encyclopedia that
" anyone can edit." Unless you want to edit
the entries on Albert Einstein...
Einstein was first, last, and foremost,
a mathematician... modeling nature herself, God.
Dice are pseudorandom, Einstein talked about
psuedorandomness all the time, ten different ways,
...I can show you the quotes.
And that's true no matter if
he used that exact word or not.
Jeff Relf 04:01, 19 June 2006 (UTC)
Jeff…Relf
And you replied: No it isn't. It shows the whole thread in
the appropriate [ newsgroup/server ]. If some one replies to your messages
and they go to alt.jeff.is.insane would you expect
them to appear in a thread list on sci.physics ?
Ideally, yes. But chances are no servers carry alt.jeff.is.insane .
A while back I told Google that Sub_Threads are specific to a message,
and that it should include the 5 most recent Message_IDs
as found in the _References_ line.
Googling this post of yours, X7mdndrH7Z1...@pipex.net :
Google.COM/group/sci.physics/msg/4fb66f7aecd52927
and clicking on the title produces:
Google.COM/group/sci.physics/browse_thread/thread/7e52f9505f78d756/4fb66f7aecd52927
Which is, almost as I suggested,
about 20 full-text messages all on one page.
The first message in the list was only for sci.physics, not Talk.Origins.
Going to anyone of those posts ( Show_Options --> Individual_Message )
and clicking on the title takes you, again,
to just 10 full-text messages... all on one page.
I wouldn't do it exactly that way myself, but it's close.
But my concept is there: Message_Centric Sub_Threads.
T Wake
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff...@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_200...@Cotse.NET...
> Hows that crusade to get everyone on Wikipedia
> to do editing just like you going ?
>
> I let them remove all the carriage returns,
> I can't fight 10 admins all at once... some of them are pretty high-level.
> I might offer to write a diff routine for them that
> compares 80 character chuncks instead of lines.
> Their current diff is sensitive to extra spaces and lines... it shouldn't
> be.
>
Yet theirs works better than yours. _You_ are the only person having a
problem with their system.
I see it still isn't going away for you - you are refusing to understand the
terms they are using and the standards that govern the Wiki. That is *so*
like you Jeff.
Jeff…Relf
These lines in FireFox's userContent.CSS made it work a lot better for me:
::-moz-selection, span[class="diffchange"], span[class="diff-deletedline"]
, span[class="diff-addedline"] {
color: rgb( 99, 155, 188 ) !important; }
Here's the whole thing, from:
Cotse.NET/users/jeffrelf/CSS.PNG
Cotse.NET/users/jeffrelf/userContent.CSS
/**/
input *, textarea * {
/* margin: -3px !important; padding: 3px !important; */
background: rgb( 128, 128, 0 ) !important; }
/**/
:focus * { background: rgb( 0, 96, 0 ) !important; }
/**/
i, b, p, em, tt, h1, h2, h3, h4, h5, h6, td, tr, ul, li, div, dd, dl, dt
, span, font, form, small, label, strong, .highlight, table {
color: inherit !important; font-style: inherit !important; }
/* */
::-moz-selection, span[class="diffchange"], span[class="diff-deletedline"]
, span[class="diff-addedline"] {
color: rgb( 99, 155, 188 ) !important; }
/**/
body { color: rgb( 188, 155, 0 ) !important; }
pre { color: rgb( 0, 177, 0 ) !important; }
/**/
a[target], a[href], input, button { color: rgb( 155, 155, 155 ) !important; }
a[target]:visited, a[href]:visited, input:visited, button:visited {
color: rgb( 200, 200, 200 ) !important; }
a[target]:hover, a[href]:hover, input:hover, button:hover {
color: rgb( 200, 200, 200 ) !important;
text-decoration: underline ! important; }
a[name]:before { content: "_ "; }
/**/
blink, :link, :visited { text-decoration: none ! important; }
marquee { -moz-binding: none ! important; }
p, blockquote { max-width: 300em !important; }
T Wake
"Jeff.Relf" <Jeff...@Yahoo.COM> wrote in message
news:Jeff_Relf_200...@Cotse.NET...
>
> These lines in FireFox's userContent.CSS made it work a lot better for me:
So what. Do they stop you producing your screed there?