On Jun 14, 5:22 am, Tom Roberts wrote:
> On 6/14/12 6/14/12 1:08 AM, Koobee Wublee wrote:
> > It [Dark Engery] means vacuum manifests a negative mass
> > density. The concept of a negative mass density is so fvcking
> > ludicrous, and the self-styled physicists know that. So,
> > instead of presenting what dark energy actually is (negative
> > mass density in vacuum), they just mystified it with this term
> > dark energy. <shrug>
>
> No. It is negative PRESSURE.
Denial? Well, math does not lie. So, let’s start with the Lagrangian
on which the field equations are derived, and Koobee Wublee would be
more than happy to show Professor Roberts how this negative pressure
is exactly a negative mass density in vacuum. <shrug>
** L = (R / K + rho) sqrt(-det[g])
Where
** L = Lagrangian
** R = Ricci scalar
** K = Constant
** rho = Mass density
** [g] = The metric (a 4x4 matrix)
** det[] = Determinant of a matrix
You can easily derive the field equation from the Lagrangian above in
just one single step through Leibniz’s rules of derivatives. Oh, for
those who are looking for how this Lagrangian is derived, it was one
pulled out of Hilbert’s ass with the mass density term added. <shrug>
** [R] – R [g] / 2 = K rho [g] / 2
Where
** [R] = Ricci tensor (another 4x4 matrix)
Note: If you like, you can write the above field equation in its
matrix form into the following element-by-element form.
** [R]_ij – R [g]_ij / 2 = K rho [g]_ij / 2
Where
** []_ij = The i’th, j’th element in the matrix
There are many ways to apply the boundary conditions (such as
degeneracy into Newtonian law of gravity). Each way results in a
different value of this constant, K. For the purpose of this
exercise, let’s leave K alone since working with the boundary
conditions can be discussed in great length. Then, the mass density,
rho, can be written into the following.
** rho = rho1 + rho0
Where
** rho1 >= 0, Positive or null (if in vacuum) mass density
** rho0 <= 0, Negative mass density in vacuum
The field equations can be written as follows.
** [R] – R [g] / 2 = K (rho1 + rho0) [g] / 2
Or
** [R] – R [g] / 2 – K rho0 [g] / 2 = K rho1 [g] / 2
Or
** [R] – (LAMBDA + R / 2) [g] / 2 = [T]
Where
** LAMBDA = K rho0 / 2, Cosmological Constant
** [T] = Energy momentum tensor (another 4x4 matrix)
Thus, LAMBDA, the Cosmological Constant, is a negative mass density in
vacuum in disguise. This so-called vacuum pressure results from this
negative mass density. <shrug>
The funny thing is that you don’t have to go to GR to find the
ridiculous nature in the negative mass density in vacuum. The Poisson
equation shows this too. So, please study Newtonian law of gravity
first. <shrug>
> > Oh, by introducing this dark energy, the first law of
> > thermodynamics is easily falsified. It is indirectly decided
> > based on at least three assumptions where all these assumptions
> > have to be valid to falsify the first law of thermodynamics.
> > If interested, Koobee Wublee will discuss it further. Otherwise,
> > behaving like the self-styled physicists with their thumbs plugged
> > into their anuses, the discussion will allow Koobee Wublee to have
> > the last words again --- not by choice but by the ignorance of the
> > self-styled physicists. <shrug>
>
> So why did YOU make it up?
Koobee Wublee did not make it up. All you need to do is to actually
study what GR actually says instead of deciding what GR is through
mysticism, ignorance, and downright lies. Koobee Wublee believes
studying the subjects involved was your suggestion, no? <shrug>
> As usual, Koobee gets it completely wrong. He is so consistent in that, and so
> persistent in attempting to promulgate his nonsense, that it is rarely
> appropriate to respond to him.
You don’t respond because you are incapable of responding using ideas
within the knowledge in science. Please stop giving excuses. <shrug>
Oh, as a parting comment, GR has never been verified with non-zero
energy momentum tensor. This includes binary star systems. So,
please don’t try to spin more mysticism with the energy momentum
tensor. <shrug>