You mean Eintein's fear of relatives trumps Newton's apple pie? [pick-me]
Printable View
You mean Eintein's fear of relatives trumps Newton's apple pie? [pick-me]
No Big Bang? Quantum equation predicts universe has no beginning
Quote:
(Phys.org) —The universe may have existed forever, according to a new model that applies quantum correction terms to complement Einstein's theory of general relativity. The model may also account for dark matter and dark energy, resolving multiple problems at once.
The widely accepted age of the universe, as estimated by general relativity, is 13.8 billion years. In the beginning, everything in existence is thought to have occupied a single infinitely dense point, or singularity. Only after this point began to expand in a "Big Bang" did the universe officially begin.
Although the Big Bang singularity arises directly and unavoidably from the mathematics of general relativity, some scientists see it as problematic because the math can explain only what happened immediately after—not at or before—the singularity.
"The Big Bang singularity is the most serious problem of general relativity because the laws of physics appear to break down there," Ahmed Farag Ali at Benha University and the Zewail City of Science and Technology, both in Egypt, told Phys.org.
Ali and coauthor Saurya Das at the University of Lethbridge in Alberta, Canada, have shown in a paper published in Physics Letters B that the Big Bang singularity can be resolved by their new model in which the universe has no beginning and no end.
So, who lit the fuse on the Big Bang? [Muaha][Pop]
God asked for a snack and Satan made him a Big Bean Burrito ...Quote:
Originally Posted by TFOGGER
....then someone pulled his finger.....I saw it in a painting in the Sistine chapel.....
NASA published this report 2 years ago...
http://science.nasa.gov/science-news...an_sunclimate/
in part:
Quote:
Much has been made of the probable connection between the Maunder Minimum, a 70-year deficit of sunspots in the late 17th-early 18th century, and the coldest part of the Little Ice Age, during which Europe and North America were subjected to bitterly cold winters. The mechanism for that regional cooling could have been a drop in the sun’s EUV output; this is, however, speculative.
Quote:
Indeed, the sun could be on the threshold of a mini-Maunder event right now. Ongoing Solar Cycle 24 is the weakest in more than 50 years. Moreover, there is (controversial) evidence of a long-term weakening trend in the magnetic field strength of sunspots. Matt Penn and William Livingston of the National Solar Observatory predict that by the time Solar Cycle 25 arrives, magnetic fields on the sun will be so weak that few if any sunspots will be formed. Independent lines of research involving helioseismology and surface polar fields tend to support their conclusion. (Note: Penn and Livingston were not participants at the NRC workshop.)
Wait, is NASA wanting us to believe that planet Earth gets its heat from the Sun? HA!
And that when the sun is less active, it heats the planet less? HA HA!
Crazy talk I tell you!
NASA was compromised years ago. Take anything coming out of that agency with a grain of salt.
You guys are joking about Islam, but you do realize that the Church admitted being wrong about the same thing and kindly "pardoned" Galileo only in 1992?
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Galileo_affair
FIFYQuote:
Originally Posted by bellavite1
Don't lump all Christians in the same bucket- there were a lot of reasons for the protestant movement...
Copernicus was a Roman Catholic and his theories were well known and discussed in Rome during the 1500's. Pope Paul III was aware and expressed interest in the heliocentric ideas presented by Copernicus. The Lutherans in Germany were equally interested and assisted in the initial publications of the Polish astronomers theories.
Copernicus, while not ordained as a priest in the Catholic Church, had taken minor orders and was actively involved in administering Canon Law in Eastern Prussia and modern day Poland.
Religion is not the enemy of science.
Well, damn, I guess that settles it:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eGH_vkC2B80
Here are some more scientifical facts.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=P2RMH9we62Q&feature=youtu.be
Well, it appears Beeho continues to push man-made global warming as one of his pet causes, in addition to widespread racist police brutality:
http://lastresistance.com/11896/obam...most-a-decade/
Obama Warns About Global Warming-Induced Extreme Weather; No Major Hurricane in Almost a Decade
Posted on May 29, 2015 by Philip Hodges
This is another one of those things that baffles scientists. They all know that burning fossil fuels causes global warming, and that global warming causes more extreme and frequent weather patterns. But in the same way we’ve experienced an inexplicable pause in global warming despite record carbon emissions, we’ve also witnessed a pause in major hurricanes. So much so that this pause is called a “hurricane drought.” It leaves scientists baffled, perhaps because their premises and presuppositions are wrong. But they would never consider that as a possibility. They start with their conclusion and then work their way backwards to find a possible explanation for their predetermined conclusion. The Daily Caller reported:
It’s been nearly a decade since a major hurricane has made landfall in the U.S., but that hasn’t stopped President Barack Obama from claiming that more global warming-induced “extreme weather” will pummel Americans every year.
Obama is set to tour the National Hurricane Center Thursday where he is expected to mention that man-made global warming will increase the risks of major hurricanes hitting the U.S. and costing causing billions of dollars in damages. Obama has frequently claimed that hurricanes and other weather events will get more severe as humans emit more carbon dioxide into the atmosphere.
But the facts aren’t on the president’s side when it comes to hurricanes. NHC experts will likely report to Obama Thursday they expect a relatively weak hurricane season this year, possibly continuing the U.S. “hurricane drought” even longer.
It’s been 3,503 days since a Category 3 or greater hurricane has made landfall in the U.S., according to storm data. The last major hurricane to make landfall in the U.S. was in 2005 when Hurricane Wilma hit Florida. Experts have dubbed this nine-year and seven-month period as a “hurricane drought.”
The lack of major hurricanes hitting the U.S. in the last decade has baffled scientists, and some have attributed the hurricane “drought” to dumb luck. A recent study by NASA found that the U.S. has just been lucky this past decade when it comes to major hurricanes.
“When we looked qualitatively at the nine-year drought, they aren’t inactive seasons,” lead author Timothy Hall with the National Aeronautics and Space Administration’s Goddard Institute for Space Studies said in a statement. “I don’t believe there is a major regime shift that’s protecting the U.S.”
So far, the consensus among scientists is that global warming will cause fewer hurricanes, some of which will be made more intense as humans increase carbon dioxide concentrations in the atmosphere. But even that’s been elusive so far as major storms seem to be bypassing the U.S.
It doesn’t matter what ends up happening with the weather patterns; it’ll be portrayed as negative and caused by GOP-induced global warming. Even if there’s a slowdown in extreme weather, they’ll find a way to make it sound like that’s actually a bad thing, and it’s all because of fossil fuel consumption.
************************************************** *************************
BTW, some "inconvenient truths" about global warming on the Two Minute Conservative blog: http://adrianvance.blogspot.com/
As solid as his track record is on being absolutely wrong on everything, I'd be more worried if he came out expressed some doubt about "climate change". Even a broken clock is more accurate than Obama because the broken clock is right twice a day ...
Now, now, don't let the facts get in the way of the agenda.
Good article.Quote:
Originally Posted by Gman
Not going to bored people w/ Theoretical/Astro Physics, but I am leaning towards "gravity."