Cosmology Knowledge Base
cosmology? the metric fluctuates in the infinitely small, then why its principal characteristic, its signature, should remain fixed?
Are cyclic theory of cosmology gaining more support? I was reading about the cyclic theory of cosmology. Theory that big bangs are produced every trillion years or so by the collision of "branes". Sounds plausible, but is this gaining any acceptance among the main cosmologists?
Why was Nicolas Cusa was not condemed for his belief in a radical Neoplatonic cosmology? In the book the Copernican revolution Kuhn says that “Nicholas of Cusa had propounded a radical Neoplatonic cosmology and had not even bothered about the earth as a moving star, like the sun and the other stars, and though his works were widely read and had great influence, he was not condemned or even criticized by his church”. Why was it that this radical theory not condemned by the church and the Copernican theory was? Was it the content of the theory or were the times just different, what makes theories in general dangerous to the church?
Need help with Cosmology and How it impacts the world Globally? Hi, I am having trouble writing a this paper about Cosmology (study of the universe and how humanity is involved with the universe) I understand most of the minor concepts and such, but i am suppose to relate this topic on a Global Level...like how it affects various nations...most other topics people are writing about in my class involve economics globally...so i am a little worried about my topic and how to relate it globally to my professors liking...Help me out guys with any ideas!
How many climate change deniers also deny biology, astronomy, cosmology, etc? I'd like to just get an idea - how many of those denying anthropogenic climate change tend to reject science generally? That is to say, how many denialists also reject biological evolution and the Big Bang model of cosmology, and by extension, also implicitly reject most if not all of the findings of: Geology Chemistry Physics Archaeology Astronomy Cosmology Biology Paleontology Et cetera Well?
What are the objections to plasma cosmology? Many remarkably intelligent people subscribe to the idea that the cosmos is driven primarily by electricity, not gravity. If you've never heard of this, please look at some of these resources before trying to answer this question: http://plasmascience.net/tpu/TheUniverse.html http://www.holoscience.com/ http://members.cox.net/dascott3/index.htm "The Big Ban Never Happened" by Eric Lerner There are many apparently startling results that come out of this perspective. First, it has produced cosmological predictions vastly more accurate than those of the classical model (cf. http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050704predictions.htm). Second, it offers explanations of phenomena still "mysterious" to modern science (e.g. the temperature of the sun's corona). However, whenever I hear scientists not of this camp comment on plasma cosmology, they just reject it out-of-hand with little more explanation than "It's just wrong." Would someone please explain why? Sorry, one link doesn't work. For a successful plasma-based prediction, look up references to "Deep Impact" for July 4th, 2005 in the archives of Thunderbolts Picture of the Day: http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/00archive.htm This should be the correct link: http://www.thunderbolts.info/tpod/2005/arch05/050704predictions.htm First, if you're going to tell me that plasma cosmology is objectionable "because it's wrong," don't bother. I want to know WHY it's considered wrong. Calling it "pseudoscience" doesn't get us anywhere unless you care to define what that means and why it's justifiable to call plasma cosmology pseudoscientific. Second, please don't appeal to the "You know too little to understand" argument. I have no trouble understanding Penrose's "The Road to Reality." If you think I'm missing something, please explain. Third, thanks to the third respondant for posting the Kronia video. I didn't know that had been uploaded! I've met those people and I respect them. However, some of their science is off. The whole point of relativity was to solve a problem in electromagnetism. However, this doesn't change the fact that plasma cosmology (a) predicts and (b) explains phenomena that standard cosmology apparently does not. I'd like to know why this is considered unworthy of comment.
How does quantum gravity explain cosmology events prior to “10[-43]” seconds after the start of the universe? Before answering remember - Biological information is not encoded in the laws of physics and chemistry … (and it) cannot come into existence spontaneously. … There is no known law of physics able to create information from nothing.’ To Anki Rocks -Thanks for the background on quantum physics..However your statement does nothing to answer my above question, because only an intelligence/Creator can provide the information needed prior to "10[-43]".. The biggest mystery of all is the one cited by Stephen Hawking in A Brief History of Time: Why is there something rather than nothing? More specifically, what triggered the Big Bang, and why did the universe take this particular form rather than some other form that might not have allowed our existence? Attempts to solve these mysteries often take the form of what I call ironic science—unconfirmable speculation more akin to philosophy or literature than genuine science. Another example of ironic science is string theory,but the theory comes in so many versions that it predicts virtually everything—and hence nothing at all. Critics call this the "Alice's restaurant problem," a reference to a folk song with the refrain,"You can get anything you want at Alice's restaurant! To PhysicsD..This is the correct format for my question which is asked from a science-point-of-view however because as you correctly stated "Nothing" existed prior to "10^-43". So the correct answer to ny question is "Quantum cosmology cannot explain the event prior to "10^-43" because the probability of something's coming out of nothing is incoherent. To Gengi M. Wrong! - Scientists have never observed abiogenesis (i.e. the creation of life from non-life) happening in nature, nor have they been able to create any lifeforms through controlled (i.e. manmade) experiments. Abiogenesis seems out of the realm of empirical science. Furthermore, the extreme complexity of all lifeforms seems to point in the direction of an outside Intelligence..Now your question Where did God come from - 1-Everything WHICH HAS A BEGINNING has a "cause" 2 - The Law of Thermodynamics prove beyond any doubt that the universe has a beginning 3- Therefore the universe has a "Cause". Einstein's general relativity showed that TIME is linked to matter & space. So TIME itself begun along with matter & space at the start of the universe. Since God by definition created the universe he also "Created" TIME! and is NOT limited by the time dimension HE CREATED so he has NO BEGINNING in time. Therefore he does not have or need to have a "cause"...
what are the good universities for studying cosmology and astrophysics? We twins are in 1st year of a high school. We have pre-engineering and a wast knowledge of space. We have studied many books on space and many articles and watched many videos. We always go to the library just to study about space. Further we want to study astronomy. We are confused for choosing a right university. Can you help us?
What is the average cost of cosmology school? I live in Southern California & plan on making meetings with different beauty school administrators soon, but I am just trying to get an idea because I have gotten a lot of different answers from friends.
How do you pronounce the nine worlds of Norse cosmology? I was doing raearch into the nine worlds and I am very interested by it. The only problem is I have no idea how to pronounce them! Can anybody help me please? (pronunciation of other words, such as yggdrasill would help as well)
Where are we today in physics and cosmology? Im just wondering where we are today in physics and cosmology in particular in understanding the 'big bang theory'. Is 'M theory' still a big part of scientific debate at the moment or are there new more advanced theorys? Or is the scientific community really just looking to CERN and the LHC now for answers? If anyone has any good links to info I would appreciate them. Thanks
Why do creationists insist that physical cosmology is part of the theory of evolution? Such as saying that the Big Bang Theory is part of Darwinism. They are two completely different sciences, one is part of astrophysics and extends way further in the past, the other is a field of biology. Why can't they simply believe that God caused the Big Bang, I mean, the idea was developed by a priest anyway. Must the Protestant creationists be against that?
Why does the anthropic philosophy of cosmology disturb physicists? Why is it that the anthropic view of our cosmos are so disturbing to some physicists? I think we are where we are and all the constants in nature are the way they are because we live in this particular bubble of the cosmos that makes life and humans possible. No need to get religion into it. Things are the way it is because we evolved in the universe that just happen to make life possible. Why is that so hard to "buy"?
What mathematics should I know to study cosmology? I listened to a CalTech presentation by Kip Thorne, and he referred to a ton of strange math such as tensor calculus. I want to know what kind of math is necessary to understand technical papers about relativity, galaxy formation, and the birth and death of the universe. Thanks! When I try to read academic paper regarding cosmology, I barely get past the abstract before being overwhelmed by strange greek symbols with no accompanying explanation. What kind of math is this? What branches of mathematics are necessary to understand these papers?
What are some great physics/cosmology/astronomy books for me to read? I'm not looking for anything dumbed down, just something short of a thesis because I only have basic physics knowledge. Some of the authors I love are: Richard Feynman Stephen Hawking Carl Sagan Brian Greene Leonard Susskind So, are there any other than these guys? Or just anything really interesting that has to do with vaguely physics/space-related stuff? Maybe a little bit higher level than the above authors' books for the general public?
Would you give me your opinion on my cosmology? Would you give me your opinion on my cosmology? Everything comes from death, suffering, and destruction, reaches its height in the radiance of goodness, and eventually ends with death, suffering, and destruction. Thanks everyone for your visit...
Can you suggest some good books to start learning physical cosmology? I'm talking beyond Hawking, here. I'd like to study mathematical physics and really understand the complex technical nuances of the theories of the structure of the universe. Where should I begin? I'm very widely-read on astronomy and have done graduate coursework in theoretical statistics, which is not the same as mechanical statistics, obviously. I was really into cosmology as a kid until my parents talked me out of it. I remember arguing with family members at dinner parties about superstring theory.
Can anyone recommend a good book, or on-line source, to bring me up to date on Cosmology? The last thing I read was A Brief History Of Time by Prof. Stephen Hawking. But that was years ago! I am particularly interested in this "dark energy" thing people are talking about! Thanks in anticipation... The idea of "dark matter" has been around for years. I am familiar with that! "Dark energy" is supposed to be responsible for the increasing rate of expansion of the universe and is a recent development! I will read Richard Dawkins book. It's not what I am looking for here, but I am sure that it is my kind of book! Thanks.
What do you think of Hindu Cosmology as per Carl Sagan? "As far as I know, India is the only ancient religious tradition on the Earth which talks about the right time scale. In the West, people have the sense that what is natural is for the universe to be a few thousand years old, and that it is billions of years is mind-reeling, and no one can understand it. The Hindu concept is very clear. Here is a great world culture which has always talked about billions of years." "The Hindu religion is the only one of the world's great faiths dedicated to the idea that the Cosmos itself undergoes an immense, indeed an infinite, number of deaths and rebirths. It is the only religion in which the time scales correspond, to those of modern scientific cosmology. Its cycles run from our ordinary day and night to a day and night of Brahma, 8.64 billion years long. Longer than the age of the Earth or the Sun and about half the time since the Big Bang. And there are much longer time scales still." ~ Carl Sagan
Astronomy Top Contributors only: Please tell me a little about yourself and why you're enthralled by cosmology? There seem to be a few long standing top contributors on this forum who have endured the waves of 2012 and was-there-a-UFO-in-my-back-yard-last-night? questions to respond to many complex and exotic questions regarding space/time, and often with great lucidity. I have a good deal of respect for these people. But who are they? Top notch scientist at CERN or simply someone with a lifelong fascination on the universe? I dunno. Thus, the question above.
cosmology....? -We say that the value of omega (exact) should be of 1,023 +- 0,02, which suggests that space with 3 dimensions is closed? -the metric fluctuates in the infinitely small, then why its principal characteristic,its signature, should remain fixed? -Is the mode ultracour of quantum gravity intrinssically topological so that the continius degrees of freedom desappear? -Today, the speed of expansion of the universe rises with 72 km/s, and the value of the density of the universe is lower than the value of critical density. If the value of the universe exceeds the critical value, the expansion of the universe will be reversed completely and thus ended up this finding with the length of Planck? (big crunch)
Evolution in Biological Sciences and Evolution in Cosmology. What is the difference? Seems to me that Biological Science describes Evolution of biological organized systems with laws and mechanisms differents from the way that Cosmology or Astronomy describes the Evolution of others physical systems, like particles, atoms, astronomic systems. Do you know which are the differences? Do you believe that the Evolution of living beings is different from the Evolution of the so called "non-livings"? Do you believe that the Universal History is shared in two blocks, one different from the other?!
Is Cosmology and its branches of science the only important profession on Earth.? I think in my perfect world, 75% of the people on Earth would be studying the origins of the Universe. Ugh, the simpletons are taking this to literally. The meat of the point is that nothing else is important, nothing. wtf, you think a doctor is more important than finding out the origins of the universe? Godamn I wish people would evolve quicker.
Do you have a PhD in Astronomy, Astrophysics or Cosmology? I know some, but very little, about this subject. I read answers that are "all over the map" or should I say "all over the cosmos" . It would be most helpful to have answers from someone who can communicate to a layman and who actually knows something. I would like to thank all of you for your excellent answers.
Cosmology- who is not overwhelmed by its study? All the work that has been done since Einstein in Cosmology is mind-blowing. How can anyone conceptualize the vast amounts of space and time and make sense out of it? I know that many cosmologists, themselves have reacted viscerally to new discoveries and have the same difficulty I have. But what keeps them on track? Is it the mathematical formulas that they develop that can keep them grounded? Or are they stumbling blindly through their work? I find cosmology and quantum physics fascinating, but I often get lost because their ideas and theories are so unfamiliar. What do you think? Bradschum, yeah! the string theory seems to answer a lot of questions, but trying to grasp the concepts of all you mention gives me a queasy stomach!
Any new good cosmology book for the "layman"? Are there any new entertaining (not getting into mathmatics) cosmology books for the intelligent, but mathmatically illiterate person. Last couple I read and liked are: Elegant Universe: Brian Greene Fabric of the Cosmos: Brian Greene Parallel Worlds: Michio Kaku Thanks
What are the cardinal points of orientation of this consumptive cosmology? R there disadvantages/benefit of tying contemporary identity to consumption? Watch online the documentary The Persuaders @ http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline/... DOUGLAS RUSHKOFF: It was near the end of my tour through the landscape of persuasion that I came to realize how the problem of clutter finally gets solved. Marketers find a way so deep inside each of us that it no longer feels like persuasion at all. Maybe we are in control. Once the market becomes the lens through which we choose to see the world, then there's no "us" & "them" anymore We're all persuaders STUART EWEN: The secret of it all, the secret of all persuasion, is to induce the person to persuade himself ROBBINs, compared Navajo curer’s practice of sandpainting to the Persuader practices, suggests that each creates a cultural cosomology to locate & define identity Robbins writes “contemporary sandpainters construct for us a culture in which every individual enacts the identity of consumer" the documentary is free online
An introduction to cosmology. Recommended reading? I would like to learn more about cosmology. Could someone recommend a good introductory book on the subject for the layperson, and a more advanced text to follow it up with? The reading is just for personal interest, not formal study. I've studied Stage II mathematics at university but as far as physics goes, nothing beyond highschool level. So something appropriate to that level. Thanks!
Powered by Yahoo! Answers